RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Gallstone formation is increased after gastric (GR) or esophageal resection (ER); however, the exact pathophysiology is not fully understood yet. Symptomatic cholecystolithiasis and the need for subsequent cholecystectomy after upper gastrointestinal resection can alter the outcome in oncological patients. There is an ongoing discussion if these patients benefit from a simultaneous prophylactic cholecystectomy. This study aims to analyze the risk of gallstone formation after GR or ER and the perioperative course of a subsequent cholecystectomy. METHODS: In this study, all patients were included, who underwent an oncological gastric or esophageal resection at the Medical University of Innsbruck, Department of Visceral, Transplant and Thoracic Surgery in the years 2003-2021. RESULTS: A simultaneous cholecystectomy was performed in 29.8% with GR and in 2.1% with ER (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in complications or length-of-stay between patients with simultaneous vs. no simultaneous cholecystectomy. Newly developed gallstones tended to be more common after GR (16% vs. 10% ER), after reconstruction without preservation of the duodenal passage (17% vs. 11% with) and after GR with lymph node dissection (19% vs. 5% without). After ER, subsequent cholecystectomy was significant less frequently (11.4% vs. 2.9% OR) (p = 0.005). The subsequent cholecystectomy was performed openly in 57.1% with major complications classified as Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3a in 14.3%. CONCLUSION: Based on the findings of our study, we do not recommend simultaneous cholecystectomy routinely in oncological gastric or esophageal resections. An individualized approach depending on risk factors like extensive lymphadenectomy or duodenal passage can be discussed.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is one of the most common malignant neoplasms worldwide. Up to 30% of the patients present in an emergency setting despite an established screening program. Emergency colorectal resection is associated with increased mortality and morbidity as well as worse oncological outcome. This study aims to analyze the impact on tumor recurrence and survival in patients with an emergency colorectal resection, independent of sex, age, and tumor stage. METHODS: Patients, who underwent an oncological resection for colorectal cancer at the Medical University of Innsbruck, Department of Visceral, Transplant and Thoracic Surgery, between January 2003 and December 2018 were analyzed retrospectively and screened for emergency resections. Matched pairs were formed to analyze the impact of emergency operations on long-term outcomes, considering tumor stage, sex, and age, comparing it with elective patients. RESULTS: In total, 4.5% out of 1297 patients underwent surgery in an emergency setting. These patients had higher UICC (Union internationale contre le cancer) stages than elective patients. After matching the patients for age, sex, and tumor stage, emergency patients still had higher mortality. The incidence of recurrence was higher (47.5% vs. 25.4%, p = 0.003) and the 5-year overall survival decreased (35.6% vs. 64.4%, p < 0.001) compared to the matched patients with elective resection. Correcting for 90-day mortality still a reduction in the 5-year overall survival was demonstrated (44% vs. 70%, p = 0,001). The left-sided colon tumors were more common in the emergency group (45.8% vs. 25.4%, p = 0.006) and the rectal tumors in the elective one (21.2% vs. 3.4%, p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing emergency resection for colorectal cancer have a decreased tumor-specific and overall survival compared to patients after elective resection, independent of age, sex, and tumor stage, even after correcting for 90-day mortality. These findings confirm the importance of colorectal cancer awareness and screening to reduce emergency resections.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background: Neurocrine neoplasms (NEN) of the small bowel (SBNEN) are a rare entity and mostly asymptomatic. The aim of this study was to explore trends in the clinical presentation, diagnostic workup, surgical approach and oncological outcome in patients with SBNEN at our surgical department. Materials and methods: All patients who underwent surgical resection for SBNEN from 2004 to 2020 at our department were enrolled in this single center retrospective study. Results: A total of 32 patients were included in this study. In most cases, the diagnosis was based on incidental findings during endoscopy or radiographic imaging (n = 23; 72%). Twenty cases had a G1 tumor and 12 cases a G2 tumor. The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival (OS) were 96%, 86% and 81%, respectively. Patients with a tumor more than 30 mm had a significantly lower OS (p = 0.01). For G1 tumors, the estimated disease-free survival (DFS) was 109 months. Again, the DFS was significantly lower when the tumor had more than 30 mm in diameter (p = 0.013). Conclusion: Due to the mostly asymptomatic presentation, the diagnostic workup can be difficult. An aggressive approach and a strict follow-up seem to be important for the oncological outcome.

