Percutaneous ethanol injection for liver metastases

Breast cancer, alcohol, and phosphate toxicity

Alcohol consumption is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer, even at low alcohol intake levels, but public awareness of the breast cancer risk associated with alcohol intake is low. Furthermore, the causative mechanisms underlying alcohol's association with breast cancer are unknown. The present theoretical paper uses a modified grounded theory method to review the research literature and propose that alcohol's association with breast cancer is mediated by phosphate toxicity, the accumulation of excess inorganic phosphate in body tissue. Serum levels of inorganic phosphate are regulated through a network of hormones released from the bone, kidneys, parathyroid glands, and intestines. Alcohol burdens renal function, which may disturb the regulation of inorganic phosphate, impair phosphate excretion, and increase phosphate toxicity. In addition to causing cellular dehydration, alcohol is an etiologic factor in nontraumatic rhabdomyolysis, which ruptures cell membranes and releases inorganic phosphate into the serum, leading to hyperphosphatemia. Phosphate toxicity is also associated with tumorigenesis, as high levels of inorganic phosphate within the tumor microenvironment activate cell signaling pathways and promote cancer cell growth. Furthermore, phosphate toxicity potentially links cancer and kidney disease in onco-nephrology. Insights into the mediating role of phosphate toxicity may lead to future research and interventions that raise public health awareness of breast cancer risk and alcohol consumption.

Emergency exploratory laparotomy and radical gastrectomy in patients with gastric cancer combined with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer (GC) is a prevalent malignant tumor worldwide and ranks as the fourth leading cause of cancer-related mortality. Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a frequent complication of GC. Radical gastrectomy and palliative therapy are widely used surgical procedures in the clinical management of GC. This study intends to probe the clinical efficacy and safety of radical gastrectomy and palliative therapy on the basis of exploratory laparotomy in patients with GC combined with UGIB, hoping to provide valuable information to aid patients in selecting the appropriate surgical intervention.

AIM

To investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of exploratory laparotomy + radical gastrectomy and palliative therapy in patients with GC and UGIB combined.

METHODS

A total of 89 GC patients admitted to the First Affiliated Hospital of the University of South China between July 2018 and July 2020 were selected as participants for this study. The 89 patients were divided into two groups: radical resection group (n = 46) treated with exploratory laparotomy + radical gastrectomy and Palliative group (n = 43) treated with palliative therapy. The study compared several variables between the two groups, including surgical duration, intraoperative blood transfusion volume, postoperative anal exhaust time, off-bed activity time, length of hospitalization, and incidence of complications such as duodenal stump rupture, anastomotic obstruction, and postoperative incision. Additionally, postoperative immune function indicators (including CD3+, CD4+, CD8+, CD4+/CD8+, and CD3+/HLADR+), immunoglobulin (IgG and IgM), tumor markers (CEA, CA199, and CA125), and inflammatory factors (IL-6, IL-17, and TNF-α) were assessed. The surgical efficacy and postoperative quality of life recovery were also evaluated. The patients were monitored for survival and tumor recurrence at 6 mo, 1 year, and 2 years post-surgery.

RESULTS

The results indicated that the duration of operation time and postoperative hospitalization did not differ between the two surgical procedures. However, patients in the radical resection group exhibited shorter intraoperative blood loss, anus exhaust time, off-bed activity time, and inpatient activity time than those in the Palliative group. Although there was no substantial difference in the occurrence of postoperative complications, such as duodenal stump rupture and anastomotic obstruction, between the radical resection group and Palliative group (P > 0.05), the radical resection group exhibited higher postoperative immune function indicators (including CD3+, CD4+, CD8+, etc.) and immunoglobulin levels (IgG, IgM) than the Palliative group, while tumor markers and inflammatory factors levels were lower than those in the radical resection group. Additionally, surgical efficacy, postoperative quality of life, and postoperative survival rates were higher in patients who underwent radical gastrectomy than in those who underwent palliative therapy. Moreover, the probability of postoperative tumor recurrence was lower in the radical gastrectomy group compared to the palliative therapy group, and these differences were all statistically significant (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Compared to palliative therapy, exploratory laparotomy + radical gastrectomy can improve immune function, reduce the levels of tumor markers and inflammatory factors, improve surgical efficacy, promote postoperative quality of life recovery, enhance survival rates, and attenuate the probability of tumor recurrence.

