1.Long-term clinical outcomes after high and low ligations with lymph node dissection around the root of the inferior mesenteric artery in patients with rectal cancer
Min Wan LEE ; Sung Sil PARK ; Kiho YOU ; Dong Eun LEE ; Dong Woon LEE ; Sung Chan PARK ; Kyung Su HAN ; Dae Kyung SOHN ; Chang Won HONG ; Bun KIM ; Byung Chang KIM ; Hee Jin CHANG ; Dae Yong KIM ; Jae Hwan OH
Annals of Coloproctology 2024;40(1):62-73
Purpose:
This study aimed to evaluate the long-term clinical outcomes based on the ligation level of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) in patients with rectal cancer.
Methods:
This was a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database that included all patients who underwent elective low anterior resection for rectal cancer between January 2013 and December 2019. The clinical outcomes included oncological outcomes, postoperative complications, and functional outcomes. The oncological outcomes included overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS). The functional outcomes, including defecatory and urogenital functions, were analyzed using the Fecal Incontinence Severity Index, International Prostate Symptom Score, and International Index of Erectile Function questionnaires.
Results:
In total, 545 patients were included in the analysis. Of these, 244 patients underwent high ligation (HL), whereas 301 underwent low ligation (LL). The tumor size was larger in the HL group than in the LL group. The number of harvested lymph nodes (LNs) was higher in the HL group than in the LL group. There were no significant differences in complication rates and recurrence patterns between the groups. There were no significant differences in 5-year RFS and OS between the groups. Cox regression analysis revealed that the ligation level (HL vs. LL) was not a significant risk factor for oncological outcomes. Regarding functional outcomes, the LL group showed a significant recovery in defecatory function 1 year postoperatively compared with the HL group.
Conclusion
LL with LNs dissection around the root of the IMA might not affect the oncologic outcomes comparing to HL; however, it has minimal benefit for defecatory function.
2.Treatment for appendicitis in cancer patients on chemotherapy: a retrospective cohort study
Hyung Hwan KIM ; Sung Sil PARK ; Byung Chang KIM ; Kyung Su HAN ; Bun KIM ; Chang Won HONG ; Dae Kyung SOHN ; Kiho YOU ; Dong Woon LEE ; Sung Chan PARK
Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research 2024;107(1):1-7
Purpose:
Whether to perform surgery or conservatively manage appendicitis in immunosuppressed patients is a concern for clinicians. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of these 2 treatment options for appendicitis in patients with cancer undergoing chemotherapy.
Methods:
This retrospective study included 206 patients with cancer who were diagnosed with acute appendicitis between August 2001 and December 2021. Among them, patients who received chemotherapy within 1 month were divided into surgical and conservative groups. We evaluated the outcomes, including treatment success within 1 year, 1-year recurrence, and the number of days from the diagnosis of appendicitis to chemotherapy restart, between the 2 groups.
Results:
Among the 206 patients with cancer who were diagnosed with acute appendicitis, 78 received chemotherapy within 1 month. The patients were divided into surgery (n = 63) and conservative (n = 15) groups. In the surgery group, the duration of antibiotic therapy (7.0 days vs. 16.0 days, P < 0.001) and length of hospital stay (8.0 days vs. 27.5 days, P = 0.002) were significantly shorter than conservative groups. The duration from the diagnosis of appendicitis to the restart of chemotherapy was shorter in the surgery group (20.8 ± 15.1 days vs. 35.2 ± 28.2 days, P = 0.028). The treatment success rate within 1 year was higher in the surgery group (100% vs. 33.3%, P < 0.001).
Conclusion
Surgical treatment showed a significantly higher success rate than conservative treatment for appendicitis in patients less than 1 month after chemotherapy. Further prospective studies will be needed to clinically determine treatment options.
3.Stratification of rate of lymph node metastasis according to risk factors and oncologic outcomes in patients who underwent radical resection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors
Myung Jae JIN ; Sung Sil PARK ; Dong-Eun LEE ; Sung Chan PARK ; Dong Woon LEE ; Kiho YOU ; Hee Jin CHANG ; Chang Won HONG ; Dae Kyung SOHN ; Kyung Su HAN ; Bun KIM ; Byung Chang KIM ; Jae Hwan OH
Annals of Coloproctology 2023;39(6):467-473
Purpose:
Most predictive factors for lymph node metastasis in rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) have been based on local and endoscopic resection. We aimed to evaluate the risk factors for lymph node metastasis in patients who underwent radical resection for rectal NETs and stratify the risk of lymph node metastasis.
Methods:
Sixty-four patients who underwent radical resection for rectal NETs between January 2001 and January 2018 were included. We investigated the risk factors of lymph node metastasis using clinicopathologic data. We also performed a risk stratification for lymph node metastases using the number of previously known risk factors. For oncologic outcomes, the 5-year overall survival and recurrence-free survival were evaluated in both groups.
