Deep Learning-Based Image Feature with Arthroscopy-Aided Early Diagnosis and Treatment of Meniscus Injury of Knee Joint

The aim of this study is to explore the clinical effect of deep learning-based MRI-assisted arthroscopy in the early treatment of knee meniscus sports injury. Based on convolutional neural network algorithm, Adam algorithm was introduced to optimize it, and the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) image super-resolution reconstruction model (SRCNN) was established. Peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) and structural similarity (SSIM) were compared between SRCNN and other algorithms. Sixty patients with meniscus injury of knee joint were studied. Arthroscopic surgery was performed according to the patients’ actual type of injury, and knee scores were evaluated for all patients. Then, postoperative scores and MRI results were analyzed. The results showed that the PSNR and SSIM values of the SRCNN algorithm were (42.19 ± 4.37) dB and 0.9951, respectively, which were significantly higher than those of other algorithms ( P < 0.05). Among patients with meniscus injury, 17 cases (28.33%) were treated with meniscus suture, 39 cases (65.00%) underwent secondary resection, 3 cases (5.00%) underwent partial resection, and 1 case (1.67%) underwent full resection. After meniscus suture, secondary resection, partial resection, and total resection, the knee function scores of patients after treatment were (83.17 ± 8.63), (80.06 ± 7.96), (84.34 ± 7.74), and (85.52 ± 5.97), respectively. There was no great difference in knee function scores after different methods of treatment ( P > 0.05), and there were considerable differences compared with those before treatment ( P < 0.01). Compared with the results of arthroscopy, there was no significant difference in the grading of meniscus injury by MRI ( P > 0.05). To sum up, the SRCNN algorithm based on the deep convolutional network algorithm improved the MRI image quality and the diagnosis of knee meniscus injuries. Arthroscopic knee surgery had good results and had great clinical application and promotion value.

Retrospective analysis of secondary resection of the cervical stump after subtotal hysterectomy: why and when?

Purpose The rates of hysterectomy are falling worldwide, and the surgical approach is undergoing a major change. To avoid abdominal hysterectomy, a minimally invasive approach has been implemented. Due to the increasing rates of subtotal hysterectomy, we are faced with the following questions: how often does the cervical stump have to be removed secondarily, and what are the indications? Methods This was a retrospective, single-centre analysis of secondary resection of the cervical stump conducted from 2004 to 2018. Results Secondary resection of the cervical stump was performed in 137 women. Seventy-four percent of the previous subtotal hysterectomy procedures were performed in our hospital, and 26% were performed in an external hospital. During the study period, 5209 subtotal hysterectomy procedures were performed at our hospital. The three main indications for secondary resection of the cervical stump were prolapse (31.4%), spotting (19.0%) and cervical dysplasia (18.2%). Unexpected histological findings (premalignant and malignant) after subtotal hysterectomy resulted in immediate (median time, 1 month) secondary resection of the cervical stump in 11 cases. In four patients, the indication was a secondary malignant gynaecological disease that occurred more than 5 years after subtotal hysterectomy. The median time between subtotal hysterectomy and secondary resection of the cervical stump was 40 months. Secondary resection of the cervical stump was performed vaginally in 75.2% of cases, laparoscopically in 20.4% of cases and abdominally in 4.4% of cases. The overall complication rate was 5%. Conclusion Secondary resection of the cervical stump is a rare surgery with a low complication rate and can be performed via the vaginal or laparoscopic approach in most cases. The most common indications are prolapse, spotting and cervical dysplasia. If a secondary resection of the cervical stump is necessary due to symptoms, 66.6% will be performed within the first 6 years after subtotal hysterectomy.