Electrocoagulation for liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Primary liver tumours and liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma are two of the most common malignant tumours to affect the liver. The liver is second only to the lymph nodes as the most common site for metastatic disease. More than half of the people with metastatic liver disease will die from metastatic complications. Electrocoagulation by diathermy is a method used to destroy tumour tissue, using a high-frequency electric current generating high temperatures, applied locally with an electrode (needle, blade, or ball). The objective of this method is to destroy the tumour completely, if possible, in a single session. With the time, electrocoagulation by diathermy has been replaced by other techniques, but the evidence is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of electrocoagulation by diathermy, administered alone or with another intervention, versus no intervention, other ablation methods, or systemic treatments in people with liver metastases.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, ICTRP, and FDA to October 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered all randomised trials that assessed beneficial and harmful effects of electrocoagulation by diathermy, administered alone or with another intervention, versus comparators, in people with liver metastases, regardless of the location of the primary tumour.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We assessed risk of bias of the included trial using predefined risk of bias domains, and presented the review results incorporating the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included one randomised clinical trial with 306 participants (175 males; 131 females) who had undergone resection of the sigmoid colon, and who had five or more visible and palpable hepatic metastases. The diagnosis was confirmed by histological assessment (biopsy) and by carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level. The trial was conducted in Iraq. The age of participants ranged between 38 and 79 years. The participants were randomised to four different study groups. The liver metastases were biopsied and treated (only once) in three of the groups: 75 received electrocoagulation by diathermy alone, 76 received electrocoagulation plus allopurinol, 78 received electrocoagulation plus dimethyl sulphoxide. In the fourth intervention group, 77 participants functioning as controls received a vehicle solution of allopurinol 5 mL 4 x a day by mouth; the metastases were left untouched. The status of the liver and lungs was followed by ultrasound investigations, without the use of a contrast agent. Participants were followed for five years. The analyses are based on per-protocol data only analysing 223 participants. We judged the trial to be at high risk of bias. After excluding 'nonevaluable patients', the groups seemed comparable for baseline characteristics. Mortality due to disease spread at five-year follow-up was 98% in the electrocoagulation group (57/58 evaluable people); 87% in the electrocoagulation plus allopurinol group (46/53 evaluable people); 86% in the electrocoagulation plus dimethyl sulphoxide group (49/57 evaluable people); and 100% in the control group (55/55 evaluable people). We observed no difference in mortality between the electrocoagulation alone group versus the control group (risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 1.03; 113 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We observed lower mortality in the electrocoagulation combined with allopurinol or dimethyl sulphoxide group versus the control group (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.95; 165 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain regarding post-operative deaths between the electrocoagulation alone group versus the control group (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.07 to 16.12; 152 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and between the electrocoagulation combined with allopurinol or dimethyl sulphoxide groups versus the control group (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.09 to 10.86; 231 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The trial authors did not report data on number of participants with other adverse events and complications, recurrence of liver metastases, time to progression of liver metastases, tumour response measures, and health-related quality of life. Data on failure to clear liver metastases were not provided for the control group. There was no information on funding or conflict of interest. We identified no ongoing trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence on the beneficial and harmful effects of electrocoagulation alone or in combination with allopurinol or dimethyl sulphoxide in people with liver metastases is insufficient, as it is based on one randomised clinical trial at low to very low certainty. It is very uncertain if there is a difference in all-cause mortality and post-operative mortality between electrocoagulation alone versus control. It is also uncertain if electrocoagulation in combination with allopurinol or dimethyl sulphoxide may result in a slight reduction of all-cause mortality in comparison with a vehicle solution of allopurinol (control). It is very uncertain if there is a difference in post-operative mortality between the electrocoagulation combined with allopurinol or dimethyl sulphoxide group versus control. Data on other adverse events and complications, failure to clear liver metastases or recurrence of liver metastases, time to progression of liver metastases, tumour response measures, and health-related quality of life were most lacking or insufficiently reported for analysis. Electrocoagulation by diathermy is no longer used in the described way, and this may explain the lack of further trials.