Oncologic outcomes of calcitonin-negative medullary thyroid carcinoma.

Objective: Calcitonin (Ct)-negative medullary thyroid carcinoma (MTC) is a rare neuroendocrine tumor. This study aimed to clarify its incidence, clinicopathologic characteristics, management, and treatment outcome. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data of patients with primary MTC. Patients were divided into two groups according to the preoperative serum Ct level (Ct-negative and Ct-positive). The demographic, pathologic, and molecular characteristics, and treatment outcomes were compared between the two groups. In the Ct-negative group, we analyzed the association between the operation type and treatment outcome. Results: Of the total 312 patients, 24 were diagnosed with Ct-negative MTC. The rate of lymph node metastasis was significantly higher in the Ct-positive than in the Ct-negative group (47.9% vs. 0%, p<0.001). The proportion of patients with Ki-67 ≤10% was significantly higher in the Ct-negative than in the Ct-positive group (87.5% vs. 38.2%, p<0.001). Excellent response was achieved by 91.7% and 34.7% of patients in the Ct-negative and Ct-positive groups, respectively (p<0.001). In the Ct-negative group, excellent response was achieved by all female patients, but only 50% of male patients. Conclusions: Ct-negative MTC is rare and unlikely to develop lymph node metastasis. Unilateral lobectomy tends to provide a satisfactory chance of excellent response; however, this requires further validation.

[The study of different operative style for abdominal aortic aneurysm during surrounding operation].

OBJECTIVE: To compare the the similarities and differences during the surrounding operation of endovascular repair (EVAR) and open surgical repair (OSR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm. METHODS: 112 patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) were selected from 2004 to 2009: among them, 66 patients were treated with EVAR, 46 patients with OSR. Data of two groups were collected and analyzed during surrounding operation. RESULTS: Compared to OSR group, the mean blood lost, blood transfusion and intra-operative fluid in EVAR group were significantly less than OSR group (P < 0.05). The mean time of operation, observation period in ICU and being in hospital in EVAR group were shorter than OSR group (P < 0.05). But the cost of hospitalization in EVAR was far higher than that of OSR group (P < 0.05). In short term postoperative complications the OSR group was higher than the EVAR (P < 0.05), however, there was no statistically significant difference in death rate of the two groups during surrounding operation (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: EVAR has the advantages of mild trauma, less blood loss, quicker recovery after operation, and less disturbance to internal environment. Especially, it is suitable for the patients who can not undergo open surgery repair, but its cost is still higher.