Do we need to routinely perform cavity shaving with breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: To evaluate comparative outcomes of breast-conserving surgery (BCS) of breast cancer with and without cavity shaving. METHODS: A systematic search of multiple electronic data sources was conducted, and all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing BCS with or without cavity shaving for breast cancer were included. Positive margin rate, second operation rate, operative time, post-operative haematoma, cosmetic appearance and budget cost were the evaluated outcome parameters for the meta-analysis. RESULTS: Six RCTs reporting a total number of 971 patients; 495 of these underwent BCS plus shaving (BCS + S), and 473 underwent BCS alone were included. BCS + S showed significantly lower positive margin rate (Risk Ratio [RR] 0.40, P = 0.00001) and second operation rate (RR 0.38, P = 0.00001). BCS + S demonstrated longer operative time than BCS (79 ± 4 min vs 67 ± 3 min, Mean Difference 12.14, P = 0.002), and there was no significant difference in the risk of post-operative haematoma (RR 0.33, P = 0.20). CONCLUSION: BCS + S is superior to BCS in terms of positive margins rate and second operation rate. Operative time is longer when cavity shaving is performed.

Presentation and anatomical distribution of diverticular disease in four hospitals in Sudan.

INTRODUCTION: diverticular disease (DD) was thought to be more prevalent in the western countries, especially the white populations, but the recent increase in incidence among African and Asian population, was reported. Up to our knowledge, there is no previous study of DD in Sudan. METHODS: this is a descriptive cross-sectional study conducted at the department of endoscopy in four Sudanese hospitals in the period from October 2017 to February 2019. We included all patients who underwent colonoscopy during the study period. The main objective is to study the presentation and the anatomical pattern of diverticular disease among the Sudanese population. RESULTS: prevalence of DD in the included population was 7.5% (104/1393). The mean age was 66.4 ± 12.5 years with the percentage of males in our study is 77.1% and females were 22.9%. Presenting complains were: abdominal pain in all patients, constipation in 78.8% and rectal bleeding in 57.7%. Regarding anatomical distribution: 63.5% have left colonic DD, 19.2% in the right colon and 17.3% involving the entire colon. There was a significant correlation between the left side DD and following clinical presentations: mucus per-rectum (p = 0.015) and weight loss (p = 0.048). Other endoscopic findings of significance were internal pile in 21.2% and colo-rectal polyp in 15.4%. CONCLUSION: the prevalence of DD in the included population, is 7.5% which is consistent with recent literature from the Middle East, Africa and Asia but still less than the prevalence in the western countries and left side colon is predominantly affected.