Validación de la resonancia magnética pélvica como método de elección para determinar la distancia al margen anal en el cáncer de recto / Validation of pelvic magnetic resonance imaging as the method of choice to determine the distance to the anal margin in rectal cancer

Introducción: La altura exacta del tumor en el recto y sus relaciones anatómicas contribuyen a determinar la estrategia terapéutica multidisciplinar basada en la combinación de radio-quimioterapia y cirugía radical. Nuestro objetivo es valorar cuál es el método diagnóstico más preciso en la medición preoperatoria de la distancia al margen anal, y si la resonancia magnética pélvica (RM) puede sustituir a los métodos instrumentales clásicos. Métodos: Estudio prospectivo de precisión diagnóstica entre colonoscopia (CF), rectoscopia rígida (RRp) y RM en pacientes con indicación de cirugía radical. La RRp intraoperatoria fue considerada la prueba de referencia. Se analizaron las correlaciones entre las distintas técnicas y su coeficiente de determinación, así como el coeficiente de correlación intraclase y el grado de acuerdo entre los distintos test. Resultados: Se incluyeron 96 pacientes con edad media (DE) de 68 (14,1) años y predominio de varones (65%). Un 72% recibió tratamiento neoadyuvante. La distancia media al margen anal, medida mediante CF=103,5mm, fue significativamente mayor al resto, que obtuvieron valores similares: RRp=81,1, RM=77,4, RRp intraoperatoria=82,9mm (p<0,001). Se objetivó una significativa correlación intraclase y hubo un elevado acuerdo entre todas las mediciones pre e intraoperatorias a excepción de la realizada mediante CF, que sobreestimó el resultado. La RM aportó información más individualizada y precisa. Conclusiones: Existe variabilidad entre los métodos de medición, siendo la colonoscopia el menos fiable. La RM ofrece valores objetivos, comparables, precisos e individualizados que pueden sustituir a los obtenidos por RR en tumores de cualquier localización del recto. (AU)

Introduction: Distance from anal verge of rectal tumors and their anatomical relationships contribute to determine the multidisciplinary therapeutic strategy based on the combination of radio-chemotherapy and radical surgery. Our aims are to investigate which is the most accurate method for the preoperative measuring of the distance from the anal verge in rectal tumors and if the pelvic MRI can substitute the classical instrumental methods. Methods: Prospective study of diagnostic precision between flexible colonoscopy (FC), preoperative rigid rectosigmoidoscopy (pRR) and pelvic MRI in patients scheduled to radical surgery. Rigid intraoperative rectoscopy (iRR) was considered the reference test. The correlations between the different techniques and their determination coefficient as well as the intraclass correlation coefficient and the degree of agreement between the different tests were analyzed. Results: 96 patients (65% males), mean age (SD): 68 (14.1) years were included. 72% received neoadjuvant treatment. The mean distance to the anal margin measured by FC=103.5mm, was significantly greater than others, which had similar values: pRR=81.1; MRI=77.4; iRR=82.9mm (P<.001). A significant intraclass correlation was observed and there was high agreement between all pre- and intraoperative measurements except for the performed by FC, which overestimated the results. MRI provided more individualized and accurate information. Conclusions: There is variability between the measurement methods, being colonoscopy the least reliable. MRI offers objective, comparable, accurate and individualized values that can replace those obtained by pRR for tumors of any location in the rectum. (AU)

Validation of pelvic magnetic resonance imaging as the method of choice to determine the distance to the anal margin in rectal cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Distance from anal verge of rectal tumours and their anatomical relationships contribute to determine the multidisciplinary therapeutic strategy based on the combination of radio-chemotherapy and radical surgery. Our aims are to investigate which is the most accurate method for the preoperative measuring of the distance from the anal verge in rectal tumours and if the pelvic MRI can substitute the classical instrumental methods. METHODS: Prospective study of diagnostic precision between flexible colonoscopy (FC), preoperative rigid rectosigmoidoscopy (pRR) and pelvic MRI in patients scheduled to radical surgery. Rigid intraoperative rectoscopy (iRR) was considered the reference test. The correlations between the different techniques and their determination coefficient as well as the intraclass correlation coefficient and the degree of agreement between the different tests were analyzed. RESULTS: 96 patients (65% males), mean age (SD): 68 (14.1) years were included. 72% received neoadjuvant treatment. The mean distance to the anal margin measured by FC = 103.5 mm, was significantly greater than others, which had similar values: pRR = 81.1; MRI = 77.4; iRR = 82.9 mm (P < .001). A significant intraclass correlation was observed and there was high agreement between all pre- and intraoperative measurements except for the performed by FC, which overestimated the results. MRI provided more individualized and accurate information. CONCLUSIONS: There is variability between the measurement methods, being colonoscopy the least reliable. MRI offers objective, comparable, accurate and individualized values that can replace those obtained by pRR for tumours of any location in the rectum.

