The Use of Intraoperative Radiation Therapy (IORT) in Multimodality Management of Cancer Patients. A Single Institution Experience.

Background Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) is a highly conformal technique given in the operating room in many cancer sites for better tumor local control by increasing the tumor radiation dose without exceeding normal tissues tolerance doses.Purpose Assess the feasibility of Intra operative radiation therapy (IORT) and short-term toxicity in patients with different cancer sites treated with a multidisciplinary protocols including IORT.Patients & MethodsMedical records of cancer patients who received IORT at King Faisal Specialized Hospital and Research center(KFSHRC), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia from 2013 until 2017 were retrospectively reviewed.ResultsTotal 188 patients with 212 IORT applications were analyzed. Twenty-four patients had more than one application.116 patients were males. Median age at time of diagnosis was 49.5years (19-77). Hundred thirty four patients had primary while 54 cases had recurrent disease. Gastro esophageal cancer and soft tissue sarcoma were the most frequent diagnosis in 49 patients followed by colorectal cancer in 35 patients. Major surgeries with curative intent done in 183 patients (97.3%) and 118 patients (62.8%) had hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in addition to IORT. The 30days postoperative mortality rate was 3.2%. Fifty-three (28.2%) patients develop Grade III-IV complications according to Clavien-Dindo grading system. ConclusionThe data presented discussing treatment modalities for different malignant tumors which are treated and may benefit from using IORT technique as a part of multimodality treatment. IORT seems safe and feasible, however a longer follow-up is needed for proper evaluation and defining the role of IORT in tailored multimodality approach.

Surgical and Oncologic Outcomes With Intraoperative Radiation Therapy for Early Breast Cancer

Background For selected patients with early-stage breast cancer (BC), intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) has emerged as a convenient alternative to standard whole breast irradiation (WBI). We report a single institution experience with IORT in terms of oncologic outcomes, toxicities, and cosmesis. Methods Clinicopathological and perioperative outcomes of patients who underwent IORT for early-stage BC at a public hospital from 2017 to 2020 were retrospectively retrieved. Toxicity was categorized to acute or chronic based on 6 months post-IORT cutoff. Results 85 patients underwent IORT and had complete data, aged 49‐85 years (mean 62). Intraoperative radiation therapy added 23 minutes on average to the total operative time. Final stage was 0, I, and II in 40%, 58.9%, and 1.1% of patients, respectively. Mean tumor size was 0.8 cm (range .1-2.1), with ductal histology comprising 94% of cases. Surgical margins were positive in 2 patients, and adjuvant WBI was required in 5 patients. After a median follow‐up of 17 months (range 3-41), none of the patients had local recurrence and no mortality was recorded. Early wound complications included wound dehiscence (n = 1), seroma/hematoma (n = 15), and re-operation with loss of nipple-areola complex (n = 1). Chronic skin toxicities were reported in 10 (12%) patients and good or excellent cosmetic outcome was reported in 93% of patients. Conclusions Utilizing IORT among low-risk early BC patients may be a safe and more convenient alternative to traditional WBI, with low toxicity rate, acceptable cosmetic results, and good oncologic outcomes at 17 months. Longer follow-up and further prospective controlled studies are needed to confirm these findings.

The role of AIHIP in Preoperative Planning of Total Hip Arthroplasty to Different Surgeons.

BackgroundPreoperative planning with computed tomography (CT)-based three-dimensional templating has been achieved more precise placement of hip components. This study investigated the value of the software for preoperative planning (artificial intelligence hip system, AIHIP) in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) for surgeons with different experience levels.MethodsWe performed a retrospective study of 240 hips in 240 patients who underwent cementless primary THA. The patients were divided into four groups: A1) senior surgeon without AIHIP, A2) senior surgeon with AIHIP, B1) junior surgeon without AIHIP, and B2) junior surgeon with AIHIP. All preoperative planning evaluations were completed using the AIHIP software. We analysed the accuracy of stem size prediction and cup size prediction, the absolute value of postoperative discrepancy in leg length, discrepancy of neck-shaft angle and femoral offset between the healthy side and the affected side from the anteroposterior radiographic view of the hip, intraoperative and postoperative complications, operative times, the reduction in the haemoglobin (Hb) level during the first 24 hours and the number of intraoperative radiations.ResultsThe sizes of 95% were accurately estimated to be within one stem size, and 97% of the cup size estimates were accurate to within one cup size in group A2. A total of 87% were accurately estimated to be within one stem size, and 85% were accurate to within one cup size in group B2. There was a significant difference in radiological indicators (P<0.050), postoperative complications (overall P=0.035), operation duration (P<0.001), decrease in Hb per 24 hours (P=0.046) and intraoperative radiation frequency (P<0.050) among the patients in group B. There was also a significant difference in postoperative complications (overall P=0.01) between groups A1 and B1.ConclusionOur results suggest that the AIHIP is a favourable tool for young surgeons, and the accuracy is good.

Comparison of Simultaneous Single-position Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation with Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion using O-arm Navigated C-arm free Technique for Lumbar Degenerative Diseases

Background: To compare the clinical, surgical and radiographic outcomes of O-arm navigated C-arm free, simultaneous single-position oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) fixation with minimally invasive posterior/ transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-PLIF/TLIF).Methods: This is retrospective comparative study. The study included 98 patients, 63 in single position OLIF (group SO) and 35 in MI-PLIF/TLIF (group P/T). Surgical time, blood loss, mobilization time after surgery and complications were analyzed for all patients. Clinical evaluation included visual analog scale (VAS) for back pain, oswestry disability index (ODI). Radiological parameters included cage height (CH), cage to disc ratio (CDR), DH change, pre and postoperative disc height (DH), foraminal height (FH), foraminal area (FA), segmental lordosis (SL). Results: In group SO (vs group P/T), surgical time, blood loss and mobilization time were 117.7± 34.1 minutes (171.8 ± 40.6 minutes, p<0.000001), 139.2 ± 82.0 ml (vs. 374.2 ± 247.7 ml, p<0.000001) and 2.7 ±1 .0 days (vs 3.9 ± 2.4 days, p<0.000001) respectively. The CH, CDR, DH change and postoperative DH, FH, FA increase were statistically significant in group SO compared to group P/T. VAS and ODI improvement were similar in both groups. Mobilization time is shorter in group SO. Total complication rate in group SO was 7% while that in group P/T was 11%. Conclusions: Simultaneous single position O-arm navigated C-arm free OLIF reduces the surgical time, blood loss, mobilization time after operation without the risk of an adverse event of intraoperative radiation to operating staff. Good indirect decompression can be achieved with this method. Clinical results were similar in both groups.