Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Leukemia-Lymphoma, Adult T-Cell/drug therapy , Receptors, CCR4/antagonists & inhibitors , Stevens-Johnson Syndrome/drug therapy , Aged , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Humans , Leukemia-Lymphoma, Adult T-Cell/blood , Male , Stevens-Johnson Syndrome/bloodABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Extensive peristomal skin ulcer due to pyoderma gangrenosum is difficult to manage and causes significant morbidity. CASE: A 69-year-old man presented with a 10×7-cm painful peristomal skin necrosis during cancer chemotherapy for metastatic colon adenocarcinoma. The diagnosis of peristomal pyoderma gangrenosum was made on the basis of the presence of the skin necrosis with a well-defined, undermined, violaceous border. One month after the presentation along with daily cleansing and minimal debridement without immunosuppressive treatments, wound bed preparation was deemed sufficient for a split-thickness skin graft using negative pressure wound therapy for graft fixation. One month after the operation, the ulcer was completely healed and the patient could manage ostomy pouching independently. He died of cancer 5 months later; no recurrence of the ulcer was observed during this period. CONCLUSION: Peristomal pyoderma gangrenosum was successfully treated with skin grafting after local wound management. Negative pressure wound therapy was useful for skin graft fixation in the peristomal region.
Subject(s)
Colonic Neoplasms/complications , Ileostomy/adverse effects , Pyoderma Gangrenosum/surgery , Skin/pathology , Wound Healing , Aged , Colonic Neoplasms/mortality , Colonic Neoplasms/surgery , Humans , Male , Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy/statistics & numerical data , Pyoderma Gangrenosum/mortality , Pyoderma Gangrenosum/therapy , Skin Transplantation/statistics & numerical dataABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In Japan, elective lymph node dissection (ELND) has been the standard treatment for patients with possible nodal melanoma. Sentinel node biopsy (SNB) has now replaced ELND, not only in Japan but also worldwide. The objective of this study was to compare the interim outcomes of SNB and ELND. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted among patients with clinically node-negative disease treated at our institute with either SNB (n = 30) or ELND (n = 72). RESULTS: The background was similar in the two groups. Nodal metastases were found in 40.0% of patients in the SNB group, but in only 26.4% in the ELND group (P = 0.173). The median follow-up was 31.5 months for the SNB group and 82 months for the ELND group. The incidence of locoregional recurrence and distant metastasis in the SNB group was 10.0% and 16.7%, respectively, and for the ELND group the incidence was 5.6% and 31.9%, respectively. The 3-year disease-free survival rate was similar in the two groups (P = 0.280), and the 3-year disease-free survival rates for node-positive patients were also similar in the two groups (P = 0.90), as were the 3-year disease-free survival rates for node-negative patients (P = 0.193). CONCLUSION: This interim result in a Japanese melanoma population with clinically node-negative disease demonstrated that SNB identified more nodal micrometastases than ELND. This increase in accurate staging likely resulted from the reliable identification of the lymph node field by lymphoscintigraphy, as well as the more detailed pathologic examination of the nodes removed in SNB. It is quite reasonable to perform SNB instead of ELND in this population.