The patient was an 82-year-old woman. For dysphagia scrutiny, upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and biopsy of a submucosal tumor of the midthoracic esophagus were performed. The patient was urgently admitted to the Department of Gastroenterology for examination and treatment. After admission, enhanced CT showed a descending thoracic aortic aneurysm (DTA) pressing on the esophagus. On the third day of hospitalization, the patient suffered massive hematemesis and went into shock, and emergency thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) was performed with resuscitation based on the diagnosis of esophageal perforation of the DTA. The patient was weaned from the ventilator by tracheotomy without cerebrospinal complications and left the intensive care unit on the seventh postoperative day. One month after surgery, a CT scan showed that the DTA had almost disappeared and that the esophageal compression had been released. The patient was managed with antibacterial therapy and nutritional support other than oral intake and was discharged home 7 months after surgery without stent graft infection or mediastinitis. The usefulness of TEVAR for ruptured descending thoracic aortic aneurysms has been reported in many cases. However, in patients with an aortoesophageal fistula (AEF), esophagectomy is required after TEVAR to control infection, and the mortality rate of this disease is high. We report a case in which infection were controlled by antibacterial therapy and nutritional management other than oral intake after TEVAR and the patient survived.

Objective: Hospital treatment volume affects survival in patients with endometrial cancer;notably, initial treatment at high-volume centers improves survival outcomes. Our study assessed the effect of hospital treatment volume on cost-effectiveness and survival outcomes in patients with endometrial cancer in Japan. Methods: A decision-analytic model was evaluated using the following variables and their impact on cost-effectiveness: 1) hospital treatment volume (low-, intermediate-, and highvolume centers) and 2) postoperative recurrent risk factors based on pathological findings (high- and intermediate-risk or low-risk). Data were obtained from the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology database, systematic literature searches, and the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination database. Quality-adjusted life years (QALY) was used as a measure of effectiveness. The model was built from a public healthcare perspective and the impact of uncertainty was assessed using sensitivity analyses. Results: A base-case analysis showed that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio at high-volume centers was below a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of ¥5,000,000with a maximum of ¥3,777,830/4.28 QALY for the high- and intermediate-risk group, and ¥2,316,695/4.57 QALY for the low-risk group. Treatment at the high-volume centers showed better efficiency and cost-effectiveness in both strategies compared to intermediate- or lowvolume centers. Sensitivity analyses showed that the model outcome was robust to changes in input values. With the WTP threshold, treatment at high-volume centers remained cost-effective in at least 73.6% and 78.2% of iterations for high- and intermediate-risk, and lowrisk groups, respectively. Conclusion Treatment at high-volume centers is the most cost-effective strategy for guiding treatment centralization in patients with endometrial cancer.

Objective: Hospital treatment volume affects survival in patients with endometrial cancer;notably, initial treatment at high-volume centers improves survival outcomes. Our study assessed the effect of hospital treatment volume on cost-effectiveness and survival outcomes in patients with endometrial cancer in Japan. Methods: A decision-analytic model was evaluated using the following variables and their impact on cost-effectiveness: 1) hospital treatment volume (low-, intermediate-, and highvolume centers) and 2) postoperative recurrent risk factors based on pathological findings (high- and intermediate-risk or low-risk). Data were obtained from the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology database, systematic literature searches, and the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination database. Quality-adjusted life years (QALY) was used as a measure of effectiveness. The model was built from a public healthcare perspective and the impact of uncertainty was assessed using sensitivity analyses. Results: A base-case analysis showed that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio at high-volume centers was below a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of ¥5,000,000with a maximum of ¥3,777,830/4.28 QALY for the high- and intermediate-risk group, and ¥2,316,695/4.57 QALY for the low-risk group. Treatment at the high-volume centers showed better efficiency and cost-effectiveness in both strategies compared to intermediate- or lowvolume centers. Sensitivity analyses showed that the model outcome was robust to changes in input values. With the WTP threshold, treatment at high-volume centers remained cost-effective in at least 73.6% and 78.2% of iterations for high- and intermediate-risk, and lowrisk groups, respectively. Conclusion Treatment at high-volume centers is the most cost-effective strategy for guiding treatment centralization in patients with endometrial cancer.

