Gemcitabine versus Gemcitabine Combined with Cisplatin Treatment Locally Advanced or Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis / Journal of the Korean Cancer Association, 대한암학회지

PURPOSE: Gemcitabine is the most active agent to treat unresectable pancreatic cancer. The superiority of combining other drugs with cisplatin is still controversial; therefore, we performed a retrospective analysis of gemcitabine versus gemcitabine combined with cisplatin to determine the treatment outcomes for patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 2001 to 2007, we enrolled 60 patients who were treated with gemcitabine or gemcitabine combined with cisplatin for locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. Gemcitabine 1, 000 mg/m2 (G) was administrated at day 1 and day 8 every 3 weeks. Cisplatin 60 mg/m2 was added at day 1 every 3 weeks to the gemcitabine schedule (GP). RESULTS: Number of G: GP was 34: 26, locally advanced to metastatic ratio was 35% to 65% in group G and 46% to 54% in group GP. Median follow up duration was 29 months. The median number of chemotherapy cycles was 4 (range: 2~11) for the G group, and 4 (range: 1~11) for the GP group. The response rate of the G and GP groups was 17% and 11%, respectively. The progression free survival (PFS) was 4.5 months and 2.8 months, respectively, for the G and GP groups. The overall survival (OS) was 10.7 and 8.7 months respectively, for the G and GP groups, but there is no statistically significant difference of the PFS (p=0.2396) and OS (p=0.4643) between the 2 groups. The hematological toxicity profile was similar (the grade III neutropenia and thrombocytopenia was 4.4% and 3.1%, respectively, in G group, and 7.5% and 2.8%, respectively, in the GP group). But non-hematological toxicities such as skin rash, abnormal liver function and nausea/vomiting were observed in 3 patients of the GP group. On the prognostic factor analysis, no factors predicted a longer PFS and OS for both the G and GP groups. CONCLUSIONS: Gemcitabine single treatment might be more tolerable and it had the same efficacy compared to cisplatin combination treatment in this retrospective study.

A case of cytomegalovirus colitis in immunocompetent patient / 대한내과학회지

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is more frequent in immunocompromised patients those with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), malignant disease, steroid therapy. However, CMV can infect a healthy person who has normal immunity. Most cases of CMV infections are due to reactivation of latent virus. We report a case of cytomegalovirus colitis in a 73 years old woman who has congestive heart failure with normal immunity. Sigmidoscopy reveals cobble stone like mucosa and deep ulceration. CMV infection produces a cytomegalic cell containing a intranuclear inclusion, which is surrounded by clear halo in Hematoxylin-Eosin stain. Immunohistochemical stain for CMV reveals focal positive in cytoplasm and in nuclei of large cells. We diagnosed CMV colitis with histopathologic finding and immunohistochemistry through sigmoidoscopic mucosal biopsy.

Hepatocholelithiasis due to compression of common hepatic duct by right hepatic artery / 한국간담췌외과학회지

We present two cases of compression of the common hepatic duct by overriding of the right hepatic artery. One case is gall bladder, common hepatic duct stone and one case is right intrahepatic duct stone. We observed the compression of the common hepatic duct caused by overriding of the right hepatic artery in the both cases. The final diagnosis was made at operative fields. These patient were successfully treated by dissection of adhesion, suture, fixation between gall bladder bed and right hepatic artery.

Effectiveness of Flumazenil against Midazolam as Premedication for Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy / 대한소화기내시경학회지

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Midazolam is utilized as a premedication for uppoer gastrointestinal endoscopy. Midazolam has a more rapid onset of reaction than that of diazepam and its duration is shorter. But the Consciousness of premedicated patients has not been regained sooner. The Purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of flumazenil against midazolam as premedication for upper gastrointesinal endoscopy. METHODS: Sixty patients underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. These patients were divided to three groups: Group I included twenty patients without premedication; Group II Included twenty patients with premedication of midazolam and then were not given an antisedative agent excluign of normal saline; and Group III included the others with midazolam and flumazenil as an antisedative agent. RESULTS: There was no change in vital signs after midazolam and flumazenil as an antisedative agent. RESULTS: There was no change in vital signs after midazolam injection, compared with presedation value. Modified Steward Coma Scale showed a significant increase after flumazenil injection as an antagonist of midazolam. The assessment of the endoscopist and the comfort of patients were satisfactory. When the 40 patients were asked about their willingness to undergo the same procedure in the future, thirty-four patients responded favorably. CONCLUSION: Midazolam was safe and effective for sedation for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. There was rapid regaining of consciousness with flumazenil indection after midazolam, so the use of flumazenil against midazolam injection also appeared to be effective.