Efficacy of three BCG strains (Connaught, TICE and RIVM) with or without secondary resection (re-TUR) for intermediate/high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancers: results from a retrospective single-institution cohort analysis

Purpose (I) To evaluate the clinical efficacy of three different BCG strains in patients with intermediate-/high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). (II) To determine the importance of performing routine secondary resection (re-TUR) in the setting of BCG maintenance protocol for the three strains. Methods NMIBCs who received an adjuvant induction followed by a maintenance schedule of intravesical immunotherapy with BCG Connaught, TICE and RIVM. Only BCG-naïve and those treated with the same strain over the course of follow-up were included. Cox proportional hazards model was developed according to prognostic factors by the Spanish Urological Oncology Group (CUETO) as well as by adjusting for the implementation of re-TUR. Results n = 422 Ta-T1 patients (Connaught, n = 146; TICE, n = 112 and RIVM, n = 164) with a median (IQR) follow-up of 72 (60–85) were reviewed. Re-TUR was associated with improved recurrence and progression outcomes (HRRFS: 0.63; 95% CI 0.46–0.86; HRPFS: 0.55; 95% CI 0.31–0.86). Adjusting for CUETO risk factors and re-TUR, BGC TICE and RIVM provided longer RFS compared to Connaught (HRTICE: 0.58, 95% CI 0.39–0.86; HRRIVM: 0.61, 95% CI 0.42–0.87) while no differences were identified between strains for PFS and CSS. Sub-analysis of only re-TUR cases (n = 190, 45%) showed TICE the sole to achieve longer RFS compared to both Connaught and RIVM. Conclusion Re-TUR was confirmed to ensure longer RFS and PFS in intermediate-/high-risk NMIBCs but did not influence the relative single BCG strain efficacy. When routinely performing re-TUR followed by a maintenance BCG schedule, TICE was superior to the other strains for RFS outcomes.

Induction Chemotherapy for Primarily Unresectable Locally Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma—Who Will Benefit from a Secondary Resection?

Background and Objectives: An increasing number of patients (pts) with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) are treated with an intensive neoadjuvant therapy to obtain a secondary curative resection. Only a certain number of patients benefit from this intention. The aim of this investigation was to identify prognostic factors which may predict a benefit for secondary resection. Materials and Methods: Survival time and clinicopathological data of pts with pancreatic cancer were prospective and consecutively collected in our Comprehensive Cancer Center Database. For this investigation, we screened for pts with primarily unresectable pancreatic cancer who underwent a secondary resection after receiving induction therapy in the time between March 2017 and May 2019. Results: 40 pts had a sufficient database to carry out a reliable analysis. The carbohydrate-antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9) level of the pts treated with induction therapy decreased by 44.7% from 4358.3 U/mL to 138.5 U/mL (p = 0.001). The local cancer extension was significantly reduced (p < 0.001), and the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status was lowered (p = 0.03). The median overall survival (mOS) was 20 months (95% CI: 17.2–22.9). Pts who showed a normal CA 19-9 level (<37 U/mL) at diagnosis and after neoadjuvant therapy or had a Body Mass Index (BMI) below 25 kg/m2 after chemotherapy had a significant prolonged overall survival (29 vs. 19 months, p = 0.02; 26 vs. 18 months, p = 0.04; 15 vs. 24 months, p = 0.01). Pts who still presented elevated CA 19-9 levels >400 U/mL after induction therapy did not profit from a secondary resection (24 vs. 7 months, p < 0.001). Nodal negativity as well as the performance of an adjuvant therapy lead to better mOS (25 vs. 15 months, p = 0.003; 10 vs. 25 months, p < 0.001). Conclusion: The pts in our investigation had different benefits from the multimodal treatment. We identified the CA 19-9 level at time of diagnosis and after neoadjuvant therapy as well as the preoperative BMI as predictive factors for overall survival. Furthermore, diagnostics of presurgical nodal status should gain more importance as nodal negativity is associated with better outcome.