Epithelioid angiomyolipoma of the liver: an incidental diagnosis.

We present the exceptional case of a 76-year-old woman with an incidental finding of a liver tumor compatible with an epithelioid angiomyolipoma, a rare neoformation about which there is still controversy regarding its management, due to its presumed potential for malignancy.

Giant cavernous mesenteric lymphangioma in an adult.

We report the exceptional case of a 71-year-old patient with a giant mesenteric mass causing mass effect, dyspnea and abdominal pain. After surgical resection and histopathological analysis of the specimen, the result was a cavernous lymphangioma, an unusual diagnosis due to both the location and age of presentation.

Long-Term Quality of Life (BREAST-Q) in Patients with Mastectomy and Breast Reconstruction.

(1) Background: Mastectomy is the surgical treatment of choice in 20-30% of women with breast cancer. In addition, more women are undergoing risk-reducing mastectomies. It is necessary to study these women's quality of life and satisfaction after surgery, as studies report high percentages of dissatisfaction with the results. The publication of the BREAST-Q© questionnaire in 2009 provided a valuable tool to measure these results. (2) Methods: Descriptive, cross-sectional study of 70 patients who underwent mastectomy and breast reconstruction, both therapeutic and prophylactic, in the last 10 years to whom the BREAST-Q© 2.0-Reconstruction Module questionnaire was provided for completion. (3) Results: The sexual satisfaction scale was the lowest score of the entire questionnaire (51.84 ± 21.13), while the highest score was obtained on the satisfaction with the surgeon scale (91.86 ± 18.11). The satisfaction with care scales showed the importance of the evaluation of these items for future studies. More than half of the patients of the study (51.5%) underwent at least one reoperation after the first surgery, with an average of one (1.15) intervention per patient and a maximum of five. (4) Conclusions: Mastectomy and breast reconstruction have a high negative impact on the sexual well-being of patients. The high percentage of reoperations is a factor to consider because of its possible influence on these patients' quality of life and satisfaction.

Validation of pelvic magnetic resonance imaging as the method of choice to determine the distance to the anal margin in rectal cancer. / Validación de la resonancia magnética pélvica como método de elección para determinar la distancia al margen anal en el cáncer de recto.

INTRODUCTION: Distance from anal verge of rectal tumors and their anatomical relationships contribute to determine the multidisciplinary therapeutic strategy based on the combination of radio-chemotherapy and radical surgery. Our aims are to investigate which is the most accurate method for the preoperative measuring of the distance from the anal verge in rectal tumors and if the pelvic MRI can substitute the classical instrumental methods. METHODS: Prospective study of diagnostic precision between flexible colonoscopy (FC), preoperative rigid rectosigmoidoscopy (pRR) and pelvic MRI in patients scheduled to radical surgery. Rigid intraoperative rectoscopy (iRR) was considered the reference test. The correlations between the different techniques and their determination coefficient as well as the intraclass correlation coefficient and the degree of agreement between the different tests were analyzed. RESULTS: 96 patients (65% males), mean age (SD): 68 (14.1) years were included. 72% received neoadjuvant treatment. The mean distance to the anal margin measured by FC=103.5mm, was significantly greater than others, which had similar values: pRR=81.1; MRI=77.4; iRR=82.9mm (P<.001). A significant intraclass correlation was observed and there was high agreement between all pre- and intraoperative measurements except for the performed by FC, which overestimated the results. MRI provided more individualized and accurate information. CONCLUSIONS: There is variability between the measurement methods, being colonoscopy the least reliable. MRI offers objective, comparable, accurate and individualized values that can replace those obtained by pRR for tumors of any location in the rectum.

Emphysematous hepatitis: a very rare entity with a poor prognosis.

A 67-year-old female, with no alterations in glucose metabolism or other relevant history, presented to the Emergency Department due to abdominal pain and vomiting after a syncopal episode. Physical examination revealed a poor general condition, mild stupor and a distended abdomen, painful on palpation in the right hypochondrium, with localized rigidity. On arrival at the Emergency Department, the patient's blood pressure (BP) was 150/66 mmHg, heart rate (HR) was 110 beats/minute and temperature 35 °C.

