-
Cancers Mar 2021Targeted axillary dissection (TAD) is a new axillary staging technique that consists of the surgical removal of biopsy-proven positive axillary nodes, which are marked... (Review)
Review
The Evolving Role of Marked Lymph Node Biopsy (MLNB) and Targeted Axillary Dissection (TAD) after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy (NACT) for Node-Positive Breast Cancer: Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis.
Targeted axillary dissection (TAD) is a new axillary staging technique that consists of the surgical removal of biopsy-proven positive axillary nodes, which are marked (marked lymph node biopsy (MLNB)) prior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in addition to the sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). In a meta-analysis of more than 3000 patients, we previously reported a false-negative rate (FNR) of 13% using the SLNB alone in this setting. The aim of this systematic review and pooled analysis is to determine the FNR of MLNB alone and TAD (MLNB plus SLNB) compared with the gold standard of complete axillary lymph node dissection (cALND). The PubMed, Cochrane and Google Scholar databases were searched using MeSH-relevant terms and free words. A total of 9 studies of 366 patients that met the inclusion criteria evaluating the FNR of MLNB alone were included in the pooled analysis, yielding a pooled FNR of 6.28% (95% CI: 3.98-9.43). In 13 studies spanning 521 patients, the addition of SLNB to MLNB (TAD) was associated with a FNR of 5.18% (95% CI: 3.41-7.54), which was not significantly different from that of MLNB alone ( = 0.48). Data regarding the oncological safety of this approach were lacking. In a separate analysis of all published studies reporting successful identification and surgical retrieval of the MLN, we calculated a pooled success rate of 90.0% (95% CI: 85.1-95.1). The present pooled analysis demonstrates that the FNR associated with MLNB alone or combined with SLNB is acceptably low and both approaches are highly accurate in staging the axilla in patients with node-positive breast cancer after NACT. The SLNB adds minimal new information and therefore can be safely omitted from TAD. Further research to confirm the oncological safety of this de-escalation approach of axillary surgery is required. MLNB alone and TAD are associated with acceptably low FNRs and represent valid alternatives to cALND in patients with node-positive breast cancer after excellent response to NACT.
PubMed: 33810544
DOI: 10.3390/cancers13071539 -
Endoscopy International Open May 2022Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a standard method for minimally invasive resection of superficial gastrointestinal tumors. The pocket creation method (PCM)... (Review)
Review
Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a standard method for minimally invasive resection of superficial gastrointestinal tumors. The pocket creation method (PCM) facilitates ESD regardless of location in the gastrointestinal tract. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of ESD for superficial neoplasms in the upper and lower gastrointestinal tract comparing the PCM to the non-PCM. Randomized controlled, prospective, and retrospective studies comparing the PCM with the non-PCM were included. Outcomes included en bloc resection, R0 resection, dissection speed, delayed bleeding and perforation. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) using the Mantel-Haenszel random effect model were documented. Eight studies including gastric, duodenal, and colorectal ESD were included. The en bloc resection rate was significantly higher in the PCM group than the non-PCM group (OR 3.87, 95 %CI 1.24-12.10 = 0.020). The R0 resection rate was significantly higher in the PCM group than the non-PCM group (OR 2.46, 95 %CI 1.14-5.30, = 0.020). The dissection speed was significantly faster in the PCM group than the non-PCM group (mean difference 3.13, 95 % CI 1.35-4.91, < 0.001). The rate of delayed bleeding was similar in the two groups (OR 1.13, 95 %CI 0.60-2.15, 0.700). The rate of perforation was significantly lower in the PCM group than the non-PCM group (OR 0.34, 95 %CI 0.15-0.76, 0.009). The PCM facilitates high-quality, fast and safe colorectal ESD. Further studies are needed regarding the utility of PCM in ESD of the upper gastrointestinal tract.
PubMed: 35571471
DOI: 10.1055/a-1789-0548 -
Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology 2020The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for superficial esophageal squamous cancer. (Review)
Review
AIM
The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term outcomes of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for superficial esophageal squamous cancer.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted using PubMed, ProQuest and Cochrane Library databases. Primary outcomes were overall survival, disease-specific survival and recurrence-free survival at 5 years. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, recurrence and metastasis. Hazard ratios were calculated based on time to events for survival analysis, and odds radios were used to compare discrete variables.
