Search

Purpose Laparoscopic surgery for left-sided colon cancer is one of the most frequent procedures performed in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. In this study, we analyzed clinical and long-term oncological outcomes of left-sided colon cancer patients who underwent conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) and hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS). Methods A total of 172 CLS patients and 72 HALS patients for left-sided colon cancer from July 2001 to December 2011 were included in this study. The collected data included the clinical and oncological outcomes. We analyzed overall survival and disease-free survival by tumor, node, metastasis (TNM) stage. Results The mean age of the patients was 64 years, and male patients were predominant. The mean follow-up period was 58.1 months. The number of patients that belong in each TNM stage 0, I, II, III, and IV was as follows: 17 (7%), 47 (19.2%), 70 (28.7%), 80 (32.8%), and 30 (12.3%), respectively. Overall 5-year survival rate for TNM stage I, II, III, and IV was 87.1%, 82.8%, 82%, and 12%, respectively. Overall 5-year survival rate for CLS group and HALS group was 90.2% and 66.7%, 86.5% and 77%, 88.7% and 67.4%, and 18.9% and 0%, respectively. Disease-free 5-year survival rate for TNM stage I, II, and III was 97.7%, 90.7%, and 72.8%, respectively. Disease-free 5-year survival rate for CLS group and HALS group was 97.3% and 100%, 100% and 78.8%, and 81% and 55.1%, respectively. Conclusion These data show the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic surgery for left-sided colon cancer in terms of long-term oncological outcomes.

Background: The present study aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy between ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology (US-FNAC) and core needle biopsy (CNB) of axillary lymph nodes (ALNs) in patients with breast cancer through a meta-analysis and a diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) review. Methods: The present meta-analysis and DTA review included 67 eligible studies. The diagnostic accuracy of various preoperative assessments, including US-FNAC and CNB, was evaluated for ALNs assessments in patients with breast cancer. In addition, a subgroup analysis based on methods of cytologic preparation was performed. In the DTA review, the sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (OR) and area under the curve (AUC) on the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve were calculated. Results: The diagnostic accuracy of the preoperative assessments of ALNs was 0.850 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.833–0.866) for patients with breast cancer. The diagnostic accuracy of CNB was significantly higher than that of US-FNAC (0.896, 95% CI 0.844–0.932 vs. 0.844, 95% CI 0.825–0.862; p = 0.044 in a meta-regression test). In the subgroup analysis based on cytologic preparation, the diagnosis accuracies were 0.860, 0.861 and 0.859 for the methods of conventional smear, liquid-based preparation and cell block, respectively. In the DTA review, CNB showed higher sensitivity than US-FNAC (0.849 vs. 0.760). However, there was no difference in specificity between US-FNAC and CNB (0.997 vs. 1.000). US-FNAC with liquid-based preparation and CNB showed the highest diagnostic OR and AUC on the SROC, respectively. Conclusion: Both US-FNAC and CNB are useful in preoperative assessments of ALNs in patients with breast cancer. Although the most sensitive test was found to be CNB in this study, there was no difference in specificity between various preoperative evaluations and the application of US-FNAC or CNB may be impacted by various factors.