Purpose: Prehabilitation (PH) is purported to improve patients’ preoperative functional status. This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to compare short-term postoperative outcomes between patients who underwent a protocolized PH program and the existing standard of care among colorectal cancer patients awaiting surgery. Methods: A search in MEDLINE/PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Scopus, and CINAHL was conducted to identify relevant articles. Repetitive and exhaustive combinations of MeSH search terms (“prehabilitation,” “colorectal cancer,” “colon cancer,” and “rectal cancer”) were used to identify randomized and nonrandomized studies comparing PH versus standard of care for colorectal cancer patients awaiting surgery. The primary outcomes included postoperative morbidity, length of hospital stay, and readmission rates. Results: Seven studies including 1,042 colorectal cancer patients (PH, 382) were included. No significant differences were found in intraoperative outcomes. The postoperative complication rates were comparable between groups (Clavien-Dindo grades I and II: risk ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.62–1.07; P=0.15; Clavien-Dindo grades ≥III: risk ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.72–1.44; P=0.92). There were also no significant differences in length of hospital stay (P=0.21) or the risk of 30-day readmission (P=0.68). Conclusion Although PH does not appear to improve short-term postoperative outcomes following colorectal cancer surgery, the quality of evidence is impaired by the limited trials and heterogeneity. Thus, further large-scale trials are warranted to draw definitive conclusions and establish the long-term effects of PH.

INTRODUCTIONGenetic predisposition to clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) has been linked to disorders such as von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) syndrome. While twin research is a classic approach for elucidating genetic and environmental contributions to disease, no monozygotic twin-pair concordant for ccRCC in the absence of VHL syndrome has been previously reported in the literature or in major twin registries.

CLINICAL PICTUREWe describe a unique monozygotic twin-pair concordant for ccRCC, with discordant but early ages of onset of 25 and 38 respectively. Cytogenetic studies and direct sequencing for VHL gene mutations in the second twin proved unremarkable.

CONCLUSIONSThis is the fi rst reported case of monozygotic twins concordant for ccRCC in the absence of VHL gene mutation. The early yet discordant, age of onset of disease in both twins suggests both genetic and environmental contributions to ccRCC.

Adult ; Carcinoma, Renal Cell ; genetics ; pathology ; Diseases in Twins ; genetics ; pathology ; Humans ; Kidney Neoplasms ; genetics ; pathology ; Male ; Twins, Monozygotic ; von Hippel-Lindau Disease ; genetics

Background: The PLASMIC score is a convenient tool for predicting ADAMTS13 activity of ＜10%.Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) is widely used as a marker of haemolysis in thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP) monitoring, and could be used as a replacement marker for lysis. We aimed to validate the PLASMIC score in a multi-centre Asia Pacific region, and to explore whether LDH could be used as a replacement marker for lysis. Methods: Records of patients with thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) were reviewed. Patients’ ADAMTS13 activity levels were obtained, along with clinical/laboratory findings relevant to the PLASMIC score. Both PLASMIC scores and PLASMIC-LDH scores, in which LDH replaced traditional lysis markers, were calculated. We generated a receiver operator characteristics (ROC) curve and compared the area under the curve values (AUC) to determine the predictive ability of each score. Results: 46 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria, of which 34 had ADAMTS13 activity levels of ＜10%. When the patients were divided into intermediate-to-high risk (scores 5‒7) and low risk (scores 0‒4), the PLASMIC score showed a sensitivity of 97.1% and specificity of 58.3%, with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 86.8% and negative predictive value (NPV) of 87.5%. The PLASMIC-LDH score had a sensitivity of 97.1% and specificity of 33.3%, with a PPV of 80.5% and NPV of 80.0%. Conclusion Our study validated the utility of the PLASMIC score, and demonstrated PLASMIC-LDH as a reasonable alternative in the absence of traditional lysis markers, to help identify high-risk patients for treatment via plasma exchange.