RESULTS
A total of 3796 patients in 21 retrospective studies, including 5 comparative studies for ESD and esophagectomy were enrolled. The invasion depth was 52.0% for M1-M2, 43.2% for M3-SM1 and 4.7% for SM2 or deeper. The 5-year survival rate was: overall survival 87.3%, disease-specific survival 97.7%, and recurrence-free survival 85.1%, respectively. Pooled local recurrence of ESD was 1.8% and metastasis was 3.3%. In terms of the comparison between ESD and esophagectomy, there was no difference in the overall survival (86.4% 81.8%, hazard ratio = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.39-1.11) as well as disease-specific and recurrence-free survival. In addition, ESD was associated with fewer adverse events (19.8 % 44.0%, odds ratio = 0.3, 95% CI = 0.23-0.39).
CONCLUSIONS
For superficial esophageal squamous cancer, ESD may be considered as the primary treatment of for mucosal lesions, and additional treatment should be available for submucosal invasive cancers.
PubMed: 33224272
DOI: 10.1177/1756284820964316 -
Dermatology and Therapy Nov 2023Dissecting cellulitis of the scalp (DCS) is a chronic inflammatory skin condition characterized by abscesses, nodules, fistulas, and scarring alopecia. Management of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Dissecting cellulitis of the scalp (DCS) is a chronic inflammatory skin condition characterized by abscesses, nodules, fistulas, and scarring alopecia. Management of this oftentimes debilitating dermatosis can be challenging due to its recalcitrant nature. There is limited data regarding the efficacy of treatment options for DCS.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the literature to explore the efficacy and safety of reported DCS treatments.
METHODS
In October 2022, MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched for articles on treatments for DCS. Studies that contained outcome efficacy data for DCS treatments were included. Reviews, conference abstracts, meta-analyses, commentaries, non-relevant articles, and articles with no full-text available were excluded. Data extraction was performed by two independent reviewers.
RESULTS
A total of 110 relevant articles with 417 patients were identified. A majority of studies (86.4%) were case reports or series. Treatment options included systemic antibiotics, oral retinoids, biologics, procedural treatments, combination agents, and topical treatments. Oral retinoids and photodynamic therapy were the most extensively studied medical and procedural interventions, respectively.
CONCLUSION
Overall, randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate various treatment regimens for DCS and provide patients with a robust, evidence-based approach to therapy.
PubMed: 37740150
DOI: 10.1007/s13555-023-01018-7 -
Gastroenterology Report Aug 2016Heterotopic gastric mucosa (HGM) is the most reported epithelial heterotopia, but it is very rare in the rectum and anus. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Heterotopic gastric mucosa (HGM) is the most reported epithelial heterotopia, but it is very rare in the rectum and anus.
METHODS
The first case of an asymptomatic adult male with a large nonpolypoid HGM in the low rectum underwent complete resection by endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is reported. The systematic review was based on a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and Google Scholar. Studies on humans were identified with the term 'heterotopic gastric mucosa in the rectum and /or anus.'
RESULTS
The search identified 79 citations, and 72 cases were evaluated comprising the present report. Congenital malformations were observed in 17 (24%) patients; rectal duplication accounted for most of the cases. The HGM was located in the anus and perineal rectum in 25 cases (41%) and low, middle and proximal pelvic rectum in 20 (33%), five (8%) and 11 cases (18%), respectively. Morphology was nonpolypoid in 37 cases (51%), polypoid in 26 cases (36%) and ulcerated in nine cases (13%). Specific anorectal symptoms were reported by 50 (69%) patients of the whole study population, and by 33 (97%) of 34 patients ≤ 18 years. Complications were observed in 23 cases (32%). The HGM was excised in 50 cases (83%). Endoscopic resection was performed in 17 cases (34%); resection was piecemeal in five of 12 lesions ≥15 mm, required argon plasma coagulation in two cases and was associated with residual tissue in two (17%). Intestinal metaplasia and an adenoma with low-grade dysplasia were described in three adults (4%).
DISCUSSION
This systematic review shows that the HGM in the rectum and anus may be associated with specific rectal symptoms and serious complications, mainly in the pediatric population, and a risk of malignancy in adults. Its complete excision should be recommended, and the ESD can overcome the technical limits of conventional endoscopic snare resection and avoid unnecessary surgery.
