scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

Showing papers in "Annals of Surgical Oncology in 2023"


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper , a comprehensive U.S. analysis of liver transplantation for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) suggests a burgeoning interest in high-volume transplant centers.
Abstract: Current success in transplant oncology for select liver tumors, such as hepatocellular carcinoma, has ignited international interest in liver transplantation (LT) as a therapeutic option for nonresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). In the United States, the CRLM LT experience is limited to reports from a handful of centers. This study was designed to summarize donor, recipient, and transplant center characteristics and posttransplant outcomes for the indication of CRLM.Adult, primary LT patients listed between December 2017 and March 2022 were identified by using United Network Organ Sharing database. LT for CRLM was identified from variables: "DIAG_OSTXT"; "DGN_OSTXT_TCR"; "DGN2_OSTXT_TCR"; and "MALIG_TY_OSTXT."During this study period, 64 patients were listed, and 46 received LT for CRLM in 15 centers. Of 46 patients who underwent LT for CRLM, 26 patients (56.5%) received LTs using living donor LT (LDLT), and 20 patients received LT using deceased donor (DDLT) (43.5%). The median laboratory MELD-Na score at the time of listing was statistically similar between the LDLT and DDLT groups (8 vs. 9, P = 0.14). This persisted at the time of LT (8 vs. 12, P = 0.06). The 1-, 2-, and 3-year, disease-free, survival rates were 75.1, 53.7, and 53.7%. Overall survival rates were 89.0, 60.4, and 60.4%, respectively.This first comprehensive U.S. analysis of LT for CRLM suggests a burgeoning interest in high-volume U.S. transplant centers. Strategies to optimize patient selection are limited by the scarce oncologic history provided in UNOS data, warranting a separate registry to study LT in CRLM.

6 citations








Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper , a hybrid tracer of technetium-99m nanocolloid and indocyanine green was injected endoscopically around the resection scar the day before surgery, followed by preoperative imaging.
Abstract: Abstract Background Selective lymphadenectomy using sentinel node-navigated surgery (SNNS) might offer a less invasive alternative to esophagectomy in patients with high-risk T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of a new treatment strategy, consisting of radical endoscopic resection of the tumor followed by SNNS. Methods In this multicenter pilot study, ten patients with a radically resected high-risk pT1cN0 EAC underwent SNNS. A hybrid tracer of technetium-99m nanocolloid and indocyanine green was injected endoscopically around the resection scar the day before surgery, followed by preoperative imaging. During surgery, sentinel nodes (SNs) were identified using a thoracolaparoscopic gammaprobe and fluorescence-based detection, and subsequently resected. Endpoints were surgical morbidity and number of detected and resected (tumor-positive) SNs. Results Localization and dissection of SNs was feasible in all ten patients (median 3 SNs per patient, range 1–6). The concordance between preoperative imaging and intraoperative detection was high. In one patient (10%), dissection was considered incomplete after two SNs were not identified intraoperatively. Additional peritumoral SNs were resected in four patients (40%) after fluorescence-based detection. In two patients (20%), a (micro)metastasis was found in one of the resected SNs. One patient experienced neuropathic thoracic pain related to surgery, while none of the patients developed functional gastroesophageal disorders. Conclusions SNNS appears to be a feasible and safe instrument to tailor lymphadenectomy in patients with high-risk T1 EAC. Future research with long-term follow-up is warranted to determine whether this esophageal preserving strategy is justified for high-risk T1 EAC.