FOLFOXIRI Plus Panitumumab As First-Line Treatment of RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The Randomized, Open-Label, Phase II VOLFI Study (AIO KRK0109)

PURPOSE This trial investigated the addition of panitumumab to triplet chemotherapy with fluorouracil/folinic acid, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI) in a two-to-one randomized, controlled, open-label, phase II trial in patients with untreated RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) according to RECIST (version 1.1). The experimental arm (modified FOLFOXIRI [mFOLFOXIRI] plus panitumumab) was considered active if the ORR was ≥ 75%. The experimental ORR was compared with an estimated ORR of 60% based on historical data, verified by a randomized control group (FOLFOXIRI). The power of the trial was 80%, with a potential type I error of 0.05. Secondary end points included secondary resection rate, toxicity, progression-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS A total of 63 patients were randomly assigned to the experimental arm and 33 patients to the control arm. The ORR of the mFOLFOXIRI plus panitumumab arm exceeded 75% and was higher when compared with that of FOLFOXIRI (87.3% v 60.6%; odds ratio, 4.469; 95% CI, 1.61 to 12.38; P = .004). The secondary resection rate was improved with the addition of panitumumab (33.3% v 12.1%; P = .02). Progression-free survival was similar in the study arms, whereas overall survival showed a trend in favor of the panitumumab-containing arm (hazard ratio for death, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.41 to 1.11; P = .12). CONCLUSION The addition of panitumumab to mFOLFOXIRI in patients with RAS WT metastatic colorectal cancer improved the ORR and rate of secondary resection of metastases and represents a treatment option in selected and fit patients in need of highly active first-line therapy. Future studies should determine whether the addition of panitumumab to mFOLFOXIRI prolongs survival.

Improved local relapse-free and overall survival with secondary surgery after a first R1 or R2 resection in soft tissue sarcoma (STS) of the limbs or trunk wall: An analysis 10,931 patients (pts) in NETSARC.

11056 Background: We previously reported that secondary resection (2Surg) improved local relapse free (LRFS) but not overall survival (OS) in a retrospective series of pts with localized STS after unplanned 1st excision. Here we investigated the impact of 2Surg specifically after a first R1 or R2 resection in the 10931 pts with STS of the limb or trunk wall included in the nationwide NETSARC database from 2010 to 2017. Methods: NETSARC (netsarc.org) is a network of 26 reference sarcoma centers with specialized multidisciplinary tumor boards (MDT), funded by the French NCI (INCa). Since 2010, presentation to an MDTB and second pathological review are mandatory for sarcoma pts. Statistics were performed with SPSS23.0. LRFS, metastasis-free survival (MFS), OS compared with the logrank test. Results: The series included 5598 (51.2%) males. Median age was 56.7. Tumor sites: 5295 (49.4%) lower limb, 3670 (33.6%) trunk wall. 1966 (18.0%) upper limb. As previously reported in the entire series, local RFS (LRFS) and RFS (p<0.001), but not OS, were superior for pts presented to a NETSARC MDT (NMDT), or operated in a NETSARC center (N=4417, 41%). LRFS & OS were best for pts presented to a NMDT AND operated in NETSARC centers; while the worst LRFS & OS were observed in pts presented in a NMDT but not operated there (p<0.001). Among the 2081 pts with a first R1 resection in whom 2Surg was documented, 1047 (50.3%) were reoperated. R1 reoperated pts had a superior LRFS, metastatic free survival (MFS) and OS (p<0.001). LRFS (p<0.001), MFS (p=0.05) and OS (p<0.001) were superior after 2Surg only in pts operated 1st outside a Netsarc center. There were 823 pts with a first surgery with R2 resection in whom 2Surg was documented: 619 (75.2%) were reoperated. R2 reoperated patients had a superior LRFS and OS (p=0.01). MFS was not different. LRFS (p<0.001) & OS (p<0.001) were superior after 2Surg only in pts operated 1st outside a Netsarc center. 2028 (%) pts had 2Surg. Pts for whom 2Surg was in a NetSARC center had a superior LRFS (p<0.001) and OS (p=0.01) when operated first outside a NETSARC center. Conclusions: In this nationwide series of limb or trunk wall STS, 2Surg after a R1 or R2 primary excision improves LRFS & OS when the pts were operated 1st outside a reference center. 2Surg in a NETSARC center was associated with a better LRFS and OS.