Postoperative Bleeding After Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer in Patients Receiving Antiplatelet and Anticoagulation Treatment.
- 作者列表："Aoyama T","Atsumi Y","Hara K","Kazama K","Tamagawa H","Tamagawa A","Komori K","Maezawa Y","Kano K","Hashimoto I","Oshima T","Murakawa M","Numata M","Yukawa N","Masuda M","Rino Y
BACKGROUND:The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical impact of the perioperative use of antiplatelet/anticoagulation therapy for postoperative bleeding after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS:Patients were selected from the medical records of consecutive patients who were diagnosed with primary esophageal adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma and who underwent complete resection at Yokohama City University from January 2005 to September 2018. The patients were divided into the antiplatelet/anticoagulation treatment group and the non-treatment group. We compared the safety and feasibility of esophagectomy between two groups. RESULTS:One hundred and twenty-two patients underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer and were analyzed in the present study. Among them, 18 (14.8%) received anti-thrombotic therapy (anticoagulation group). The incidence of postoperative bleeding in patients overall was 8.2% (10/122). The incidence of postoperative bleeding in the anticoagulation group was 22.2% (4/18), while that in the non-anticoagulation group was 5.8% (6/104). Preoperative anticoagulation therapy was identified as a significant independent risk factor for postoperative bleeding (hazard ratio=4.673, 95% confidence interval=1.170-18.519; p=0.029). CONCLUSION:The perioperative use of anti-thrombotic therapy was a significant risk factor for postoperative bleeding after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Thus, when patients receive perioperative antiplatelet/anticoagulation treatment, careful attention is required after esophagectomy due to their increased risk of postoperative bleeding.
背景: 本研究的目的是评估围手术期使用抗血小板/抗凝治疗对食管癌术后出血的临床影响。 患者和方法: 患者选自 2005年1月至 2018年9月在横滨城市大学接受完全切除的连续患者的病历。将患者分为抗血小板/抗凝治疗组和非治疗组。比较两组食管癌切除术的安全性和可行性。 结果: 本研究对 102 例食管癌患者进行了食管切除术和分析。其中 18 例 (14.8%) 接受抗栓治疗 (抗凝组)。患者总体术后出血发生率为 8.2% (10/122)。抗凝组术后出血发生率为 22.2% (4/18)，未抗凝组为 5.8% (6/104)。术前抗凝治疗被确定为术后出血的显著独立危险因素 (风险比 = 4.673，95% 可信区间 = 1.170-18.519; p = 0.029)。 结论: 围术期应用抗栓治疗是食管癌术后出血的重要危险因素。因此，当患者接受围手术期抗血小板/抗凝治疗时，由于术后出血风险增加，食管切除术后需要仔细关注。
METHODS:PURPOSE:The purpose of this study was to compare the survival and toxicities in cervical esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (CESCC) treated by concurrent chemoradiothrapy with either three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) or intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) techniques. Materials and Methods:A total of 112 consecutive CESCC patients were retrospectively reviewed. 3D-CRT and IMRT groups had been analyzed by propensity score matching method, with sex, age, Karnofsky performance status, induction chemotherapy, and tumor stage well matched. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model were used for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Toxicities were compared between two groups by Fisher exact test. RESULTS:With a median follow-up time of 34.9 months, the 3-year OS (p=0.927) and PFS (p=0.859) rate was 49.6% and 45.8% in 3D-CRT group, compared with 54.4% and 42.8% in IMRT group. The rates of grade ≥ 3 esophagitis, grade ≥ 2 pneumonitis, esophageal stricture, and hemorrhage were comparable between two groups, while the rate of tracheostomy dependence was much higher in IMRT group than 3D-CRT group (14.3% vs.1.8%, p=0.032). Radiotherapy technique (hazard ratio [HR], 0.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01 to 0.79) and pretreatment hoarseness (HR, 0.12; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.70) were independently prognostic of tracheostomy dependence. CONCLUSION:No survival benefits had been observed while comparing IMRT versus 3D-CRT in CESCC patients. IMRT with fraction dose escalation and pretreatment hoarseness were considered to be associated with a higher risk for tracheostomy dependence. Radiation dose escalation beyond 60 Gy should be taken into account carefully when using IMRT with hypofractionated regimen.
METHODS::The radial force of esophageal stents may not completely change during extraction and therefore, the procedure of stent removal may cause tissue damage. The present study reports the manufacture of 2 novel detachable stents, which were designed to reduce tissue damage through their capacity to be taken or fall apart prior to removal and evaluated the supporting properties of these stents and the extent of local mucosal injury during their removal. The stents were manufactured by braiding, heat-setting, coating and connecting. The properties of the stents were evaluated by determining the following parameters: Expansion point, softening point, stent flexibility, radial compression ratio and radial force. A total of 18 rabbits with induced esophageal stricture were randomly assigned to 3 groups as follows: Detachable stent (DS) group, biodegradable stent (BS) group and control group. The stricture rate, complications, survival, degradation and stent removal were observed over 8 weeks. The stents of the DS and BS groups provided a similar supporting effect. The stricture rate, incidence of complications and survival were also similar between the 2 groups, while significant differences were noted between the DS and control groups and between the BS and control groups. In the BS group, the stents were degraded and moved to the stomach within 7 weeks (2 in 6 weeks and 3 in 7 weeks). The debris was extracted using biopsy forceps. In the DS group, all stents were easy to remove and 2 cases exhibited minor hemorrhage. In conclusion, the 2 types of novel detachable stent provided an equally efficient supporting effect in vitro and in vivo and may reduce the incidence of secondary injury during stent removal.
METHODS:BACKGROUND:Immune imbalance and inflammation have been suggested as key factors of Barrett's esophagus (BE) pathway towards adenocarcinoma. The neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) indirectly reflects the relation between innate and adaptive immune systems and has been studied in premalignant conditions as a biomarker for cancer diagnosis. Our aim was to investigate if increasing values of NLR correlated with advancing stages of BE progression to dysplasia and neoplasia. METHODS:We retrospectively analyzed data of patients with biopsies reporting BE between 2013 and 2017 and with a complete blood count within 6 months from the endoscopy, as well as patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). NLR was calculated as neutrophil count/lymphocyte count. Cases (n = 113) were classified as non-dysplastic BE (NDBE, n = 72), dysplastic BE (DBE, n = 11) and EAC (n = 30). RESULTS:NLR progressively increased across groups (NDBE, 1.92 ± 0.7; DBE, 2.92 ± 1.1; EAC 4.54 ± 2.9), with a significant correlation between its increasing value and the presence of dysplasia or neoplasia (r = 0.53, p 2.27 was able to diagnose EAC with 80% sensitivity and 71% specificity (area under the curve = 0.8). CONCLUSION:NLR correlates with advancing stages of BE progression, a finding that reinforces the role of immune imbalance in EAC carcinogenesis and suggests a possible use of this marker for risk stratification on surveillance strategies.