Managing the incidentally detected gallbladder cancer: algorithms and controversies.

INTRODUCTION: Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is the fifth most common neoplasm of the gastrointestinal tract and the most common cancer of the biliary tract. GBC is suspected preoperatively in only 30-40% of patients. The other 60-70% are discovered incidentally (IGBC) by the pathologist on a gallbladder specimen following cholecystectomy for benign diseases such as polyps, gallstones, and cholecystitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 1995 and 2011, 30 cases of GBC, who underwent resection with curative intent in our institutions, were retrospectively reviewed. They were analyzed for demographic data, and type of operation, surgical morbidity and mortality, histopathological classification, and survival. Incidental GBC was compared with suspected or preoperatively diagnosed GBC. Overall survival, disease-free survival (DFS) and the difference in DFS between patients previously treated with laparoscopic cholecystectomy and those who had oncological resection as first intervention were analyzed. The authors also present a systematic review to evaluate the role of extended surgery in the treatment of the incidental GBC. RESULTS: GBC was diagnosed in 30 patients, 16 women and 14 men. The M/F ratio was 1:1.14 and the mean age was 69.4 years (range 45-83 years). A preoperative diagnosis was possible only in 14 cases; fourteen of the incidental cases were diagnosed postoperatively after the pathological examination; two were suspected intraoperatively at the opening of the surgical specimen and then confirmed by frozen sections. The ratio between incidental and nonincidental cases was 1, 14/1, with twelve cases discovered after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Eighty-one per cent of the incidental cases were discovered at an early stage (≤II). The preoperative diagnosis of the 30 patients with GBC was: GBC with liver invasion diagnosed by preoperative CT (nine cases); gallbladder abscess perforated into hepatic parenchyma and involving the transversal mesocolon and hepatic hilum (one case); porcelain gallbladder (three cases); gallbladder adenoma (four cases); and chronic cholecystolithiasis (thirteen cases). Every case, except one, with a T1b or more advanced invasion underwent IVb + V wedge liver resection and pericholedochic/hepatoduodenal lymphoadenectomy. One patient refused further surgery. Cases with Tis and T1a involvement were treated with cholecystectomy alone. Nine of the sixteen patients with incidental diagnosis reached 5-year DFS (56.25%) and eight of them are recurrence free. Surprisingly, one patient reached 38 mo survival despite a port-site recurrence (the only one in our experience) 2 years after the original surgery requiring further resection. Cases with non incidental diagnosis were more locally advanced and only two patients experienced 5 years DFS (Tables 2 and 3). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy does not affect survival if implemented properly. Reoperation should have two objectives: R0 resection and clearance of the lymph nodes.

The safety of the Harmonic® FOCUS in open thyroidectomy: a prospective, randomized study comparing the Harmonic® FOCUS and traditional suture ligation (knot and tie) technique.

Since Kocher and Billroth refined an acceptable technique, the thyroidectomy has become one of the most frequent procedures in endocrine surgery and bilateral total thyroidectomy is performed in the majority of thyroid diseases. This work evaluated the use of the Harmonic(®) FOCUS and traditional suture ligation (knot and tie) technique in a prospective, randomized study of open thyroidectomy. Eighty two patients were randomized and divided into two similarly sized groups: the Harmonic(®) FOCUS group (F group) and traditional group (T group). The use of the harmonic FOCUS shows some statistically significant advantages limited to a few intraoperative parameters: surgical time and volume of blood loss. The surgical time was significantly shorter in F group than in the T group (105 ± 27 min vs 143 ± 32 respectively; p < 0.05). Intraoperative volume blood loss was significantly more in the T group than in the F group (36 ± 23 ml vs. 24 ± 18; p < 0.05). The postoperative parameters (volume of drainage fluid, serum calcium at 12 and 48 h, hypocalcemia, wound complication, RLN palsy, postoperative pain and length of hospital stay) showed no statistical difference. The Harmonic Focus may provide a cost-effective option only in high volume centers where reducing operative time may balance the number of daily procedures.

Prognostic factors in elderly patients with breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer (BC) remains principally a disease of old ages; with 35-50% of cases occurring in women older than 65 years. Even mortality for cancer increases with aging: 19.7% between 65 and 74 years; 22.6% between 75 and 84 years; and 15.1% in 85 years or more. METHODS: A search was performed on Medline, Embase, Scopus using the following Key words: Breast cancer, Breast neoplasms, Aged, Elder, Elderly, Eldest, Older, Survival analysis, Prognosis, Prognostic factors, Tumor markers, Biomarkers, Comorbidity, Geriatric assessment, Axilla, Axillary surgery. 3029 studies have been retrieved. Paper in which overall or disease free survival were not end points, or age class was not well defined, or the sample was too small, were excluded. At last 42 papers fulfilled the criteria. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Lack of screening and delay in diagnosis may be responsible for the minor improvement in survival observed in elderly respect to younger breast cancer patients. Predictive factors are the same and must be assessed with the same attention reserved to younger women. CONCLUSIONS: Most of elderly patient are fit to undergo standard treatment and can get the same benefits of younger women. Nevertheless it is possible that some older women with early breast cancer can be spared too aggressive treatments. Geriatric assessment and co-morbidities can affect the prognosis modifying surveillance, life expectancy and compliance to therapies. They can thus be useful to select the better treatment, either surgical or radio or hormone - or chemo-therapy.