Dataset Information

Prospective Non-Randomized Study of Intraoperative Assessment of Surgical Resection Margin of Colo-Rectal Liver Metastases.

ABSTRACT: Introduction: More than 50% of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) develop liver metastases during the natural course of disease. Surgical resection is currently the most potentially curative method in the treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). The goal of surgery is to achieve a negative resection margin (RM) of at least 1 mm, which provides the best prognosis for patients. The RM can be assessed by the pathologist of the resected liver specimen (RLS) and by the surgeon intraoperatively. The aim of this research paper is to determine the degree of agreement on intraoperative assessment of the RM by the surgeon and histopathological RM assessment by the pathologist. Material and methods: This prospective non-randomized double-blind study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Oncology Institute of Vojvodina and registered on ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT04634526. The study was conducted at the Oncology Institute of Vojvodina, Sremska Kamenica, Serbia. An experienced hepatobiliary surgeon assessed RM for every specimen intra-operatively, immediately after CRLM resection. Resected CRLM lesions were analyzed by two experienced pathologists. These data were compared with pathological RM assessment as a "gold standard". RM of 1 mm or more was rated as negative RM (RM-). Disease-free survival (DFS) and recurrence rate was calculated by RM status defined by surgeon and by pathologist. Results: From 01 January 2015 to 31 August 2019, 98 patients were enrolled in the study. There were 219 RLS with 245 CRLM. The surgeon registered positive RM (RM+) of <1mm in 41 (18.7%) RLS. Taking the result of the histopathological assessment (HPA) as the "gold standard", it was determined that RM was true positive in 32 (14.6%) cases. False positive RM was found in 9 (4.1%) cases. False negative RM was found in 20 (9.1%) cases. True negative RM was found in 158 (72.2%) cases. Sensitivity of surgical assessment (SA) of RM+ was 61.5% (32/52). Specificity of SA of RM+ was 94.6% (158/167). The positive predictive value (PPV) was 78.0% (32/41), while the negative predictive value (NPV) was 88.8% (158/178). The overall accuracy of the RM+ SA was 86.8% (190/219). There was no statistically significant difference in the assessment of RM+ per RLS by surgeon and pathologists (p=0.061), but it was significant when analyses per patients was performed (p=0.017). Recurrence rate for RM+ patients was 48.1% (13/27, p=0.05) for SA and 35.0% (14/40, p=0.17) for HPA. Three year DFS for RM- and RM+ was 66.5% and 27.9% (p=0.04), respectively, by SA, and 64.8% and 42.1% (p=0.106), respectively, by HPA. Conclusion: Intraoperative assessment of RM- by surgeon of RLS is clinically meaningful. There is not a statistically significant difference in the assessment of RM+ by surgeon and pathologists per RLS, but it was statically significant on a per patient basis. RM determined by surgeon has better prognostic impact on recurrence rate and 1- and 3-year DFS than standard histopathological assessment.

SUBMITTER: Protic M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8120181 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceComplete (R0) resection is the dominant prognostic factor for survival across solid tumor types. Achieving adequate tumor clearance with appropriate margins is particularly difficult in nonpalpable tumors or in situ disease. Previous methods to address this problem have proven time consumptive, impractical, or ineffective.ObjectiveTo assess the capability of intraoperative molecular imaging (IMI), a novel technology using a fluorescent tracer targeted to malignant cells, to localize visually occult, nonpalpable tumors and quantify margin distances during resection.Design, setting, and participantsThis nonrandomized open-label trial of IMI using a folate receptor-targeted fluorescent tracer enrolled patients between May 2017 and June 2020 at a single referral center. Eligible patients included those with a small (T1) lung lesion suspicious for malignant neoplasms and with radiographic features suggestive of a nonpalpable lesion.InterventionsPatients were preoperatively infused with a folate receptor-targeted near-infrared tracer. Intraoperatively, surgeons used thoracoscopic visualization and palpation to identify lesions. IMI was performed to detect the lesion in situ, and lesions were imaged ex vivo. Margins were assessed by IMI before comparison with those reported on final histopathologic analysis.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcomes were whether IMI could (1) localize nonpalpable lung lesions in situ and (2) quantify margin distance with comparison with final pathology as the criterion standard. Patient demographic information and lesion characteristics were prospectively recorded.ResultsOf 40 patients, 26 (65%) were female, and the median (interquartile range) age was 66.5 (62-72) years. Conventional surgical methods localized 22 of 40 lesions (55%), while IMI localized 36 of 40 (90%). Of 18 nonpalpable lesions, 15 (83.3%) were identified by IMI. Both palpable and nonpalpable lesions demonstrated mean signal-to-background ratio more than 2. An IMI margin was able to be calculated for 39 of 40 patients (95%). IMI margins were nearly identical to margins reported on final pathology (R2 = 0.9593), with median (interquartile range) difference of 1.3 (0.7-2.0) mm. IMI detected 2 margins in nonpalpable tumors that were clinically unacceptable and would have had a high probability of recurrence.Conclusions and relevanceTo our knowledge, this study presents the first clinical use of IMI for nonpalpable tumors and provides proof of principle for the utility of IMI across the field of surgical oncology in identifying occult disease and tumor-positive margins.

