Analysis of appendiceal neoplasms in 1,423 appendectomy specimens: a 10-year retrospective cohort study from a single institution.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to reveal the incidence, clinicopathological, and oncological outcomes of appendiceal neoplasms. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study from a single institution. Patients with a pathological diagnosis of malignancy who underwent appendectomy between January 2011 and 2021 were included in the study, and groups were formed according to pathological type. Clinical, pathological, and oncological results were compared in these groups. RESULTS: The incidence of neoplasia was 2.38% (n=34) in a cohort of 1,423 appendectomy cases. Of the cases, 56% (n=19) were female. The median age in the entire cohort was 55.5 (range: 13-106) years. In the cohort, the rate of neuroendocrine tumor mucinous cystadenoma adenocarcinoma, and low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm, according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer classification of appendiceal neoplasms, was 32.3% (n=11), 26.4% (n=9), 26.4% (n=9), and 14.7% (n=5), respectively. Neuroendocrine tumor patients (median age: 35 years) were younger than the other groups (p=0.021). Secondary complementary surgery was performed in 66.7% (n=6) of adenocarcinoma patients and 27.3% (n=3) of neuroendocrine tumor patients. Right hemicolectomy was performed in all neuroendocrine tumor patients requiring secondary surgery, while right hemicolectomy was performed in three adenocarcinoma patients and cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in three adenocarcinoma patients. After a median follow-up of 44.4 months (95% confidence interval: 18.6-70.1), the mean survival rate was 55% in appendiceal adenocarcinoma patients compared to 100% in neuroendocrine tumor patients. CONCLUSION: Appendiceal neoplasms are rare but remain an important cause of mortality. Appendiceal adenocarcinomas are associated with poorer oncological outcomes compared to other neoplasms.

Analysis of appendiceal neoplasms in 1,423 appendectomy specimens: a 10-year retrospective cohort study from a single institution

SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to reveal the incidence, clinicopathological, and oncological outcomes of appendiceal neoplasms. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study from a single institution. Patients with a pathological diagnosis of malignancy who underwent appendectomy between January 2011 and 2021 were included in the study, and groups were formed according to pathological type. Clinical, pathological, and oncological results were compared in these groups. RESULTS: The incidence of neoplasia was 2.38% (n=34) in a cohort of 1,423 appendectomy cases. Of the cases, 56% (n=19) were female. The median age in the entire cohort was 55.5 (range: 13-106) years. In the cohort, the rate of neuroendocrine tumor mucinous cystadenoma adenocarcinoma, and low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm, according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer classification of appendiceal neoplasms, was 32.3% (n=11), 26.4% (n=9), 26.4% (n=9), and 14.7% (n=5), respectively. Neuroendocrine tumor patients (median age: 35 years) were younger than the other groups (p=0.021). Secondary complementary surgery was performed in 66.7% (n=6) of adenocarcinoma patients and 27.3% (n=3) of neuroendocrine tumor patients. Right hemicolectomy was performed in all neuroendocrine tumor patients requiring secondary surgery, while right hemicolectomy was performed in three adenocarcinoma patients and cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in three adenocarcinoma patients. After a median follow-up of 44.4 months (95% confidence interval: 18.6-70.1), the mean survival rate was 55% in appendiceal adenocarcinoma patients compared to 100% in neuroendocrine tumor patients. CONCLUSION: Appendiceal neoplasms are rare but remain an important cause of mortality. Appendiceal adenocarcinomas are associated with poorer oncological outcomes compared to other neoplasms.

Early and late-term follow-up results of patients diagnosed with aortic aneurysm or aortic dissection with aortic regurgitation undergoing aortic valve repair or valve-sparing aortic surgery

Abstract Introduction: Valve-reimplantation and remodelling techniques used in aortic reconstruction provide successful early, mid, and long-term results. We present our early and late-term experience with 110 patients with aortic regurgitation (AR) who underwent aortic valve repair (AVr) or valve-sparing aortic root surgeries (VSARS) due to aortic dissection or aortic aneurysm. Methods: Nine hundred eighty-two patients who underwent aneurysm or dissection surgery and aortic valve surgery between April 1997 and January 2017 were analysed using the patient database. A total of 110 patients with AR who underwent AVr or VSARS due to aortic dissection or aortic aneurysm were included in the study. Results: In the postoperative period, a decrease was observed in AR compared to the preoperative period (P<0.001); there was an increase in postoperative ejection fraction (EF) compared to the preoperative values (P<0.005) and a significant decrease in postoperative left ventricle diameters compared to the preoperative values (P<0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed one, two, four, and five-year freedom from moderate-severe AR as 95%, 91%, 87%, and 70%, respectively. Freedom from reoperation in one, two, and five years were 97.9%, 93.6%, and 81%, respectively. Eight patients (7.4%) underwent AVr during follow-up. Out of the remaining 100 patients, 13 (12%) had minimum AR, 52 (48%) had 1st-2nd degree AR, and 35 (32%) had 2nd-3rd degree AR during follow-up. Conclusion: For the purpose of maintaining the native valve tissue, preserving the EF and the left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, valve-sparing surgeries should be preferred for appropriate patients.

Early and Late-Term Follow-Up Results of Patients Diagnosed with Aortic Aneurysm or Aortic Dissection with Aortic Regurgitation Undergoing Aortic Valve Repair or Valve-Sparing Aortic Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Valve-reimplantation and remodelling techniques used in aortic reconstruction provide successful early, mid, and long-term results. We present our early and late-term experience with 110 patients with aortic regurgitation (AR) who underwent aortic valve repair (AVr) or valve-sparing aortic root surgeries (VSARS) due to aortic dissection or aortic aneurysm. METHODS: Nine hundred eighty-two patients who underwent aneurysm or dissection surgery and aortic valve surgery between April 1997 and January 2017 were analysed using the patient database. A total of 110 patients with AR who underwent AVr or VSARS due to aortic dissection or aortic aneurysm were included in the study. RESULTS: In the postoperative period, a decrease was observed in AR compared to the preoperative period (P<0.001); there was an increase in postoperative ejection fraction (EF) compared to the preoperative values (P<0.005) and a significant decrease in postoperative left ventricle diameters compared to the preoperative values (P<0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed one, two, four, and five-year freedom from moderate-severe AR as 95%, 91%, 87%, and 70%, respectively. Freedom from reoperation in one, two, and five years were 97.9%, 93.6%, and 81%, respectively. Eight patients (7.4%) underwent AVr during follow-up. Out of the remaining 100 patients, 13 (12%) had minimum AR, 52 (48%) had 1st-2nd degree AR, and 35 (32%) had 2nd-3rd degree AR during follow-up. CONCLUSION: For the purpose of maintaining the native valve tissue, preserving the EF and the left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, valve-sparing surgeries should be preferred for appropriate patients.