Preparación intestinal selectiva en un programa de rehabilitación multimodal. Influencia en el confort preoperatorio y resultados tras cirugía colorrectal / Selective intestinal preparation in a multimodal rehabilitation program. Influence on preoperative comfort and the results after colorectal surgery

Introducción: Pese a no haberse evidenciado ventajas de su empleo, la preparación mecánica anterograda (PMA) sigue siendo usual en cirugía colorrectal. Nuestro objetivo es analizar el impacto de su empleo selectivo respecto a confort y resultados en pacientes de un programa de rehabilitación multimodal perioperatoria (RHMM) o con cuidados convencionales (CC). Material y métodos: Estudio prospectivo de 108 pacientes propuestos para cirugía electiva, asignados consecutivamente 2:1 a un protocolo de RHMM que incluyo emplear solamente PMA en cirugía rectal con anastomosis baja o a CC en los que se empleo PMA, salvo en cirugía del colon derecho. Además se estudiaron dos grupos (A y B) en función de si se uso o no PMA. Se analizaron su tolerabilidad, sus resultados y las variables de recuperación postoperatoria. Resultados: Se incluyo a 39 pacientes en el grupo A y a 69 en el B; 69 siguieron el protocolo de RHMM. Los pacientes del grupo A presentaron más dolor abdominal, malestar anal, nauseas y sed, pero no hubo diferencias en lo que respecta a la tasa de muertes, complicaciones globales o su tipo, mientras que sý tuvieron menos complicaciones, fallos de sutura y muertes los pacientes del grupo RHMM (p < 0,05). Tampoco hubo ventajas del empleo de PMA respecto al inicio del tránsito intestinal, tolerancia a la dieta o estancias, pero estos parametros fueron favorables al grupo de RHMM. Conclusiones: La restricción de la PMA a casos seleccionados es segura, y asociada a un programa de RHMM contribuye a una recuperación mas rápida y cómoda sin incrementarlas complicaciones (AU)

Introduction: Despite there being no evidence of the advantages of its use, mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) continues to be routine in colorectal surgery. Our objective is to analyse the impact of its selective use, as regards patient comfort and results, comparing a perioperative multimodal rehabilitation program (MMRH) with conventional care (CC). Material and methods: A prospective study of 108 patients proposed for elective surgery, assigned consecutively 2:1 to an MMRH protocol which only included MBP in rectal surgery with low anastomosis, or to CC in whom MBP was used except in right colon surgery. We also studied two Groups (A and B) with and without the use of MBP. Their tolerance, results and postoperative recovery variables were analysed. Results: Thirty-nine patients were included in Group A, and 69 in Group B. A MMRH protocol was used in another 69 patients. The Group A patients had more abdominal pain, anal discomfort, nausea and thirst, but there were no differences as regards, death, overall or local complications, whilst there was less complications, suture failures and death in the MMRH when compared with CC Group (P < .05). There were no advantages observed in the use of MBP as regards the start of bowel movements, tolerance to diet or hospital stay, but these parameters were favourable to the MMRH when compared with CC Group. Conclusions: The restriction of MBP is safe, and associated with an MMRH program, contributes to a faster and more comfortable recovery, without increasing complications (AU)

[Selective intestinal preparation in a multimodal rehabilitation program. Influence on preoperative comfort and the results after colorectal surgery]. / Preparación intestinal selectiva en un programa de rehabilitación multimodal. Influencia en el confort preoperatorio y resultados tras cirugía colorrectal.

INTRODUCTION: Despite there being no evidence of the advantages of its use, mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) continues to be routine in colorectal surgery. Our objective is to analyse the impact of its selective use, as regards patient comfort and results, comparing a perioperative multimodal rehabilitation program (MMRH) with conventional care (CC). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective study of 108 patients proposed for elective surgery, assigned consecutively 2:1 to an MMRH protocol which only included MBP in rectal surgery with low anastomosis, or to CC in whom MBP was used except in right colon surgery. We also studied two Groups (A and B) with and without the use of MBP. Their tolerance, results and postoperative recovery variables were analysed. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients were included in Group A, and 69 in Group B. A MMRH protocol was used in another 69 patients. The Group A patients had more abdominal pain, anal discomfort, nausea and thirst, but there were no differences as regards, death, overall or local complications, whilst there was less complications, suture failures and death in the MMRH when compared with CC Group (P<.05). There were no advantages observed in the use of MBP as regards the start of bowel movements, tolerance to diet or hospital stay, but these parameters were favourable to the MMRH when compared with CC Group. CONCLUSIONS: The restriction of MBP is safe, and associated with an MMRH program, contributes to a faster and more comfortable recovery, without increasing complications.