Intussusception Caused by Cecal Duplication in an Adult: A Case Report.

Cecal duplication is a rare congenital malformation and majority of the cases are discovered in the first years of life. Ileocolic intussusception is also a rare situation encountered in adults. A 19-year-old female presented with acute abdominal pain and bowel occlusion in relation with an ileocecal intussusception. She underwent an emergent laparotomy and ileocecal resection. A cecal duplication cyst was found to be the cause of the intussusception. While duplications and intussusception are very rare situations encountered in the adult life, the presence of both at the same time remains frankly anecdotal. The present case demonstrates that intussusception may likely be involved with any cecal lesion, like duplication.

Transarterial embolization therapies for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: CEPO review and clinical recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most deadly cancers in the world and its incidence rate has consistently increased over the past 15 years in Canada. Although transarterial embolization therapies are palliative options commonly used for the treatment of HCC, their efficacy is still controversial. The objective of this guideline is to review the efficacy and safety of transarterial embolization therapies for the treatment of HCC and to develop evidence-based recommendations. METHOD: A review of the scientific literature published up to October 2013 was performed. A total of 38 studies were included. RECOMMENDATIONS: Considering the evidence available to date, the CEPO recommends the following: (i) transarterial chemoembolization therapy (TACE) be considered a standard of practice for the palliative treatment of HCC in eligible patients; (ii) drug-eluting beads (DEB)-TACE be considered an alternative and equivalent treatment to conventional TACE in terms of oncological efficacy (overall survival) and incidence of severe toxicities; (iii) the decision to treat with TACE or DEB-TACE be discussed in tumour boards; (iv) bland embolization (TAE) not be considered for the treatment of HCC; (v) radioembolization (TARE) not be considered outside of a clinical trial setting; and (vi) sorafenib combined with TACE not be considered outside of a clinical trial setting.

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer: a literature review and recommendations from the Comité de l'évolution des pratiques en oncologie.

BACKGROUND: Adoption of the laparoscopic approach for colorectal cancer treatment has been slow owing to initial case study results suggesting high recurrence rates at port sites. The use of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer still raises a number of concerns, particularly with the technique's complexity, learning curve and longer duration. After exploring the scientific literature comparing open and laparoscopic surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer with respect to oncologic efficacy and shortterm outcomes, the Comité de l'évolution des pratiques en oncologie (CEPO) made recommendations for surgical practice in Quebec. METHODS: Scientific literature published from January 1995 to April 2012 was reviewed. Phase III clinical trials and meta-analyses were included. RESULTS: Sixteen randomized trials and 10 meta-analyses were retrieved. Analysis of the literature confirmed that for curative treatment of colorectal cancer, laparoscopy is not inferior to open surgery with respect to survival and recurrence rates. Moreover, laparoscopic surgery provides short-term advantages, including a shorter hospital stay, reduced analgesic use and faster recovery of intestinal function. However, this approach does require a longer operative time. CONCLUSION: Considering the evidence, the CEPO recommends that laparoscopic resection be considered an option for the curative treatment of colon and rectal cancer; that decisions regarding surgical approach take into consideration surgeon experience, tumour stage, potential contraindications and patient expectations; and that laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer be performed only by appropriately trained surgeons who perform a sufficient volume annually to maintain competence.

CONTEXTE: L'adoption de la laparoscopie pour traiter le cancer colorectal se fait lentement à cause des résultats des premières études de cas qui indiquent des taux élevés de récidive aux sites d'intervention. La laparoscopie pour traiter le cancer colorectal soulève toujours de nombreuses préoccupations, particulièrement en raison de la complexité de la technique, de la courbe d'apprentissage, et de la durée de la chirurgie. Après avoir étudié des publications scientifiques comparant l'efficacité oncologique et les résultats à court terme de la laparoscopie à ceux de la chirurgie ouverte pour le traitement du cancer colorectal, le Comité de l'évolution des pratiques en oncologie (CEPO) a formulé des recommandations pour la pratique chirurgicale au Québec. MÉTHODES: Une revue des écrits scientifiques publiés entre janvier 1995 et avril 2012 a été effectuée. Seuls les essais cliniques de phase III et les méta-analyses ont été répertoriés. RÉSULTANTS: Seize essais randomisés et 10 méta-analyses ont été retenus. L'analyse des publications a confirmé que pour le traitement curatif du cancer colorectal, la laparoscopie n'est pas inférieure à la chirurgie ouverte pour ce qui est des taux de survie et de récidive. La laparoscopie offre de plus des avantages à court terme, y compris une hospitalisation de moins longue durée, une réduction de l'usage d'analgésiques et un rétablissement plus rapide de la fonction intestinale. Cette intervention prend toutefois plus de temps. CONCLUSIONS: Compte tenu des données probantes, le CEPO recommande d'envisager la résection laparoscopique comme technique curative possible du cancer colorectal et que les décisions sur la méthode chirurgicale tiennent compte de l'expérience du chirurgien, du stade de la tumeur, des contre-indications possibles et des attentes du patient. Dans le cas de la résection laparoscopique du cancer du rectum, le CEPO recommande qu'elle ne soit pratiquée que par des chirurgiens ayant reçu la formation nécessaire et qui pratiquent suffisamment d'interventions par année pour maintenir leur compétence.

Adjuvant treatment for endometrial cancer: literature review and recommendations by the Comité de l'évolution des pratiques en oncologie (CEPO).

OBJECTIVE: Despite the very good prognosis of endometrial cancer, a number of patients with localized disease relapse following surgery. Therefore, various adjuvant therapeutic approaches have been studied. The objective of this review is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies in patients with resectable endometrial cancer and to develop evidence-based recommendations. METHODS: A review of the scientific literature published between January 1990 and June 2012 was performed. The search was limited to published phase III clinical trials and meta-analyses evaluating the efficacy of neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapies in patients with endometrial carcinoma or carcinosarcoma. A total of 23 studies and five meta-analyses were identified. RESULTS: The selected literature showed that in patients with a low risk of recurrence, post-surgical observation is safe and recommended in most cases. There are several therapeutic modalities available for treatment of endometrial cancers with higher risk of recurrence, including vaginal brachytherapy, external beam radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or a combination of these. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the evidence available to date, the CEPO recommends the following: (1)post-surgical observation for most patients with a low recurrence risk; (2)adjuvant vaginal brachytherapy for patients with an intermediate recurrence risk; (3)adjuvant pelvic radiotherapy with or without vaginal brachytherapy for patients with a high recurrence risk; addition of adjuvant chemotherapy may be considered as an option for selected patients (excellent functional status, no significant co-morbidities, poor prognostic factors); (4)adjuvant chemotherapy and pelvic radiotherapy with or without brachytherapy and para-aortic irradiation for patients with advanced disease;