ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Patients with intestinal failure (IF) require long-term parenteral nutrition using central venous catheters (CVCs), which often require replacement. We adopted a less fallible guidewire replacement (GWR) method and verified its effectiveness and validity. METHODS: We enrolled 108 cases that underwent a CVC replacement with "GWR" method with IF at our department between 2013 and 2023. We retrospectively reviewed patients' clinical details with tunneled CVC (Hickman/Broviac catheter). For the analysis, we compared for the same time period the catheter exchange method "Primary placement"; newly inserted catheter by venipuncture. RESULTS: The success rate of catheter replacement using GWR was 94.4%. There were six unsuccessful cases. A log-rank test showed no significant difference in catheter survival between primary placement and the GWR, and the time to first infection was significantly longer in the GWR (p = 0.001). Furthermore, no significant differences were observed between the two methods until the first infection, when the exchange indication was limited to infections. In the same way, when the indication was restricted to catheter-related bloodstream infection, there was no significant difference in catheter survival between the two approaches. CONCLUSION: Our GWR procedure was easy to perform and stable, with a high success rate and almost no complications. Moreover, using a guidewire did not increase the frequency of catheter replacement and the infection rate.
Subject(s)
Catheterization, Central Venous , Central Venous Catheters , Intestinal Failure , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Male , Female , Catheterization, Central Venous/methods , Intestinal Failure/therapy , Infant , Child, Preschool , Child , Catheter-Related Infections , Parenteral Nutrition/methods , Treatment Outcome , Device Removal/methods , AdolescentABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment modality for locally advanced prostate cancer has not been established. Radiotherapy, hormonal therapy, and combination treatments are the main strategies, although the feasibility of radical prostatectomy as a first-line therapy needs to be considered. This retrospective analysis of pathological results of extracted specimens evaluated long-term oncological outcomes for high-risk prostate cancer treated surgically. The association of number of risk factors with long-term outcome was specifically analyzed. METHODS: We identified patients with high-risk prostate cancer who underwent laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, without neoadjuvant therapy, at Nippon Medical School from 2000 to 2012. Risk factors were a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration ≥20 ng/mL, pathological ≥T3, and pathological Gleason Score ≥8. Biological failure was defined as a PSA concentration ≥0.2 ng/mL. RESULTS: 222 men were identified. One patient had a positive lymph node status, and there was a significant difference in surgical margin positivity (52 men, 68.4% vs 56 men 38.4%) between patients with and without biochemical failure. Among patients meeting the high-risk criteria with a follow-up of up to 133 months, the biochemical recurrence (BCR) -free survival rates at 5 and 10 years were 62.8% and 58.4%, respectively, and mean time to BCR was 14.0 months. BCR-free survival rates at 5 and 10 years were 73.6% and 71.4%, respectively, for 1 risk factor, 48.7% and 34.6% for 2 factors, and 34.5% and 34.5% for 3 factors. Patients with a single risk factor had a significantly better outcome than those with multiple risk factors. The overall survival rates at 5 and 10 years were 94.6% and 93.7%, and the cancer-specific survival rate was 100% at both 5 and 10 years. CONCLUSIONS: Reasonable long-term oncological outcomes can be achieved by surgical treatment for high-risk prostate cancer. Patients with 1 risk factor had a significantly better BCR-free rate than those with multiple risk factors.
