Crohn's disease, diabetes, and obesity increase the risk for perianal abscess. Of these, Crohn's and HIV has an impact on readmission. The pathogenesis and the influence of diabetes and obesity need further research if we are to understand why these diseases increase the risk for perianal abscess but not its recurrence.
Background. Multidisciplinary team (MDT) conferences have been introduced into standard cancer care, though evidence that it benefi ts the patient is weak. We used the national Swedish Rectal Cancer Register to evaluate predictors for case discussion at a MDT conference and its impact on treatment. Material and methods. Of the 6760 patients diagnosed with rectal cancer in Sweden between 2007 and 2010, 78% were evaluated at a MDT. Factors that infl uenced whether a patient was discussed at a preoperative MDT conference were evaluated in 4883 patients, and the impact of MDT evaluation on the implementation of preoperative radiotherapy was evaluated in 1043 patients with pT3c-pT4 M0 tumours, and in 1991 patients with pN ϩ M0 tumours. Results. Hospital volume, i.e. the number of rectal cancer surgical procedures performed per year, was the major predictor for MDT evaluation. Patients treated at hospitals with Ͻ 29 procedures per year had an odds ratio (OR) for MDT evaluation of 0.15. Age and tumour stage also infl uenced the chance of MDT evaluation. MDT evaluation signifi cantly predicted the likelihood of being treated with preoperative radiotherapy in patients with pT3c-pT4 M0 tumours (OR 5.06, 95% CI 3.08 -8.34), and pN ϩ M0 (OR 3.55, 95% CI 2.60 -4.85), even when corrected for co-morbidity and age. Conclusion. Patients with rectal cancer treated at high-volume hospitals are more likely to be discussed at a MDT conference, and that is an independent predictor of the use of adjuvant radiotherapy. These results indirectly support the introduction into clinical practice of discussing all rectal cancer patients at MDT conferences, not least those being treated at low-volume hospitals.
Purpose The role of hybrid imaging using 18 F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron-emission tomography (FDG-PET), computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to improve preoperative evaluation of rectal cancer is largely unknown. To investigate this, the RECTOPET (REctal Cancer Trial on PET/MRI/CT) study has been launched with the aim to assess staging and restaging of primary rectal cancer. This report presents the study workflow and the initial experiences of the impact of PET/CT on staging and management of the first patients included in the RECTOPET study. Methods This prospective cohort study, initiated in September 2016, is actively recruiting patients from Region Västerbotten in Sweden. This pilot study includes patients recruited and followed up until December 2017. All patients had a biopsy-verified rectal adenocarcinoma and underwent a minimum of one preoperative FDG-PET/CT and FDG-PET/MRI examination. These patients were referred to the colorectal cancer multidisciplinary team meeting at Umeå University Hospital. All available data were evaluated when making management recommendations. The clinical course was noted and changes consequent to PET imaging were described; surgical specimens underwent dedicated MRI for anatomical matching between imaging and histopathology. Results Twenty-four patients have so far been included in the study. Four patients were deemed unresectable, while 19 patients underwent or were scheduled for surgery; one patient was enrolled in a watch-and-wait programme after restaging. Consequent to taking part in the study, two patients were upstaged to M1 disease: one patient was diagnosed with a solitary hepatic metastasis detected using PET/CT and underwent metastasectomy prior to rectal cancer surgery, while one patient with a small, but metabolically active, lung nodulus experienced no change of management. PET/MRI did not contribute to any recorded change in patient management. Conclusions The RECTOPET study investigating the role of PET/CT and PET/MRI for preoperative staging of primary rectal cancer patients will provide novel data that clarify the value of adding hybrid to conventional imaging, and the role of PET/CT versus PET/MRI. Trial registration NCT03846882 .
Purpose Anterior resection is the procedure of choice for tumours in the mid and upper rectum. Depending on tumour height, a total mesorectal excision (TME) or partial mesorectal excision (PME) can be performed. Low anastomoses in particular have a high risk of developing anastomotic leakage, which might be explained by blood perfusion compromise. A pilot study indicated a worse blood flow in TME patients in an open setting. The aim of this study was to further evaluate perianastomotic blood perfusion changes in relation to TME and PME in a predominantly laparoscopic context. Method In this prospective cohort study, laser Doppler flowmetry was used to evaluate the perianastomotic colonic and rectal perfusion before and after surgery. The two surgical techniques were compared in terms of mean differences of perfusion units using a repeated measures ANOVA design, which also enabled interaction analyses between type of mesorectal excision and location of measurement. Anastomotic leakage until 90 days after surgery was reported for descriptive purposes. Results Some 28 patients were available for analysis: 17 TME and 11 PME patients. TME patients had a reduced blood perfusion postoperatively compared to PME patients in the aboral posterior area (mean difference: −57 vs 18 perfusion units; p = 0.010). An interaction between mesorectal excision type and anterior/posterior location was detected at the aboral level (p = 0.007). Two patients developed a minor leakage, diagnosed after discharge. Conclusion Patients operated on using TME have a decreased blood flow in the aboral posterior quadrant of the rectum postoperatively compared to patients operated on using PME. This might explain differing rates of anastomotic leakage. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02401100
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.