Objective: Hospital treatment volume affects survival in patients with endometrial cancer;notably, initial treatment at high-volume centers improves survival outcomes. Our study assessed the effect of hospital treatment volume on cost-effectiveness and survival outcomes in patients with endometrial cancer in Japan. Methods: A decision-analytic model was evaluated using the following variables and their impact on cost-effectiveness: 1) hospital treatment volume (low-, intermediate-, and highvolume centers) and 2) postoperative recurrent risk factors based on pathological findings (high- and intermediate-risk or low-risk). Data were obtained from the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology database, systematic literature searches, and the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination database. Quality-adjusted life years (QALY) was used as a measure of effectiveness. The model was built from a public healthcare perspective and the impact of uncertainty was assessed using sensitivity analyses. Results: A base-case analysis showed that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio at high-volume centers was below a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of ¥5,000,000with a maximum of ¥3,777,830/4.28 QALY for the high- and intermediate-risk group, and ¥2,316,695/4.57 QALY for the low-risk group. Treatment at the high-volume centers showed better efficiency and cost-effectiveness in both strategies compared to intermediate- or lowvolume centers. Sensitivity analyses showed that the model outcome was robust to changes in input values. With the WTP threshold, treatment at high-volume centers remained cost-effective in at least 73.6% and 78.2% of iterations for high- and intermediate-risk, and lowrisk groups, respectively. Conclusion Treatment at high-volume centers is the most cost-effective strategy for guiding treatment centralization in patients with endometrial cancer.

Objective: Associations between hospital treatment volume and survival outcomes for women with 3 types of gynecologic malignancies, and the trends and contributing factors for high-volume centers were examined. Methods: The Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology tumor registry databased retrospective study examined 206,845 women with 80,741, 73,647, and 52,457 of endometrial, cervical, and ovarian tumor, respectively, who underwent primary treatment in Japan between 2004 and 2015. Associations between the annual treatment volume and overall survival (OS) for each tumor type were examined using a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model with restricted cubic splines. Institutions were categorized into 3 groups (low-, moderate-, and high-volume centers) based on hazard risks. Results: Hazard ratio (HR) for OS each the 3 tumors decreased with hospital treatment volume. The cut-off points of treatment volume were defined for high- (≥50, ≥51, and ≥27), moderate- (20–49, 20–50, and 17–26), and low-volume centers (≤19, ≤19, and ≤16) by cases/year for endometrial, cervical, and ovarian tumors, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed younger age, rare tumor histology, and initial surgical management as contributing factors for women at high-volume centers (all, p<0.001). The proportion of high-volume center treatments decreased, whereas low-volume center treatments increased (all p<0.001). Treatment at high-volume centers improved OS than that at other centers (adjusted HR [aHR]=0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.78–0.88; aHR=0.78, 95% CI=0.75–0.83; and aHR=0.90, 95% CI=0.86–0.95 for endometrial, cervical, and ovarian tumors). Conclusion Hospital treatment volume impacted survival outcomes. Treatments at high-volume centers conferred survival benefits for women with gynecologic malignancies. The proportion of treatments at high-volume centers have been decreasing recently.

Objective: Regional lymph node (LN) dissection is a standard surgical procedure for endometrial cancer, but there is currently no clear consensus on its therapeutic significance. We aimed to determine the impact of regional LN dissection on the outcome of endometrial cancer. Methods: Study subjects comprised 36,813 patients who were registered in the gynecological tumor registry of the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology, had undergone initial surgery for endometrial cancer between 2004 and 2011, and whose clinicopathological factors and prognosis were appropriate for our investigation. The following clinicopathological factors were obtained from the registry: age, surgical stage classification, Union for International Cancer Control tumor, node, metastasis classification, histological type, histological differentiation, presence or absence of LN dissection, and postoperative treatment. We retrospectively analyzed the clinicopathological factors and therapeutic outcomes for patients with endometrial cancer. Results: Analysis of all subjects showed that the group that underwent LN dissection had a significantly better overall survival than the group that did not undergo dissection. Analysis based on stage showed similar results across groups, except for stage Ia. Analysis based on stage and histological type showed similar results across groups, except for stage Ia endometrial carcinoma G1 or Ia G2. Multivariate analysis of prognostic factors indicated that LN dissection is an independent prognostic factor and that it has a greater impact on prognosis than adjuvant chemotherapy. Conclusion Despite the limitations of a retrospective study with some biases, the results suggest that LN dissection in endometrial cancer has a prognostic effect.

