Maja J. Pavlov

Ttv infection in colorectal cancer tissues and normal mucosa

Department of Medicine II, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg and the Molecular Gastroenterology Unit,Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum, Heidelberg, GermanyDear Sir,Genetic modifications and environmental factors are presentlyseen as the key factors in the etiology of colorectal cancer,

Double-Barreled Wet Colostomy: Urinary and Fecal Diversion

PURPOSE Double-barreled wet colostomy represents simultaneous urinary and fecal surgical diversion performed most commonly after pelvic exenteration as a palliative procedure or after actinic damage. We report the structural and functional results of double-barreled wet colostomy with special attention to surgical technique, morbidity and functional results compared to those described in the available literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS We retrospectively followed 38 patients who underwent double-barreled wet colostomy at our institution from April 2003 to November 2007. The parameters were patient age and gender, the indication for double-barreled wet colostomy, postoperative morbidity and mortality, length of hospital stay and functional assessment by excreting excretory urography. RESULTS A total of 38 double-barreled wet colostomies were performed at our institution, including 24 following total pelvic exenteration, 14 without resection, 9 in inoperable tumor cases and 5 in actinic damage cases. The postoperative morbidity rate was 15.7% with no treatment related mortality. Two patients had late postoperative complications, including stenosis of the ureterocolonic anastomosis and conduit necrosis, respectively. CONCLUSIONS In our experience double-barreled wet colostomy has an acceptable morbidity and mortality rate, is performed without technical difficulties and does not require prolonged operative time. Double-barreled wet colostomy represents the procedure of choice in patients who require concurrent urinary and fecal diversion.

Double-Barreled Wet Colostomy versus Ileal Conduit and terminal colostomy for urinary and fecal diversion: A Single institution experience

Background and Aims: The aim of this study was to compare the feasibility and early postoperative outcomes between patients undergoing double-barreled wet colostomy and patients undergoing terminal colostomy and ileal conduit for simultaneous urinary and fecal diversion. Material and Methods: Between 1995 and 2012, we had 181 patients in whom it was necessary to make simultaneous urinary and fecal diversion. This is a retrospective study and patients were divided into two groups, depending on the technique applied for the fecal and urinary diversion. The first group consisted of patients undergoing ileal conduit and terminal colostomy and the second group consisted of patients undergoing  double-barreled wet colostomy. Results: Ileal conduit and terminal colostomy was performed in 77 (43%) cases, while wet colostomy was performed in 104 (57%) cases. Median length of stay was shorter for double-barreled wet colostomy (13.1 vs 18.1, p < 0.0001). Median operating times for urinary and fecal diversion were shorter for double-barreled wet colostomy (32 vs 64 min, p < 0.0001). The morbidity was lower for double-barreled wet colostomy (11.5% vs 23.4%, p = 0.0432), retrospectively. The mortality was 3.8% for double-barreled wet colostomy and 10.3% for ileal conduit and terminal colostomy group (p = 0.1282). Conclusions: Double-barreled wet colostomy is a safe, fast, and simple alternative to traditional ileal conduit and terminal colostomy diversion. The technique is relatively easy to learn, and it reduces the time for urinary and fecal diversion, length of stay, and morbidity rate.

Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced epithelial and recurrent ovarian carcinoma: a single center experience

Abstract Background: With standard treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), prognosis is very poor. The aim of this study is to show early and late results in patients who underwent cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Patients and methods: This was a retrospective single centre study. All patients with advanced and recurrent ovarian cancer treated with cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) or modified early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC) were included in the study. Results: In the period 1995–2014, 116 patients were treated, 55 with primary EOC and 61 with recurrent EOC. The mean age was 59 years (26–74). Statistically, median survival time was significantly longer in the group with primary advanced cancer of the ovary (41.3 months) compared to relapsed ovarian cancer (27.3 months). Survival for the primary EOC was 65 and 24% at 3 and 5 years, respectively. Survival for recurrent EOC was 33 and 16% at 3 and 5 years, respectively. Mortality was 1/116 (0.8%). Morbidity was 11/116 (9.5%). Peritoneal cancer index (PCI) was ≤20 in 59 (51%) patients and statistically, their average survival was significantly longer than in the group of 57 (49%) patients with PCI >20 (p = 0.014). Conclusions: In advanced or recurrent EOC, a curative therapeutic approach was pursued that combined optimal cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy. PCI and timing of the intervention (primary or recurrent) were the strongest independent prognostic factors.