Background and Objectives Abdominal metastases (AM) from soft tissue sarcoma (STS) are rare and prognosis is poor. The aims of the study were to (a) identify risk factors for the development of AM and to (b) investigate the outcome of AM‐patients. Methods Seven‐hundred‐sixty‐nine STS‐patients with localised disease at diagnosis treated at three tumour centres (2000‐2016) were retrospectively included (409 males; mean age, 55.6 years [range, 8‐96 years]; median follow‐up, 4.1 years [interquartile‐range, 2.5‐6.6 years]). Results Two‐hundred‐two patients (26.3%) developed secondary metastases, and 24 of them AM (3.1%). Ten patients developed first AM (FAM) after a mean of 2.4 years and 14 patients late AM (LAM, after being diagnosed with metastases to other sites) after a mean of 2.0 years. Patients with liposarcoma had a significantly higher risk of developing AM (P = .007), irrespective of grading. There was no difference in post‐metastasis‐survival (PMS) between patients with AM at any time point and those with metastases to other sites (P = .585). Patients with LAM or FAM showed no difference in post‐abdominal‐metastasis‐survival (P = .884). Conclusions Survival in patients with AM is poor, irrespective of whether they develop secondarily to other metastases or not. Patients at high‐risk of AM (ie, liposarcoma) may be followed‐up regularly by abdominal‐ultrasound/CT.

Methods This study is a double-blinded, randomized, controlled, prospective study, submitted to clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04879004). 30 patients scheduled for OC and LC were randomized into 4 equal groups. If the patient was randomized in Group R L or R O , Ropivacaine 0.375% (20 ml) was infused at each side 30 minutes before induction of GA and 0.2% (20 ml) 12, 24, 36 and 48 hours after surgery. If the patient was randomized in Group C L or C O , N/S 0.9% (20 ml) was infused in the same manner. We recorded QoR score on the 3d postoperative day, satisfaction score and discharge time of patients. Statistical analysis was performed with Jamo-viVersion1.6.18.0, using MannWhitneyU test. Results All groups were similar. No statistically significant differences were found between groups R L and C L regarding QoR, satisfaction score and discharge time of the patients (p=0.061, p=0.061, p=0.704 respectively). Regarding OC, QoR score and satisfaction score of the patients were significantly higher in Group R O when compared to C O (p=0.002 and p=0.042 respectively). There was found no statistically significant difference between these groups regarding discharge time of the patients (p=0.122). Conclusions In this study, we confirmed that ESPB is an effective method which contributes to the improvement of QoR and satisfaction score of patients undergoing OC.

No abstract