Search

BACKGROUND while interest on early-onset colorectal cancer (age ≤49) is on the rise, studies on early-onset rectal cancer (EORC) are limited. The aim of this study was to compare predictors for disease progression/recurrence between sporadic EORC and late-onset RC patients (LORC). METHODS 163 EORC and 830 LORC operated between January 1st, 2010 and April 30th, 2021 at a tertiary center were included. Demographics, tumor characteristics, microsatellite status, gene mutations (KRAS, BRAF, NRAS, PI3Kca) and oncologic outcomes were compared. A Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was performed to ascertain the effect of variables on recurrence/progression and death. Recurrence/Progression free survival (R/PFS) and cancer specific survival (CSS) were analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier estimator. RESULTS Mean age of EORC was 42.16, (46% aged 45-49). A majority of EORC patients had a family history for CRC (p = 0.01) and underwent total neoadjuvant treatment (p = 0.01). EORC patients showed a higher rate of low-grade tumor differentiation (p

Background: One of the controversial issues in the diagnosis of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (pNETs) is the accurate prediction of their clinical behaviour. Objectives: The aim of the study was to evaluate the role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) biopsy in the diagnosis and grading of pNETs in a certified ENETS Center. Methods: A prospectively maintained database of EUS biopsy procedures was retrospectively reviewed to identify all consecutive patients referred to a certified ENETS Center with a suspicion of pNET between June 2014 and April 2017. The cytological and/or histological specimens were stained and the Ki-67 labeling index was evaluated. In patients undergoing surgery, the grade obtained with EUS-guided biopsy was compared with the final histological grade. The grade was evaluated according to the 2017 WHO classifications and grading. Results: The study population included 59 patients. EUS biopsy material reached an adequacy of 98.3% and was adequate for Ki-67 evaluation in 84.7% of cases. Twenty-nine patients (49.2%) underwent surgery. Of these, 25 patients had Ki-67 evaluated on EUS biopsy: the agreement between EUS biopsy grading and surgical specimen grading was 84%. Conclusion: EUS biopsy is an accurate method for the diagnosis and grading of pNETs based on the WHO 2017 Ki-67 labelling scheme.

Esophageal leaks (EL) and ruptures (ER) are rare conditions associated with a high risk of mortality and morbidity. Historically, EL and ER have been surgically treated, but current treatment options also include conservative management and endoscopy. Over the last decades, interventional endoscopy has evolved as an effective and less invasive alternative to primary surgery in these cases. A variety of techniques are currently available to re-establish the continuity of the digestive tract, prevent or treat infection related to the leak/rupture, prevent further contamination, drain potential collections, and provide nutritional support. Endoscopic options include clips, both through the scope (TTS) and over the scope (OTS), stent placement, vacuum therapy, tissue adhesive, and endoscopic suturing techniques. Theoretically, all of these can be used alone or with a multimodality approach. Endoscopic therapy should be combined with medical therapy but also with percutaneous drainage of collections, where present. There is robust evidence suggesting that this change of therapeutic paradigm in the form of endoscopic therapy is associated with improved outcome, better quality of life, and shortened length of hospital stay. Moreover, recent European guidelines on endoscopic management of iatrogenic perforation have strengthened and to some degree regulated and redefined the role of endoscopy in the management of conditions where there is a breach in the continuity of the GI wall. Certainly, due to the complexity of these conditions and the variety of available treatment options, a multidisciplinary approach is strongly recommended, with close clinical monitoring (by endoscopists, surgeons, and intensive care physicians) and special attention to signs of sepsis, which can lead to the need for urgent surgical management. This review article will critically discuss the literature regarding endoscopic modalities for esophageal leak and perforation management and attempt to place them in perspective for the physician.

Background and aim Endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling (EUS sampling) is a safe and effective technique. The study aim was to evaluate the presence of a histological core from pancreatic lesions using a new 25G fork-tip needle. Methods Observational multicenter prospective and analytical study, including consecutive patients with solid pancreatic masses referred for EUS-guided sampling. At each needle pass, the endoscopist performed macroscopic on-site evaluation (MOSE). The primary outcome was the histological core procurement rates. Secondary outcomes were the evaluation of interobserver agreement between endoscopists and pathologists, adequacy of EUS samples for the diagnosis and post-procedure adverse events. Results 100 patients were enrolled in 3 centers. The mean size of the lesions was 28.5 mm (SD 11.7). Final diagnoses were adenocarcinoma (68%), neuroendocrine tumor (21%), inflammatory mass/benign lesions (8.0%), and pancreatic metastasis (3.0%). The pathologists described the presence of a core in 67 samples (67.0% of patients), with poor agreement with MOSE (kappa, 0. 12; 95% CI: 0.03–0.28). The diagnostic accuracy was 93%. We observed 6% of mild adverse events. Conclusion The new 25-gauge core needle showed good overall adequacy and a good rate of histological specimens during EUS sampling of solid pancreatic masses, with a minimum number of passes and no major complications. Clinicaltrial.gov number, NCT02946840.