British Journal of Surgery最新文献

Background: Prospective randomized trials have not yet identified baseline features predictive of organ preservation in locally advanced rectal cancers treated with total neoadjuvant therapy and a selective watch-and-wait strategy.

Methods: This was a secondary analysis of the OPRA trial, which randomized patients with stage II-III rectal adenocarcinoma to receive either induction or consolidation total neoadjuvant therapy. Patients were recommended for total mesorectal excision, or watch and wait based on clinical response at 8 ± 4 weeks after completing treatment. Standardized baseline clinical and radiological variables were collected prospectively. Survival outcomes, including total mesorectal excision-free survival, disease-free survival, and overall survival, were assessed by intention-to-treat analysis. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate associations between baseline variables and survival outcomes.

Results: Of the 324 patients randomized for the OPRA trial, 38 (11.7%) had cT4 tumours, 230 (71.0%) cN-positive disease, 101 (32.5%) mesorectal fascia involvement, and 64 (19.8%) extramural venous invasion. Several baseline features were independently associated with recommendation for total mesorectal excision on multivariable analysis: nodal disease (HR 1.66, 95% c.i. 1.12 to 2.48), extramural venous invasion (HR 1.57, 1.07 to 2.29), mesorectal fascia involvement (HR 1.45, 1.01 to 2.09), and tumour length (HR 1.11, 1.00 to 1.22). Of these, nodal disease (HR 2.02, 1.15 to 3.53) and mesorectal fascia involvement (HR 2.02, 1.26 to 3.26) also predicted worse disease-free survival. Age (HR 1.03, 1.00 to 1.06) was associated with overall survival.

Conclusion: Baseline MRI features, including nodal disease, extramural venous invasion, mesorectal fascia involvement, and tumour length, independently predict the likelihood of organ preservation after completion of total neoadjuvant therapy. Mesorectal fascia involvement and nodal disease are associated with disease-free survival.

Background: Tailoring the biliopancreatic limb length in one anastomosis gastric bypass is proposed as beneficial in retrospective studies, yet randomized trials are lacking. The aim of this double-blind, single-centre RCT was to ascertain whether tailoring biliopancreatic limb length based on total small bowel length (TSBL) results in superior outcomes after one anastomosis gastric bypass compared with a fixed 150 cm biliopancreatic limb length.

Methods: Eligible patients, meeting International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) criteria for metabolic bariatric surgery, scheduled for primary one anastomosis gastric bypass surgery, and willing to be randomized, underwent TSBL measurement during surgery. When TSBL measurement was feasible, patients were randomly assigned to a standard 150 cm biliopancreatic limb length or a tailored biliopancreatic limb based on TSBL: TSBL less than 500 cm, biliopancreatic limb 150 cm; TSBL 500-700 cm, biliopancreatic limb 180 cm; and TSBL greater than 700 cm, biliopancreatic limb 210 cm. The primary outcome was percentage total weight loss at 5 years.

Results: Between September 2020 and August 2022, 212 patients were randomized into the standard biliopancreatic limb group (105 patients) or the tailored biliopancreatic limb group (107 patients). The mean(s.d.) TSBL was 657(128) cm (range 295-1020 cm). In the tailored group, 150, 180, and 210 cm biliopancreatic limb lengths were applied to 8.4%, 53.3%, and 38.3% of patients respectively. The mean(s.d.) 1-year percentage total weight loss was 32.8(6.9)% in the standard group and 33.1(6.2)% in the tailored group (P = 0.787). Nutritional deficiencies and short-term complications showed no significant differences.

Conclusion: Tailoring biliopancreatic limb length based on TSBL is safe and feasible. One year after surgery, it is not superior to a standard biliopancreatic limb length of 150 cm in terms of percentage total weight loss.

Registration number: Dutch Trial Register, NL7945.

Background: Breast-conserving surgery alone, breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiation treatment, and mastectomy are guideline-concordant treatments for ductal carcinoma in situ. The aim of this study was to compare survival outcomes between these treatment options.

Methods: A stratified random sample of patients diagnosed with pure ductal carcinoma in situ between 2008 and 2014 was selected from 1330 sites in the USA. Data on diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up were abstracted by local cancer registrars. Population-averaged marginal estimates of disease-specific survival and overall survival for breast-conserving surgery alone, breast-conserving surgery with radiation treatment, and mastectomy were obtained by combining sampling and overlap weights.

Results: A total of 18 442 women were included, with a median follow-up of 67.8 (interquartile range 46.1-93.5) months. A total of 35 women died from breast cancer, at a median age of 62 (interquartile range 50-74) years. Population-averaged 8-year rates of disease-specific survival were 99.6% or higher for all treatment groups, with no significant differences between groups (breast-conserving surgery alone versus breast-conserving surgery with radiation treatment, HR 1.19 (95% c.i. 0.29 to 4.85); and mastectomy versus breast-conserving surgery with radiation treatment, HR 1.74 (95% c.i. 0.53 to 5.72). There was no difference in overall survival between the patients who underwent a mastectomy and the patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery with radiation treatment (HR 1.09 (95% c.i. 0.83 to 1.43)). Patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery alone had lower overall survival compared with the patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery with radiation treatment (HR 1.29 (95% c.i. 1.00 to 1.67)). This survival difference vanished for all but one subgroup, namely patients less than 65 years (HR 1.86 (95% c.i. 1.15 to 3.00)).

Conclusion: There was no statistically significant difference in disease-specific survival between women operated with breast-conserving surgery alone, breast-conserving surgery with radiation treatment, or mastectomy for ductal carcinoma in situ. Given the low absolute risk of disease-specific mortality, these results provide confidence in offering individualized locoregional treatment without fear of compromising survival.

Background: Women with thoracic aortic aneurysms within the arch or descending thoracic aorta have poorer survival than men. Sex differences in relative thoracic aortic aneurysm size may account for some of the discrepancy. The aim of this study was to explore whether basing clinical management on aneurysm size index (maximum aneurysm diameter/body surface area) rather than aneurysm size can restore equality of survival by sex.

Methods: The Effective Treatments for Thoracic Aortic Aneurysms (ETTAA; ISRCTN04044627) study was a prospective, observational cohort study. Adults referred to National Health Service hospitals in England with new/existing arch or descending thoracic aorta aneurysms greater than or equal to 4 cm in diameter were followed from March 2014 to March 2022. Baseline characteristics and survival to intervention and overall were compared for men and women. Survival models were used to assess the association between all-cause survival and sex, with and without adjustment for aneurysm diameter or aneurysm size index.

Results: A total of 886 thoracic aortic aneurysm patients were recruited: 321 (36.2%) women and 565 (63.8%) men. The mean(s.d.) aneurysm diameter was the same for women and men (5.7(1.1) versus 5.7(1.2) cm respectively; P = 0.751), but the mean(s.d.) aneurysm size index was greater for women than for men (3.32(0.80) versus 2.83(0.63) respectively; P < 0.001). Women had significantly worse survival without intervention: 110 (34.3%) women and 135 (23.9%) men (log rank test, P < 0.001). All-cause mortality remained greater for women after adjustment for diameter (HR 1.65 (95% c.i. 1.35 to 2.02); P < 0.001), but was attenuated after adjustment for aneurysm size index (HR 1.11 (95% c.i. 0.89 to 1.38); P = 0.359). Similar results were found for all follow-up, with or without intervention, and findings were consistent for descending thoracic aorta aneurysms alone.

Conclusion: Guidelines for referral to specialist services should consider including aneurysm size index rather than diameter to reduce inequity due to patient sex.