We report a successful case of fulminant myocarditis treated with central ECMO with a transapical left ventricular vent (TLVV). A 33-year-old man was diagnosed with fulminant myocarditis with acute biventricular failure. Using a cardio-pulmonary bypass, we introduced central ECMO with ascending aortic perfusion, right atrial venous drainage and TLVV. After ancillary circulation, his cardiac function gradually improved. The endotracheal tube was removed 5 days after the surgery (POD 5), and he was weaned from ECMO on POD 7 and discharged on POD 38. Although there are many cases in which peripheral veno-arterial ECMO (VA-ECMO) is used for fulminant myocarditis, there is a drawback to VA-ECMO : left ventricle (LV) unloading may be incomplete. Insufficient LV unloading may cause pulmonary congestion or disadvantage in myocardial recovery. TLVV can be used as a solution to unload the left ventricle. Central ECMO with TLVV should be useful therapy for fulminant myocarditis.

A 76-year-old man with a complaint of dyspnea was diagnosed with acute severe mitral regurgitation due to ruptured chordae tendineae. For improvement of pulmonary congestion, we introduced IMPELLA 5.0® and extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation before valve surgery. After two-days' IMPELLA 5.0® support, mitral valve replacement surgery with a bioprosthetic valve was performed and IMPELLA 5.0® was withdrawn. We report a successful case of a bridge to surgery using IMPELLA 5.0® with mitral valve regurgitation accompanied by acute left heart failure with severe respiratory failure.

Objectives: This study aimed at identifying the differences in the vegetable intake frequency among rural, suburban, and urban residents. It also intended to estimate the effects of vegetable cultivation, receiving vegetables, and purchasing vegetables at farmers’ markets on the differences in vegetable intake frequency. Based on the results, to promote vegetable intake, we discuss the value of supporting vegetable cultivation in the rural areas.Materials and Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study targeting residents aged between 20 and 74, living in three parts of a city within the Gunma prefecture in Japan. The three locations were selected to represent the rural, suburban, and urban areas. We mailed two sets of anonymous self-administered questionnaires to all households in the three areas (a total of 2,260 households, comprising about 1,000 people aged between 20 and 74 in each area). The survey requested information on the vegetable intake frequency, vegetable cultivation, frequency of receiving vegetables, frequency of vegetable purchase at farmers’ markets, the subjective difficulty in food-store access, economic circumstances, health attitudes, and demographic characteristics. We used the analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) to examine the data obtained.Results: We received 873 responses (from 586 households), of which 90 were irrelevant, thus leaving a sample of 783 residents (257 rural, 259 suburban, 267 urban) available for statistical analysis. The results revealed that the rural residents had significantly greater vegetable intake frequency than the urban and suburban residents did. These regional differences became smaller after the adjustment of the following variables: vegetable cultivation, receiving vegetables, and vegetable purchase at farmers’ markets. No significant difference was observed in the vegetable intake frequency between the rural and urban respondents after this adjustment was made.Conclusions: Vegetable intake frequency was higher in the rural area than in the suburban and urban areas. Vegetable cultivation, receiving vegetables, and vegetable purchase at farmers’ markets were strongly linked to these regional differences.

Objective: To clarify the relationship between the proportion of severely insufficient vegetable intake frequency and 1) vegetable cultivation, 2) frequency of receiving vegetable among non-cultivators.Materials and Methods: Residents aged 20 to 74 years in three areas of a city in Gunma Prefecture, Japan, were invited to participate. In September 2016, two sets of self-administered questionnaires were mailed to all 2,260 households in the three areas. The survey items covered the frequency of vegetable intake, vegetable cultivation (as a farmer, as a non-farmer, or no-cultivation), frequency of receiving vegetable, and basic characteristics. For vegetable cultivators, we asked the proportion of cultivated vegetables for home consumption and for giving to neighbors. Binomial logistic regression models were used to analyze the data collected. The respondents were classified into two groups according to their vegetable intake frequency: fewer than three times per day (severely insufficient), and at least three times per day.Results: We had 796 valid responses. Using the no-cultivation group as reference, both of the other groups —vegetable cultivation as a farmer, and as a non-farmer— had a significantly smaller proportion of severely insufficient vegetable intake frequency. Among the no-cultivation group, using those who had never received vegetable in the past month as reference, those who rarely, sometimes, or often received vegetables had a significantly smaller proportion of severely insufficient vegetable intake frequency. These associations were similar in cases where vegetable juice was or was not included. The proportion of those who cultivated vegetables for home consumption was 96% among farmers and 100% among non-farmers, respectively, and for giving to neighbors was 84% among farmers and 62% among non-farmers, respectively.Conclusion: A negative association of the proportion of severely insufficient vegetable intake with vegetable cultivation, and with receiving vegetable among non-cultivators, was suggested.