[Ileal ureteric replacement for iatrogenic long segment ureteric injuries].

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy of ileal ureteric replacement in the treatment of iatrogenic long segment ureteric injuries. METHODS: The hospital records of 9 cases with iatrogenic long segment ureteric injuries during Aug. 2010 to Sept. 2014 treated with ileal ureteric replacement were retrospectively reviewed and followed-up postoperatively. The patients included 3 males and 6 females with a median age of 40 years. The length of injury segment was 13-25 cm (median 20 cm). The etiology of the iatrogenic injury was urological surgery (n=6), gynecological surgery (n=2) and general surgery (n=1), respectively. The ureter stent was removed in 1-2 month postoperatively in all the 9 cases. RESULTS: All the operations were successful. The operation time was 203-394 min, with the average of (278.1±68.8) min. The bleeding volume was 10-1 000 mL, with the median of 200 mL. The mean length of hospital stay was (16.8±7.5) days. Four minor complications (Grade I-II) developed, including 3 ileus (33.3%) and 1 proximal anastomotic leakage (11.1%). The median follow-up time was 11 months, serum creatinine decreased or remained stable in 8 patients (88.9%). Three patients (33.3%) developed mild hydronephrosis and short-time urinary tract infection was seen in 1 patient (11.1%). Metabolic acidosis was not detected during the follow-up. CONCLUSION: Ileal ureteric replacement is a safe and effective method in patients with complex or difficult iatrogenic long segment ureteric injuries.

[Efficacy of NO regimen and NP regimen on advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a prospective randomized trial].

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: Oxaliplatin (LOHP) is an effective drug in treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with mild toxicities to gastrointestinal tract, kidney, and bone marrow. Cisplatin (DDP) plus vinorelbine (NVB) constitute the first-line regimen (NP regimen) for NSCLC. This study was to compare the short-term response, long-term outcome, and adverse events between advanced NSCLC patients received NO regimen (LOHP plus NVB) and NP regimen. METHODS: A total of 90 patients with advanced NSCLC were randomized into NO group (58 patients, 25 mg/m(2) of NVB, day 1 and day 8; 130 mg/m(2) of LOHP, day 1) and NP group (32 patients, 25 mg/m(2) of NVB, day 1 and day 8; 50 mg/m(2) of DDP, day 2 and day 3). The short-term response, long-term outcome, adverse events, and survival status of the 2 groups were observed. RESULTS: The response rates were 33.33% in NO group, and 35.48% in NP group, but no significant difference was detected between the 2 groups (P > 0.05). The clinical benefit response rate was significantly higher in NO group than in NP group (80.70% vs. 64.52%, P < 0.05). The median time to progression (TTP) was 17 weeks in NO group, and 15 weeks in NP group; the median time of remission was 21 weeks in NO group, and 19 weeks in NP group; the median survival time was 39 weeks in NO group, and 37 weeks in NP group; the 1-year survival rate was 37.93% in NO group, and 31.25% in NP group. No significant differences were detected between the 2 groups. The incidence rates of phlebitis and grade I-II peripheral neuritis were significantly higher in NO group than in NP group (77.59% vs. 50.00%, P<0.01; 43.10% vs. 15.63%, P<0.01). The incidence rate of grade III-IV nausea/vomiting was significantly higher in NP group than in NO group (31.25% vs. 3.45%, P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of NO regimen on advanced NSCLC is similar to that of NP regimen, but the clinical benefit response rate is higher in NO group than in NP group. In short, NO regimen may be recommended as the first-line chemotherapy regimen for advanced NSCLC.

[Prospective randomized study of HMVP, MVP, and HVP regimens in treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer].

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is hyposensitive to the normal first and second-line chemotherapy regimens. Camptothecin derivative is becoming a hot point in the treatment of advanced NSCLC. The objective of this article was to evaluate the response, toxicity, and survival time of HMVP, MVP, and HVP regimens (detail in below) in the treatment of advanced NSCLC. METHODS: A total of 134 cases with advanced NSCLC was randomized into three groups: HMVP group [46 patients, hydroxycamptothecin (HCPT) 12 mg/m(2) from d1 to d5, mitomycin C (MMC) 6 mg/m(2) d1, vindesine (VDS) 2.5-3 mg/m(2) d1 and d8, cisplatin (DDP) 50 mg/m(2) d2 and d3], MVP group (44 patients, MMC, VDS and DDP were the same as HMVP group) and HVP group (44 patients, HCPT, VDS, DDP were the same as HMVP group). RESULTS: The response rates were 39.54% (17/43), 35.57% (15/42), and 26.19% (11/42) in HMVP, MVP, and HVP groups, respectively; no significant difference was detected among the three groups (P >0.05). No significant difference was detected in the median time of remission, median survival time, and 1-, 2-year survival rates among the three groups. Moreover, no significant difference was detected in grade III-IV leukopenia, grade III-IV thrombocytopenia, grade III-IV nausea and vomiting and grade III-IV constipation among the three groups. CONCLUSION: The response rate of MVP regimen is slightly lower than that of HMVP regimen, but HMVP regimen do not show obvious superiority. It may increase toxicities such as leukopenia, nausea/vomiting, and constipation. The response rate of HVP regimen is slightly lower than that of MVP regimen.