The effect of mechanical bowel preparation on colonic anastomotic healing: an experimental study.

PURPOSE: Although bowel preparation is traditionally used in elective colorectal surgery, its value is debatable. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of mechanical bowel preparation on healing of colonic anastomoses. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-seven rats were divided into three groups, each of nine animals. All rats had left colonic resection and anastomosis. Group 1 and group 2 were the control and sham group, respectively. Group 3 had colonic lavage before resection and anastomosis. On the fourth postoperative day, animals were killed; bursting pressure and tissue hydroxyproline concentrations were measured and compared. RESULTS: The median bursting pressure values were 87 (range 4-135) mmHg in group 1, 88 (range 78-136) mmHg in group 2 and 76.0 (range 57.0-125) mmHg in group 3. The differences between bursting pressure values of the groups were not statistically significant (p= 0.07). The median tissue hydroxyproline concentrations were 3.25 (range 2.63-5.16) mg/mg in group 1, 4.15 (range 1.54-5.72) mg/mg in group 2 and 3.52 (range 2.04-5.27) mg/mg in group 3. The differences between tissue hydroxyproline concentrations of the groups were not statistically significant (p = 0.7). CONCLUSION: Mechanical bowel preparation is not necessary for enhancing colonic anastomotic integrity in the rat.

Is invasive lobular carcinoma different from invasive ductal carcinoma?

AIMS: The purpose of this study is to determine whether the histopathologic features and outcome in invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) and invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) are different, and whether the histologic type is a prognostic factor for outcome. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in consecutive 510 stage I/II breast carcinoma patients who underwent modified radical mastectomy. The features of 65 patients with ILC were compared with those of 445 patients with IDC. In patients with median follow-up period of 44 months, univariate and multivariate prognostic factor analyses for cancer-specific death and relapse were carried out. RESULTS: The median ages in patients with ILC and those with IDC were 52 and 41 (P=0.04). Tumor size, estrogen receptor positive expression and nodal positivity were not significantly different between the histologic types. Patients with ILC had more frequently (81.5%) low grade tumors and less lymphatic vascular invasion (9.3%) in primary tumor than those with IDC (P<0.05). Whereas the rates of 5-year overall survival were 94% in ILC and 90% in IDC, the rates of 5-year event-free survival were 71 and 67%, respectively (P=NS). Multivariate analyses in all patients demonstrated that tumor size, pathologic lymph node status and age at diagnosis were the most important prognostic factors for overall and event-free survival. Histologic type was not statistically significant for both outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Although patients with ILC had older age, low grade tumor and less lymphatic vascular invasion, they had no survival advantage comparing with their counterparts. Histologic type was not an independent prognostic factor for outcome.

The prognostic significance of total lymph node number in patients with axillary lymph node-negative breast cancer.

AIM: In node-negative breast cancer patients, several factors for survival have been evaluated and currently, some of them are accepted for their prognostic and/or predictive values after validation in the separate data sets. The prognostic significance of increases in the number of pathologically detectable axillary lymph nodes in the node-negative patients could not been established clearly. To address this question, we have reviewed our patients' records. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in pathologically node-negative patients who underwent modified radical mastectomy for stage I and II breast cancer. Survival and multivariate prognostic factor analyses were carried out to determine whether the number of tumour-free lymph nodes in complete axillary dissection material in addition to known factors was significant for the outcomes. RESULTS: Two hundred and seventy consecutive patients were eligible to enter the trial. The median observation time and the median number of tumour-free lymph nodes were 61 (from 30 to 120) months and 18 (from 10 to 44), respectively. The cohort was divided into the groups according to the number of nodes. The 5-year event-free and overall survivals were 92.5 and 98.3% for patients who had 18 lymph nodes or less, and 70 and 86.7% for those who had more than 18 negative nodes, respectively (P < 0.00001). Multivariate analysis for event-free survival demonstrated that the number of lymph nodes (Relative risk: 3.2 and 95% confidence interval: 1.7 to 5.9) in addition to the pathological tumour size and age was the most important independent prognosticator. In similar, multivariate analysis for overall survival showed that the number of lymph nodes together with the tumour size was the significant indicator (RR of cancer-specific dying in patients who had more than 18 nodes: 3.1 and 95% CI: 1.2 to 8.5). CONCLUSION: The increases in number of tumour-free lymph nodes are clinically important and this parameter should be taken into consideration in the breast cancer patients without metastatic lymph nodes.

Liability and validity of the Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol in Turkey.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the inter-rater reliability between nurses and the convergent validity of the Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol (AEP) in the Turkish context. METHODS: Two nurses applied the original AEP concurrently to a random subsample of 335 patient-days in internal medicine, general surgery, and gynaecology departments at a university hospital and a government teaching hospital, as a part of a larger study. Inter-rater reliability was tested by calculating overall agreement and specific agreements between nurse reviewers' AEP assessments. Validity was tested by comparing the assessments of the nurses based on the AEP with the implicit judgements of five expert physicians on a random subsample of 818 patient-days. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the AEP were calculated. Reliability and validity were also evaluated by the K statistic. RESULTS: In the reliability test, there was a high level of agreement between the two independent raters applying the AEP in the three departments studied: overall agreement = 90.7-97.6%; specific inappropriate agreement = 69.1-92.3%; specific appropriate agreement = 88.3-96.6%. In validity testing, the AEP had a sensitivity of 0.83-0.97, specificity of 0.62-0.80, and positive and negative predictive values of 0.84-0.88 and 0.73-0.95 respectively. Kappa coefficients in internal medicine and gynaecology indicated almost perfect agreement in reliability testing and moderate agreement in validity testing. In general surgery, the K coefficients showed substantial agreement in both tests. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that the AEP is a reliable and valid instrument to assess appropriateness of patient-days in Turkey.