PubMed: 27103738
DOI: 10.1093/gastro/gow006 -
The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine Sep 2016To evaluate the therapeutic outcomes of the endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) technique for the treatment of gastric subepithelial tumors (SETs). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND/AIMS
To evaluate the therapeutic outcomes of the endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) technique for the treatment of gastric subepithelial tumors (SETs).
METHODS
A systematic literature review was conducted using the core databases. Data on the complete resection rates and the procedure-related perforation rates were extracted and analyzed. A random effects model was then applied for this meta-analysis.
RESULTS
In all, 288 patients with 290 SETs were enrolled from nine studies (44 SETs originated from the submucosal layer; 246 SETs originated from the muscularis propria layer). The mean diameter of the lesions ranged from 17.99 to 38 mm. Overall, the pooled complete resection rate was estimated to be 86.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 78.9 to 91.3). If the analysis was limited to the lesions that originated from the submucosal layer, the pooled complete resection rate was 91.4% (95% CI, 77.9 to 97). If the analysis was limited to the lesions that originated from the muscularis propria, the pooled complete resection rate was 84.4% (95% CI, 78.7 to 88.8). The pooled procedure-related gastric perforation rate was 13% (95% CI, 9.4 to 17.6). Sensitivity analyses showed consistent results. Finally, publication bias was not detected.
CONCLUSIONS
ESD, including endoscopic muscularis dissection, is a technically feasible procedure for the treatment of SETs. However, selection bias is suspected from the enrolled studies. For the development of a proper indication of ESD for SETs, further studies are needed.
Topics: Endoscopic Mucosal Resection; Feasibility Studies; Gastric Mucosa; Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors; Humans; Neoplasms, Glandular and Epithelial; Stomach Neoplasms; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26898597
DOI: 10.3904/kjim.2015.093 -
Journal of Gynecologic Oncology Sep 2022To evaluate the efficacy and safety of systematic lymph node dissection (SyLND) at the time of interval debulking surgery (IDS) for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of systematic lymph node dissection (SyLND) at the time of interval debulking surgery (IDS) for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC).
METHODS
Systematic literature review of studies including AEOC patients undergoing SyLND versus selective lymph node dissection (SeLND) or no lymph node dissection (NoLND) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). Primary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included severe postoperative complications, lymphocele, lymphedema, blood loss, blood transfusions, operative time, and hospital stay.
RESULTS
Nine retrospective studies met the eligibility criteria, involving a total of 1,660 patients: 827 (49.8%) SyLND, 490 (29.5%) SeLND, and 343 (20.7%) NoLND. The pooled estimated hazard ratios (HR) for PFS and OS were, respectively, 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI]=0.65-1.20; p=0.43) and 0.80 (95% CI=0.50-1.30; p=0.37). The pooled estimated odds ratios (ORs) for severe postoperative complications, lymphocele, lymphedema, and blood transfusions were, respectively, 1.83 (95% CI=1.19-2.82; p=0.006), 3.38 (95% CI=1.71-6.70; p<0.001), 7.23 (95% CI=3.40-15.36; p<0.0001), and 1.22 (95% CI=0.50-2.96; p=0.67).
CONCLUSION
Despite the heterogeneity in the study designs, SyLND after NACT failed to demonstrate a significant improvement in PFS and OS and resulted in a higher risk of severe postoperative complications.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42022303577.
Topics: Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Cytoreduction Surgical Procedures; Female; Humans; Lymphedema; Lymphocele; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Ovarian Neoplasms; Postoperative Complications; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 35882606
DOI: 10.3802/jgo.2022.33.e69 -
European Journal of Vascular and... Apr 2020To present the pooled quantitative evidence of basic profiles, initial treatment strategies, and clinical outcomes in patients with isolated abdominal aortic dissection... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To present the pooled quantitative evidence of basic profiles, initial treatment strategies, and clinical outcomes in patients with isolated abdominal aortic dissection (IAAD).
METHODS
A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis was performed of all available studies reporting IAAD, retrieved from the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Databases. The logistic normal random effect model was fitted using the generalised linear mixed model with random intercepts to calculate the pooled proportion estimates.