Project description:ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes between robotic-assisted simultaneous resection and open surgery in patients with rectal cancer and liver metastases.BackgroundOpen simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases is widely performed and the potential cure for eligible patients. However, the feasibility of robotic simultaneous resection of primary and secondary liver lesions has not been established as a treatment option for metastatic rectal cancer.Patients and methodsA single-center randomized controlled trial was conducted at a hospital in China. Enrolling patients were aged from 18 to 75 years and diagnosed with surgically resectable metastatic rectal cancer (distal extension to ≤15 cm from the anal margin). Patients selected for simultaneous resection were randomly assigned to have robotic or open surgery at a 1:1 ratio. The primary endpoint was the incidence rate of complications within 30 days after surgery. Secondary endpoints were bladder, sexual function, 3-year disease-free survival and overall survival.ResultsA total of 171 patients were enrolled in this trial with 86 in the robotic group and 85 in the open group. As a result, patients in the robotic group demonstrated fewer complications within 30 days after surgery than those in the open group (31.4% vs. 57.6%, P=0.014) and no mortality seen in either group. Patients in the robotic group had less blood loss (mean [SD], 125.5 [38.3] vs. 211.6 [68.7] mL; P<0·001), faster bowel function recovery (mean [SD], 63.7 [27.4] vs. 93.8 [33.5] hours) P<0·001) and shorter hospital stay (mean [SD], 8.0 [2.2] vs. 10.7 [5.4] days; P<0·001) compared with those in the open group. The robotic group had faster recovery of bladder and sexual function at 3 months after surgery than that of the open group. The 3-year disease-free survival rate (39.5% vs. 35.3%, P=0.739) and the 3-year overall survival rate (76.7% vs. 72.9%, P=0.712) were not statistically significant between the two groups.ConclusionsIn our randomized clinical trial, robotic simultaneous resection treatment of patients with rectal cancer and liver metastases resulted in fewer surgical complications, and faster recovery to those of open surgery. Oncological outcomes showed no significant difference between two groups.

Project description:BackgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the use of binary metric-based (proficiency-based progression; PBP) performance assessments and global evaluative assessment of robotic skills (GEARS) of a robotic-assisted low anterior rectal resection (RA-LAR) procedure.MethodA prospective study of video analysis of RA-LAR procedures was carried out using the PBP metrics with binary parameters previously developed, and GEARS. Recordings were collected from five novice surgeons (≤30 RA-LAR previously performed) and seven experienced surgeons (>30 RA-LAR previously performed). Two consultant colorectal surgeons were trained to be assessors in the use of PBP binary parameters to evaluate the procedure phases, surgical steps, errors, and critical errors in male and female patients and GEARS scores. Novice and experienced surgeons were categorized and assessed using PBP metrics and GEARS; mean scores obtained were compared for statistical purpose. Also, the inter-rater reliability (IRR) of these assessment tools was evaluated.ResultsTwenty unedited recordings of RA-LAR procedures were blindly assessed. Overall, using PBP metric-based assessment, a subgroup of experienced surgeons made more errors (20 versus 16, P = 0.158) and critical errors (9.2 versus 7.8, P = 0.417) than the novice group, although not significantly. However, during the critical phase of RA-LAR, experienced surgeons made significantly fewer errors than the novice group (95% CI of the difference, Lower = 0.104 - Upper = 5.155, df = 11.9, t = 2.23, p = 0.042), and a similar pattern was observed for critical errors. The PBP metric and GEARS assessment tools distinguished between the objectively assessed performance of experienced and novice colorectal surgeons performing RA-LAR (total error scores with PBP metrics, P = 0.019-0.008; GEARS scores, P = 0.029-0.025). GEARS demonstrated poor IRR (mean IRR 0.49) and weaker discrimination between groups (15-41 per cent difference). PBP binary metrics demonstrated good IRR (mean 0.94) and robust discrimination particularly for total error scores (58-64 per cent).ConclusionsPBP binary metrics seem to be useful for metric-based training for surgeons learning RA-LAR procedures.

Dataset Information

Prospective Non-Randomized Study of Intraoperative Assessment of Surgical Resection Margin of Colo-Rectal Liver Metastases.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets