Refine
Document Type
- Article (3)
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- Cirrhosis (1)
- Colonic neoplasms (1)
- Control (1)
- Endoscopy (1)
- Etiology (1)
- Hepatocellular carcinoma (1)
- Infectious disease epidemiology (1)
- Liver diseases (1)
- Membrane staining (1)
- Negative staining (1)
Institute
- Medizin (3)
- Georg-Speyer-Haus (1)
Background and aims: Expression of carbonic anhydrase IX (CA9), an enzyme expressed in response to hypoxia, acidosis and oncogenic alterations, is reported to be a prognostic factor in HCC patients. Here we evaluated serum CA9 levels in HCC and cirrhosis patients.
Methods: HCC and cirrhosis patients were prospectively recruited and CA9 levels were determined. CA9 levels were compared to stages of cirrhosis and HCC stages. The association of the CA9 levels and overall survival (OS) was assessed. Furthermore, immunohistochemical CA9 expression in HCC and cirrhosis was evaluated.
Results: 215 patients with HCC were included. The median serum CA9 concentration in patients with HCC was 370 pg/ml and significantly higher than in a healthy cohort. Patients with advanced cancer stages (BCLC and ALBI score) had hid significant higher levels of CA9 in the serum. HCC patients with high serum CA9 concentrations (>400 pg/ml) had an increased mortality risk (hazard ratio (HR) 1.690, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.017–2.809, P = 0.043). Serum CA9 concentration in cirrhotic patients did not differ significantly from HCC patients. Higher CA9 levels in cirrhotic patients correlated with portal hypertension and esophageal varices. Patients with ethanol induced cirrhosis had the highest CA9 levels in both cohorts. Levels of CA9 did not correlate with immunohistochemical expression.
Conclusions: We conclude that a high CA9 level is a possible prognostic indicator for a poor outcome in HCC patients. The high CA9 levels are probably mainly associated with portal hypertension. Ductular reactions might be a possible source of serum CA9.
Background: Patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) are at high risk for malnutrition because of tumour localisation and therapy. Prophylactic percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement is common practice to prevent malnutrition.
Objective: To investigate the benefits of prophylactic PEG tube placement for HNC patients in terms of the influence on patients’ nutritional status, utilisation rate, complications and to identify the predictors of PEG tube utilisation.
Methods: All consecutive HNC patients who underwent prophylactic PEG tube insertion between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2012 prior to therapy were enrolled. The PEG tube utilisation rate, complications, the patients’ nutritional status and tumour therapy were evaluated with the help of electronic patient charts and telephone interviews.
Results: A total of 181 patients (48 female, median 67.5 years) were included. The PEG utilisation rate in the entire cohort was 91.7%. One hundred and forty‐nine patients (82.3%) used the PEG tube for total enteral nutrition, 17 patients (9.4%) for supplemental nutrition and 15 patients (8.3%) made no use of the PEG tube. Peristomal wound infections were the most common complications (40.3%) in this study. A high Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS) score prior to tube insertion was found to be independently associated with PEG utilisation. No significant weight changes were observed across the three patient subgroups.
Conclusions: The overall PEG tube utilisation rate was high in this study. However, given the high rate of infections, diligent patient selection is crucial in order to determine which patients benefit most from prophylactic PEG tube insertion.
Background/Aims: Reliable and especially widely accepted preventive measures are crucial to further reduce the incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC). Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) might increase the screening numbers among patients unable or unwilling to undergo conventional colonoscopy. This registry trial aimed to document and determine the CCE indications, findings, complications, and adverse events in outpatient practices and clinics throughout Germany.
Methods: Patients undergoing CCE between 2010 and 2015 were enrolled in this prospective multicenter registry trial at six German centers. Patient demographics, outcomes, and complications were evaluated.
Results: A total of 161 patients were included. Of the CCE evaluations, 111 (68.9%) were considered successful. Pathological findings in the colon (n=92, 60.1%) and in the remaining gastrointestinal tract (n=38, 24.8%) were recorded. The main finding was the presence of polyps (n=52, 32.3%). Furthermore, five carcinomas (3.1%) were detected and histologically confirmed later. Adequate bowel cleanliness was more likely to be achieved in the outpatient setting (p<0.0001). Interestingly, 85 patients (55.6%) chose to undergo CCE based on personal motivation.
Conclusions: CCE seems to be a reliable and safe endoscopic tool for screening for CRC and detecting other diseases. Its patient acceptance and feasibility seems to be high, especially in the outpatient setting.