RESULTS
Seventeen studies with 482 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Male smokers with hyperlipidaemia and hypertension were the most prominent basic profile. IAADs were predominantly spontaneous and infrarenal, and roughly half were acute and symptomatic. Approximately 67% [95% confidence interval (CI) 42-86%] of patients were managed initially conservatively. In the overall population, the 30 day all cause mortality was 3% (95% CI 1-5%) and the long term mortality during follow up was 8% (95% CI 5-14%). Re-intervention during follow up occurred in 8% (95% CI 5-15%) of patients. In the subgroup analysis, patients with conservative treatment had a 30 day mortality of 1% (95% CI 0-8%), a long term mortality of 5% (95% CI 1-29%), and a re-intervention rate of 18% (95% CI 10-29%). Patients with open surgery had a 30 day mortality of 9% (95% CI 0-82%), a long term mortality of 12% (95% CI 4-31%), and a re-intervention rate of 9% (95% CI 1-44%). Patients with endovascular repair had a 30 day mortality of 2% (95% CI 0-10%), a long term mortality of 5% (95% CI 2-13%), a re-intervention rate of 6% (95% CI 3-13%), and a persistent endoleak rate of 4% (95% CI 2-10%).
CONCLUSION
Appropriate initial treatment strategies can be used to obtain acceptable clinical outcomes in patients with IAAD. Invasive intervention is necessary if patients match certain indications for intervention. Regular imaging surveillance should be provided for all patients, especially those treated conservatively.
Topics: Aortic Dissection; Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation; Endoleak; Endovascular Procedures; Humans; Risk Factors
PubMed: 31822385
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2019.05.013 -
Cancer Mar 2016There is uncertainty regarding the use of bladder-sparing alternatives to standard radical cystectomy, optimal lymph node dissection techniques, and optimal... (Review)
Review
There is uncertainty regarding the use of bladder-sparing alternatives to standard radical cystectomy, optimal lymph node dissection techniques, and optimal chemotherapeutic regimens. This study was conducted to systematically review the benefits and harms of bladder-sparing therapies, lymph node dissection, and systemic chemotherapy for patients with clinically localized muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Systematic literature searches of MEDLINE (from 1990 through October 2014), the Cochrane databases, reference lists, and the ClinicalTrials.gov Web site were performed. A total of 41 articles were selected for review. Bladder-sparing therapies were found to be associated with worse survival compared with radical cystectomy, although the studies had serious methodological shortcomings, findings were inconsistent, and only a few studies evaluated currently recommended techniques. More extensive lymph node dissection might be more effective than less extensive dissection at improving survival and decreasing local disease recurrence, but there were methodological shortcomings and some inconsistency. Six randomized trials found cisplatin-based combination neoadjuvant chemotherapy to be associated with a decreased mortality risk versus cystectomy alone. Four randomized trials found adjuvant chemotherapy to be associated with decreased mortality versus cystectomy alone, but none of these trials reported a statistically significant effect. There was insufficient evidence to determine optimal chemotherapeutic regimens.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Cisplatin; Cystectomy; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Lymph Node Excision; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Neoplasm Invasiveness; Organ Sparing Treatments; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Survival Analysis; Treatment Outcome; Urinary Bladder Neoplasms
PubMed: 26773572
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.29843 -
International Journal of Surgery... Jan 2016Recently, several authors introduced various methods and published feasibility studies on novel robotic-assisted neck dissection techniques for head and neck cancer... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Recently, several authors introduced various methods and published feasibility studies on novel robotic-assisted neck dissection techniques for head and neck cancer patients. Cosmesis and general appearance have become important concerns of cancer patients today. Especially in the head and neck area, a conspicuous scar can reduce patient satisfaction after surgery. With conventional neck dissection techniques, a long scar in the neck is unavoidable. Therefore, the development of robotic assisted neck dissection provides the patients with a scarless neck in these situations. However, there are some limitations of the application of these techniques in their current stage of development.
METHODS
This study was performed using a systematic literature review.
RESULTS
The reviewed clinical studies show that robotic-assisted neck dissection yields similar functional and early oncologic outcomes to that of conventional neck dissection, as well as excellent cosmetic satisfaction of patients. Despite these benefits, some disadvantages can be observed, in terms of longer operation times as well as higher procedure costs.
CONCLUSION
Besides the similar oncologic and functional outcomes compared with the open procedure so far, more prospective, controlled, multicenter studies are required to establish robotic-assisted neck dissection as an alternative standard and to justify its added costs beyond the cosmetic advantages.
Topics: Esthetics; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Humans; Neck Dissection; Operative Time; Patient Satisfaction; Prospective Studies; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Thyroid Neoplasms; Thyroidectomy
PubMed: 26602968
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2015.11.022