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Patients with colon cancer are usually included in an intensive 5-year surveillance protocol after curative resection, independent of the tumor stage, though early stages have a considerably lower risk of recurrence. The aim of this study was to analyze the adherence to an intensive follow-up and the risk of recurrence in patients with colon cancer in UICC stages I and II. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we assessed patients who underwent resection for colon cancer in UICC stages I and II between 2007 and 2016. Data were collected on demographics, tumor stages, therapy, surveillance, recurrent disease, and oncological outcome. RESULTS: Of the 232 included patients, 43.5% (n = 101) reached the 5-year follow-up disease-free. Seven (7.5%) patients in stage UICC I and sixteen (11.5%) in UICC II had a recurrence, with the highest risk in patients with pT4 (26.3%). A metachronous colon cancer was detected in four patients (1.7%). The therapy of recurrence was intended to be curative in 57.1% (n = 4) of UICC stage I and in 43.8% (n = 7) of UICC stage II, but only in one of seven patients over 80 years. 44.8% (n = 104) of the patients were lost to follow-up. CONCLUSION: A postoperative surveillance in patients with colon cancer is important and recommended as a recurrent disease can be treated successfully in many patients. However, we suggest that a less intensive surveillance protocol is reasonable for patients with colon cancer in early tumor stages, especially in UICC stage I, as the risk of recurrent disease is low. With elderly and/or frail patients in a reduced general condition, who will not endure further specific therapy in case of a recurrence, the performance of the surveillance should be discussed: we recommend a significant reduction or even renunciation.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Fewer than 10% of emergency medical system (EMS) calls concern children and adolescents younger than 18 years. Studies have shown that the preclinical care of children differs from that of adults regarding assessment, interventions, and monitoring. The aims of this study were to describe the preclinical care and emergency transport of pediatric patients in Vorarlberg, Austria and to compare trauma and nontrauma cases. METHODS: This is a population-based study, analyzing medical records of EMS calls to children and adolescents. We received all patient records of EMS calls to children and adolescents younger than 18 years (n = 4390 in total) from the 2 local EMS providers, the Red Cross Vorarlberg and the Austrian Mountain Rescue Service (Christophorus 8 and Gallus 1) covering a study period of 7 years, from 2013 to 2019. The record data were extracted by automation with an in-house program and subsequently anonymized. Statistical analyses were performed with SPSS Statistics. RESULTS: During the study period, 7.9% of all EMS calls concerned children and adolescents younger than 18 years. For our study, 3761 records were analyzed and 1270 trauma cases (33.8%) were identified. The most common injuries were injuries of the extremities and traumatic brain injury. The frequency of National Advisory Committee of Aeronautics Scores of 4 or higher was 17.7%, similar for all age groups and for trauma as well as nontrauma patients. Mean Glasgow Coma Scale scores were higher in the trauma group than in the nontrauma group (14.2 vs 11.2). In 62.9% of all patients, 1 or more vital parameters were documented. A majority of these values was in the pathologic range for the respective age group. The rate of pulsoxymetry monitoring during transport was low (42.1% in trauma and 30.3% in nontrauma patients) and decreased significantly with patient age. Moreover, while the placing of intravenous lines and monitoring during transport were significantly more frequent in trauma patients, the administration of medication or oxygen was significantly more frequent in nontrauma patients. CONCLUSIONS: The pediatric population lacks assessments and monitoring in preclinical care, especially the youngest children and nontrauma patients, although emergency severity scores are similar.

Asunto(s)