3 citations



Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article , the prognostic factors for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with either pleural dissemination (PD) or malignant pleural effusion (MPE) detected during or after surgery were clarified.
Abstract: Abstract Background Primary lung tumors are sometimes resected when either pleural dissemination (PD) or malignant pleural effusion (MPE) exists. This study clarified the prognostic factors for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with either PD and MPE, or both, detected during or after surgery. Patients and Methods We examined patients with NSCLC from a multicenter database who had either PD, MPE, or both, detected during or after surgery between 2005 and 2015. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals were estimated using the Cox proportional hazards model adjusted for potential confounding factors. Results Among 9463 registered patients, PD, MPE, or both, were found in 114 patients with NSCLC during or after surgery. Primary tumor resection and exploratory thoracotomy were performed in 65 and 49 patients, respectively. In univariate analysis, adenocarcinoma, clinically undetected lymph node metastasis (c-N0 or unknown), EGFR mutation, and combination of chemotherapy or tyrosine kinase inhibitors after surgery were better prognostic factors for overall survival (OS), whereas in the multivariate analysis, adenocarcinoma, clinically undetected lymph node metastasis, and EGFR mutation were favorable independent prognostic factors in OS. Additionally, limited to patients with EGFR mutation, patients with primary lung tumor resection showed a significantly better 5-year OS than those with exploratory thoracotomy (86.4 vs. 44.8%; p < 0.001). Conclusion Our findings show that surgical resection of primary tumors could improve the prognosis of patients with PD, MPE, or both, detected during or after surgery when the tumors harbor an EGFR mutation.

3 citations






Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors compared robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy (RDP) and laparoscopic distal pancreatic cancer (LDP) in patients with resectable pancreatic cancers.
Abstract: Abstract Background Robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy (RDP) is increasingly used as an alternative to laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer but comparative multicenter studies confirming the safety and efficacy of RDP are lacking. Methods An international, multicenter, retrospective, cohort study, including consecutive patients undergoing RDP and LDP for resectable pancreatic cancer in 33 experienced centers from 11 countries (2010–2019). The primary outcome was R0-resection. Secondary outcomes included lymph node yield, major complications, conversion rate, and overall survival. Results In total, 542 patients after minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy were included: 103 RDP (19%) and 439 LDP (81%). The R0-resection rate was comparable (75.7% RDP vs. 69.3% LDP, p = 0.404). RDP was associated with longer operative time (290 vs. 240 min, p < 0.001), more vascular resections (7.6% vs. 2.7%, p = 0.030), lower conversion rate (4.9% vs. 17.3%, p = 0.001), more major complications (26.2% vs. 16.3%, p = 0.019), improved lymph node yield (18 vs. 16, p = 0.021), and longer hospital stay (10 vs. 8 days, p = 0.001). The 90-day mortality (1.9% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.268) and overall survival (median 28 vs. 31 months, p = 0.599) did not differ significantly between RDP and LDP, respectively. Conclusions In selected patients with resectable pancreatic cancer, RDP and LDP provide a comparable R0-resection rate and overall survival in experienced centers. Although the lymph node yield and conversion rate appeared favorable after RDP, LDP was associated with shorter operating time, less major complications, and shorter hospital stay. The specific benefits associated with each approach should be confirmed by multicenter, randomized trials.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article , the authors developed, validated, and presented a personalized, clinical, decision-making tool using nationally representative data with clinically actionable probability thresholds (Expected Lymphatic Metastasis Outcome [ELMO]).
Abstract: Although sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) status is a strong prognostic indicator for cutaneous melanoma, unnecessary SLNBs have substantial cost and morbidity burden. This study was designed to develop, validate, and present a personalized, clinical, decision-making tool using nationally representative data with clinically actionable probability thresholds (Expected Lymphatic Metastasis Outcome [ELMO]). Data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Registry from 2000 to 2017 and the National Cancer Database (NCDB) from 2004 to 2015 were used to develop and internally validate a logistic ridge regression predictive model for SLNB positivity. External validation was done with 1568 patients at a large tertiary referral center. The development cohort included 134,809 patients, and the internal validation cohort included 38,518 patients. ELMO (AUC 0.85) resulted in a 29.54% SLNB reduction rate and greater sensitivity in predicting SLNB status for T1b, T2a, and T2b tumors than previous models. In external validation, ELMO had an accuracy of 0.7586 and AUC of 0.7218. Limitations of this study are potential miscoding, unaccounted confounders, and effect modification. ELMO ( https://melanoma-sentinel.herokuapp.com/ ) has been developed and validated (internally and externally) by using the largest publicly available dataset of melanoma patients and was found to have high accuracy compared with other published models and gene expression tests. Individualized risk estimates for SLNB positivity are critical in facilitating thorough decision-making for healthcare providers and patients with melanoma.



Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article , the authors evaluated variability of resectability assessments and local treatment plans for patients with initially unresectable CRLM by the liver expert panel from the randomised phase III CAIRO5 study.
Abstract: Abstract Background Consensus on resectability criteria for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) is lacking, resulting in differences in therapeutic strategies. This study evaluated variability of resectability assessments and local treatment plans for patients with initially unresectable CRLM by the liver expert panel from the randomised phase III CAIRO5 study. Methods The liver panel, comprising surgeons and radiologists, evaluated resectability by predefined criteria at baseline and 2-monthly thereafter. If surgeons judged CRLM as resectable, detailed local treatment plans were provided. The panel chair determined the conclusion of resectability status and local treatment advice, and forwarded it to local surgeons. Results A total of 1149 panel evaluations of 496 patients were included. Intersurgeon disagreement was observed in 50% of evaluations and was lower at baseline than follow-up (36% vs. 60%, p < 0.001). Among surgeons in general, votes for resectable CRLM at baseline and follow-up ranged between 0–12% and 27–62%, and for permanently unresectable CRLM between 3–40% and 6–47%, respectively. Surgeons proposed different local treatment plans in 77% of patients. The most pronounced intersurgeon differences concerned the advice to proceed with hemihepatectomy versus parenchymal-preserving approaches. Eighty-four percent of patients judged by the panel as having resectable CRLM indeed received local treatment. Local surgeons followed the technical plan proposed by the panel in 40% of patients. Conclusion Considerable variability exists among expert liver surgeons in assessing resectability and local treatment planning of initially unresectable CRLM. This stresses the value of panel-based decisions, and the need for consensus guidelines on resectability criteria and technical approach to prevent unwarranted variability in clinical practice.




Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A systematic review of studies on preoperative PBI in patients with low-risk breast cancer using the databases Ovid Medline, Embase.com, Web of Science (Core Collection), and Scopus (PROSPERO registration CRD42022301435) is conducted in this article .
Abstract: Preoperative instead of standard postoperative partial breast irradiation (PBI) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) has the advantage of reducing the irradiated breast volume, toxicity, and number of radiotherapy sessions and can allow tumor downstaging. In this review, we assessed tumor response and clinical outcomes after preoperative PBI.We conducted a systematic review of studies on preoperative PBI in patients with low-risk breast cancer using the databases Ovid Medline, Embase.com, Web of Science (Core Collection), and Scopus (PROSPERO registration CRD42022301435). References of eligible manuscripts were checked for other relevant manuscripts. The primary outcome measure was pathologic complete response (pCR).A total of eight prospective and one retrospective cohort study were identified (n = 359). In up to 42% of the patients, pCR was obtained and this increased after a longer interval between radiotherapy and BCS (0.5-8 months). After a maximum median follow-up of 5.0 years, three studies on external beam radiotherapy reported low local recurrence rates (0-3%) and overall survival of 97-100%. Acute toxicity consisted mainly of grade 1 skin toxicity (0-34%) and seroma (0-31%). Late toxicity was predominantly fibrosis grade 1 (46-100%) and grade 2 (10-11%). Cosmetic outcome was good to excellent in 78-100% of the patients.Preoperative PBI showed a higher pCR rate after a longer interval between radiotherapy and BCS. Mild late toxicity and good oncological and cosmetic outcomes were reported. In the ongoing ABLATIVE-2 trial, BCS is performed at a longer interval of 12 months after preoperative PBI aiming to achieve a higher pCR rate.