Results:
Among the patients who underwent radical surgery, 32 (50.0%) had lymph node metastasis and 32 (50.0%) had non–lymph node metastasis. In the multivariable analysis, only the male sex was identified as a risk factor for lymph node metastasis (odds ratio, 3.695; 95% confidence interval, 1.128–12.105; P=0.031). When there were 2 or more known risk factors, the lymph node metastasis rate was significantly higher than when there were one or no risk factors (odds ratio, 3.667; 95% confidence interval, 1.023–13.143; P=0.046). There was also no statistical difference between the 2 groups in 5-year overall survival (P=0.431) and 5-year recurrence-free survival (P=0.144).
Conclusion
We found that the rate of lymph node metastasis increased significantly when the number of known risk factors is 2 or more.
4.Exfoliate cancer cell analysis in rectal cancer surgery: comparison of laparoscopic and transanal total mesorectal excision, a pilot study
Kiho YOU ; Jung-Ah HWANG ; Dae Kyung SOHN ; Dong Woon LEE ; Sung Sil PARK ; Kyung Su HAN ; Chang Won HONG ; Bun KIM ; Byung Chang KIM ; Sung Chan PARK ; Jae Hwan OH
Annals of Coloproctology 2023;39(6):502-512
Purpose:
Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is currently the standard treatment for rectal cancer. However, its limitations include complications and incomplete total mesorectal resection (TME) due to anatomical features and technical difficulties. Transanal TME (TaTME) has been practiced since 2010 to improve this, but there is a risk of local recurrence and intra-abdominal contamination. We aimed to analyze samples obtained through lavage to compare laparoscopic TME (LapTME) and TaTME.
Methods:
From June 2020 to January 2021, 20 patients with rectal cancer undergoing MIS were consecutively and prospectively recruited. Samples were collected at the start of surgery, immediately after TME, and after irrigation. The samples were analyzed for carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and cytokeratin 20 (CK20) through a quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction. The primary outcome was to compare the detected amounts of CEA and CK20 immediately after TME between the surgical methods.
Results:
Among the 20 patients, 13 underwent LapTME and 7 underwent TaTME. Tumor location was lower in TaTME (7.3 cm vs. 4.6 cm, P=0.012), and negative mesorectal fascia (MRF) was more in LapTME (76.9% vs. 28.6%, P=0.044). CEA and CK20 levels were high in 3 patients (42.9%) only in TaTME. There was 1 case of T4 with incomplete purse-string suture and 1 case of positive MRF with dissection failure. All patients were followed up for an average of 32.5 months without local recurrence.
Conclusion
CEA and CK20 levels were high only in TaTME and were related to tumor factors or intraoperative events. However, whether the detection amount is clinically related to local recurrence remains unclear.
5.The risk of surgical site infection of oral sulfate tablet versus sodium picosulfate for bowel preparation in colorectal cancer surgery: a randomized clinical trial
Sung Sil PARK ; Sung Chan PARK ; Dong-Eun LEE ; Dong Woon LEE ; Kiho YU ; Hyoung-Chul PARK ; Chang Won HONG ; Dae Kyung SOHN ; Kyung Su HAN ; Bun KIM ; Byung Chang KIM ; Jae Hwan OH
Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research 2022;103(2):96-103
Purpose:
Oral sulfate tablets are abundantly used for bowel preparation before colonoscopy. However, their efficiency and safety for bowel preparation before colorectal surgery remain ill-defined. Herein, we aimed to compare the surgical site infection rates and efficiency between oral sulfate tablets and sodium picosulfate.
Methods:
We designed a prospective, randomized, phase 2 clinical trial. Patients with colorectal cancer aged 19–75 years who underwent elective bowel resection and anastomosis by minimally invasive surgery were administered oral sulfate tablets or sodium picosulfate. Eighty-three cases were analyzed from October 2020 to December 2021. Surgical site infection within 30 days after surgery was considered the primary endpoint. Postoperative morbidities, the degree of bowel cleansing, and tolerability were the secondary endpoints.
Results:
Surgical site infection was detected in 1 patient (2.5%) in the oral sulfate tablet group and 2 patients (4.7%) in the sodium picosulfate group, indicating no significant difference between the 2 groups. Postoperative morbidity and the degree of bowel cleansing bore no statistically significant differences. Furthermore, none of the investigated tolerability criteria, namely bloating, pain, nausea, vomiting, and discomfort, differed significantly between the 2 groups. The patients’ willingness to reuse the drug was also not significantly different between the 2 groups.
Conclusion
Although we could not establish the noninferiority of oral sulfate tablets to sodium picosulfate, we found no evidence suggesting that oral sulfate tablets are less safe or tolerable than sodium picosulfate in preoperative bowel preparation.
