Evidence against the involvement of chronic cerebrospinal venous abnormalities in multiple sclerosis. A case-control study.

OBJECTIVE: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic neurodegenerative disease of the CNS. Recently a controversial vascular hypothesis for MS, termed chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency (CCSVI), has been advanced. The objective of this study was to evaluate the relative prevalence of the venous abnormalities that define CCSVI. METHODS: A case-control study was conducted in which 100 MS patients aged between 18-65 y meeting the revised McDonald criteria were randomly selected and stratified into one of four MS subtypes: relapsing/remitting, secondary progressive, primary progressive and benign. Control subjects (16-70 y) with no known history of MS or other neurological condition were matched with the MS cases. All cases and controls underwent ultrasound imaging of the veins of the neck plus the deep cerebral veins, and magnetic resonance imaging of the neck veins and brain. These procedures were performed on each participant on the same day. RESULTS: On ultrasound we found no evidence of reflux, stenosis or blockage in the internal jugular veins (IJV) or vertebral veins (VV) in any study participant. Similarly, there was no evidence of either reflux or cessation of flow in the deep cerebral veins in any subject. Flow was detected in the IJV and VV in all study participants. Amongst 199 participants there was one MS subject who fulfilled the minimum two ultrasound criteria for CCSVI. Using MRI we found no significant differences in either the intra- or extra-cranial venous flow velocity or venous architecture between cases and controls. CONCLUSION: This case-control study provides compelling evidence against the involvement of CCSVI in multiple sclerosis.

Technical factors, surgeon case volume and positive margin rates after breast conservation surgery for early-stage breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: For patients with breast cancer, a negative surgical margin at first breast-conserving surgery (BCS) minimizes the need for reoperation and likely reduces postoperative anxiety. We assessed technical factors, surgeon and hospital case volume and margin status after BCS in early-stage breast cancer. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using a regional cancer centre database of patients who underwent BCS for breast cancer from 2000 to 2002. We considered the influence of patient, tumour and technical factors (e.g., size of specimen and preoperative diagnosis of cancer available) and surgeon and hospital case volume on margin status at first and final operation. We performed univariate and multivariate regression analyses. RESULTS: We reviewed 489 cases. There were no differences in patient or tumour characteristics among the low-, medium- and high-volume surgeon groups. High-volume surgeons were significantly more likely than other surgeons to operate with a confirmed preoperative diagnosis and to resect a larger volume of tissue. In our univariate analysis and at first operation, the rates of positive margins were 16.4%, 32.9% and 29.1% for high-, medium- and low-volume surgeons, respectively (p = 0.002). In the multivariate analysis, tumour factors (palpability, size, histology), presence of a confirmed preoperative diagnosis and size of resection specimen significantly predicted negative margins. However, when we controlled for these and other factors, high surgeon volume was not a predictor of negative margins at first surgery (odds ratio 1.8, 95% confidence interval 0.9-3.8, p = 0.09). Increased hospital volume was not associated with a lower rate of positive margins at first surgery. CONCLUSION: Various tumour and technical factors were associated with negative margins at first BCS, whereas surgeon and hospital volume status were not. Technical steps that are under the control of the operating surgeon are likely effective targets for quality initiatives in breast cancer surgery.

The relationship between surgical factors and margin status after breast-conservation surgery for early stage breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The study's aim was to identify technical factors that are predictive of negative margins after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). METHODS: This was a retrospective, cohort study of patients who underwent BCS for early-stage cancer from 2000 to 2002. Pathological and specific surgical factors were compared with margin status. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: Four hundred eighty-nine cases were reviewed. The positive margin rate after the initial surgery was 26%. In univariate analysis, lobular histology, size, grade, multifocality, and the presence of EIC and LVI were associated with positive margins (P < .05). The absence of cavity margin dissection and specimen orientation labeling, the absence of a confirmed diagnosis, and smaller volumes of excision were also associated with positive margins (P < .05). In multivariate analysis, confirmed diagnosis, small tumor size, ductal histology, absence of LVI and multifocality, palpability, cavity margin dissection, and larger volumes of excision were predictors of negative margins. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that specific surgical factors are predictive of margin status. Both tumor and technical factors should be considered when planning BCS.