@article{LichthardtKerscherDietzetal.2016, author = {Lichthardt, Sven and Kerscher, Alexander and Dietz, Ulrich A. and Jurowich, Christian and Kunzmann, Volker and von Rahden, Burkhard H. A. and Germer, Christoph-Thomas and Wiegering, Armin}, title = {Original article: role of adjuvant chemotherapy in a perioperative chemotherapy regimen for gastric cancer}, series = {BMC Cancer}, volume = {16}, journal = {BMC Cancer}, number = {650}, doi = {10.1186/s12885-016-2708-0}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-147743}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Background Multimodal treatment strategies - perioperative chemotherapy (CTx) and radical surgery - are currently accepted as treatment standard for locally advanced gastric cancer. However, the role of adjuvant postoperative CTx (postCTx) in addition to neoadjuvant preoperative CTx (preCTx) in this setting remains controversial. Methods Between 4/2006 and 12/2013, 116 patients with locally advanced gastric cancer were treated with preCTx. 72 patients (62 \%), in whom complete tumor resection (R0, subtotal/total gastrectomy with D2-lymphadenectomy) was achieved, were divided into two groups, one of which receiving adjuvant therapy (n = 52) and one without (n = 20). These groups were analyzed with regard to survival and exclusion criteria for adjuvant therapy. Results Postoperative complications, as well as their severity grade, did not correlate with fewer postCTx cycles administered (p = n.s.). Long-term survival was shorter in patients receiving postCTx in comparison to patients without postCTx, but did not show statistical significance. In per protocol analysis by excluding two patients with perioperative death, a shorter 3-year survival rate was observed in patients receiving postCTx compared to patients without postCTx (3-year survival: 71.2 \% postCTx group vs. 90.0 \% non-postCTx group; p = 0.038). Conclusion These results appear contradicting to the anticipated outcome. While speculative, they question the value of post-CTx. Prospectively randomized studies are needed to elucidate the role of postCTx.}, language = {en} } @article{KrajinovicReimerKudlichetal.2016, author = {Krajinovic, K. and Reimer, S. and Kudlich, T. and Germer, C. T. and Wiegering, A.}, title = {"Rendezvous technique" for intraluminal vacuum therapy of anastomotic leakage of the jejunum}, series = {Surgical Case Reports}, volume = {2}, journal = {Surgical Case Reports}, number = {114}, doi = {10.1186/s40792-016-0243-5}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-147883}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Background Anastomotic leakage (AL) is one of the most common and serious complications following visceral surgery. In recent years, endoluminal vacuum therapy has dramatically changed therapeutic options for AL, but its use has been limited to areas easily accessible by endoscope. Case presentation We describe the first use of endoluminal vacuum therapy in the small intestine employing a combined surgical and endoscopic "rendezvous technique" in which the surgeon assists the endoscopic placement of an endoluminal vacuum therapy sponge in the jejunum by means of a pullback string. This technique led to a completely closed AL after 27 days and 7 changes of the endosponge. Conclusion The combined surgical and endoscopic rendezvous technique can be useful in cases of otherwise difficult endosponge placement.}, language = {en} }