6.Clinical practice guideline for endoscopic resection of early gastrointestinal cancer
Chan Hyuk PARK ; Dong-Hoon YANG ; Jong Wook KIM ; Jie-Hyun KIM ; Ji Hyun KIM ; Yang Won MIN ; Si Hyung LEE ; Jung Ho BAE ; Hyunsoo CHUNG ; Kee Don CHOI ; Jun Chul PARK ; Hyuk LEE ; Min-Seob KWAK ; Bun KIM ; Hyun Jung LEE ; Hye Seung LEE ; Miyoung CHOI ; Dong-Ah PARK ; Jong Yeul LEE ; Jeong-Sik BYEON ; Chan Guk PARK ; Joo Young CHO ; Soo Teik LEE ; Hoon Jai CHUN
Intestinal Research 2021;19(2):127-157
Although surgery was the standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers, endoscopic resection is now a standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers without regional lymph node metastasis. High-definition white light endoscopy, chromoendoscopy, and image-enhanced endoscopy such as narrow band imaging are performed to assess the edge and depth of early gastrointestinal cancers for delineation of resection boundaries and prediction of the possibility of lymph node metastasis before the decision of endoscopic resection. Endoscopic mucosal resection and/or endoscopic submucosal dissection can be performed to remove early gastrointestinal cancers completely by en bloc fashion. Histopathological evaluation should be carefully made to investigate the presence of risk factors for lymph node metastasis such as depth of cancer invasion and lymphovascular invasion. Additional treatment such as radical surgery with regional lymphadenectomy should be considered if the endoscopically resected specimen shows risk factors for lymph node metastasis. This is the first Korean clinical practice guideline for endoscopic resection of early gastrointestinal cancer. This guideline was developed by using mainly de novo methods and encompasses endoscopic management of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, early gastric cancer, and early colorectal cancer. This guideline will be revised as new data on early gastrointestinal cancer are collected.
7.Clinical practice guideline for endoscopic resection of early gastrointestinal cancer
Chan Hyuk PARK ; Dong-Hoon YANG ; Jong Wook KIM ; Jie-Hyun KIM ; Ji Hyun KIM ; Yang Won MIN ; Si Hyung LEE ; Jung Ho BAE ; Hyunsoo CHUNG ; Kee Don CHOI ; Jun Chul PARK ; Hyuk LEE ; Min-Seob KWAK ; Bun KIM ; Hyun Jung LEE ; Hye Seung LEE ; Miyoung CHOI ; Dong-Ah PARK ; Jong Yeul LEE ; Jeong-Sik BYEON ; Chan Guk PARK ; Joo Young CHO ; Soo Teik LEE ; Hoon Jai CHUN
Intestinal Research 2021;19(2):127-157
Although surgery was the standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers, endoscopic resection is now a standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers without regional lymph node metastasis. High-definition white light endoscopy, chromoendoscopy, and image-enhanced endoscopy such as narrow band imaging are performed to assess the edge and depth of early gastrointestinal cancers for delineation of resection boundaries and prediction of the possibility of lymph node metastasis before the decision of endoscopic resection. Endoscopic mucosal resection and/or endoscopic submucosal dissection can be performed to remove early gastrointestinal cancers completely by en bloc fashion. Histopathological evaluation should be carefully made to investigate the presence of risk factors for lymph node metastasis such as depth of cancer invasion and lymphovascular invasion. Additional treatment such as radical surgery with regional lymphadenectomy should be considered if the endoscopically resected specimen shows risk factors for lymph node metastasis. This is the first Korean clinical practice guideline for endoscopic resection of early gastrointestinal cancer. This guideline was developed by using mainly de novo methods and encompasses endoscopic management of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, early gastric cancer, and early colorectal cancer. This guideline will be revised as new data on early gastrointestinal cancer are collected.
8.Clinical Practice Guideline for Endoscopic Resection of Early Gastrointestinal Cancer
Chan Hyuk PARK ; Dong-Hoon YANG ; Jong Wook KIM ; Jie-Hyun KIM ; Ji Hyun KIM ; Yang Won MIN ; Si Hyung LEE ; Jung Ho BAE ; Hyunsoo CHUNG ; Kee Don CHOI ; Jun Chul PARK ; Hyuk LEE ; Min-Seob KWAK ; Bun KIM ; Hyun Jung LEE ; Hye Seung LEE ; Miyoung CHOI ; Dong-Ah PARK ; Jong Yeul LEE ; Jeong-Sik BYEON ; Chan Guk PARK ; Joo Young CHO ; Soo Teik LEE ; Hoon Jai CHUN
Journal of Digestive Cancer Report 2020;8(1):1-50
Although surgery was the standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers, endoscopic resection is now a standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers without regional lymph node metastasis. High-definition white light endoscopy, chromoendoscopy, and image-enhanced endoscopy such as narrow band imaging are performed to assess the edge and depth of early gastrointestinal cancers for delineation of resection boundaries and prediction of the possibility of lymph node metastasis before the decision of endoscopic resection. Endoscopic mucosal resection and/or endoscopic submucosal dissection can be performed to remove early gastrointestinal cancers completely by en bloc fashion. Histopathological evaluation should be carefully made to investigate the presence of risk factors for lymph node metastasis such as depth of cancer invasion and lymphovascular invasion. Additional treatment such as radical surgery with regional lymphadenectomy should be considered if the endoscopically resected specimen shows risk factors for lymph node metastasis. This is the first Korean clinical practice guideline for endoscopic resection of early gastrointestinal cancer. This guideline was developed by using mainly de novo methods and encompasses endoscopic management of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, early gastric cancer, and early colorectal cancer. This guideline will be revised as new data on early gastrointestinal cancer are collected.
9.cal Practice Guideline for Endoscopic Resection of Early Gastrointestinal Cancer
Chan Hyuk PARK ; Dong-Hoon YANG ; Jong Wook KIM ; Jie-Hyun KIM ; Ji Hyun KIM ; Yang Won MIN ; Si Hyung LEE ; Jung Ho BAE ; Hyunsoo CHUNG ; Kee Don CHOI ; Jun Chul PARK ; Hyuk LEE ; Min-Seob KWAK ; Bun KIM ; Hyun Jung LEE ; Hye Seung LEE ; Miyoung CHOI ; Dong-Ah PARK ; Jong Yeul LEE ; Jeong-Sik BYEON ; Chan Guk PARK ; Joo Young CHO ; Soo Teik LEE ; Hoon Jai CHUN
The Korean Journal of Gastroenterology 2020;75(5):264-291
Although surgery was the standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers, endoscopic resection is now a standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers without regional lymph node metastasis. High-definition white light endoscopy, chromoendoscopy, and image-enhanced endoscopy such as narrow band imaging are performed to assess the edge and depth of early gastrointestinal cancers for delineation of resection boundaries and prediction of the possibility of lymph node metastasis before the decision of endoscopic resection. Endoscopic mucosal resection and/or endoscopic submucosal dissection can be performed to remove early gastrointestinal cancers completely by en bloc fashion. Histopathological evaluation should be carefully made to investigate the presence of risk factors for lymph node metastasis such as depth of cancer invasion and lymphovascular invasion. Additional treatment such as radical surgery with regional lymphadenectomy should be considered if the endoscopically resected specimen shows risk factors for lymph node metastasis. This is the first Korean clinical practice guideline for endoscopic resection of early gastrointestinal cancer. This guideline was developed by using mainly de novo methods and encompasses endoscopic management of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, early gastric cancer, and early colorectal cancer. This guideline will be revised as new data on early gastrointestinal cancer are collected.
10.Clinical Practice Guideline for Endoscopic Resection of Early Gastrointestinal Cancer
Chan Hyuk PARK ; Dong-Hoon YANG ; Jong Wook KIM ; Jie-Hyun KIM ; Ji Hyun KIM ; Yang Won MIN ; Si Hyung LEE ; Jung Ho BAE ; Hyunsoo CHUNG ; Kee Don CHOI ; Jun Chul PARK ; Hyuk LEE ; Min-Seob KWAK ; Bun KIM ; Hyun Jung LEE ; Hye Seung LEE ; Miyoung CHOI ; Dong-Ah PARK ; Jong Yeul LEE ; Jeong-Sik BYEON ; Chan Guk PARK ; Joo Young CHO ; Soo Teik LEE ; Hoon Jai CHUN
The Korean Journal of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research 2020;20(2):117-145
Although surgery was the standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers, endoscopic resection is now a standard treatment for early gastrointestinal cancers without regional lymph node metastasis. High-definition white light endoscopy, chromoendoscopy, and image-enhanced endoscopy such as narrow band imaging are performed to assess the edge and depth of early gastrointestinal cancers for delineation of resection boundaries and prediction of the possibility of lymph node metastasis before the decision of endoscopic resection. Endoscopic mucosal resection and/or endoscopic submucosal dissection can be performed to remove early gastrointestinal cancers completely by en bloc fashion. Histopathological evaluation should be carefully made to investigate the presence of risk factors for lymph node metastasis such as depth of cancer invasion and lymphovascular invasion. Additional treatment such as radical surgery with regional lymphadenectomy should be considered if the endoscopically resected specimen shows risk factors for lymph node metastasis. This is the first Korean clinical practice guideline for endoscopic resection of early gastrointestinal cancer. This guideline was developed by using mainly de novo methods and encompasses endoscopic management of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, early gastric cancer, and early colorectal cancer. This guideline will be revised as new data on early gastrointestinal cancer are collected.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail