DATA SOURCES: A search of PubMed and other electronic databases comparing LARR and ORR between Jan 2000 and June 2016 was performed. Histopathological variables analyzed included; location of rectal tumors; complete and incomplete TME; positive and negative circumferential resection margins (+/-CRM); positive distal resected margins (+DRM); distance of tumor from DRM; number of lymph nodes harvested; resected specimen length; tumor size and perforated rectum.
RESULTS: Fourteen RCTs totaling 3843 patients (LARR = 2096, ORR = 1747) were analyzed. Comparable effects were noted for all these histopathological variables except for the variable perforated rectum which favored ORR.
CONCLUSIONS: LARR compares favorably to ORR for rectal cancer treatment. However, there is significantly higher risk of rectal perforation during LARR compared to ORR.
RESULTS: Escherichia coli KUB-36 was selected in this study since it has the capability to produce seven SCFA extracellularly. It produced acetic acid as the main SCFA. It is a non-exotoxin producer and hence, it is a safe gut microbiota. The IC50 values indicated that the E. coli KUB-36 metabolites treatment elicited more potent cytotoxicity effect on MCF7 breast cancer cell as compared to colon cancer and leukemia cancer cells but exhibited little cytotoxic effects on normal breast cell. Furthermore, E. coli KUB-36 metabolites and individual SCFA could affect inflammatory responses in lipopolysaccharide-induced THP-1 macrophage cells since they suppressed inflammatory cytokines IL-1β, IL-6, IL-8 and TNF-α well as compared to the control, whilst inducing anti-inflammatory cytokine IL-10 expression.
CONCLUSION: SCFA producing E. coli KUB-36 possessed vast potential as a beneficial gut microbe since it is a non-exotoxin producer that exhibited beneficial cytotoxic effects on cancer cells and elicited anti-inflammatory activity simultaneously. However, the probiotic characteristic of E. coli KUB-36 should be further elucidated using in vivo animal models.
METHODS: From a prospective database of endoscopic procedures maintained by the senior author, clinical data, imaging studies, operative charts, and videos of cases undergoing fully endoscopic retrosigmoid approach for cerebellopontine angle tumors were retrieved and analyzed. The pertinent literature was also reviewed.
RESULTS: The surgical technique of the fully endoscopic retrosigmoid approach was formulated.
CONCLUSION: The endoscopic technique has many advantages over the conventional procedures. In our hands, the technique has proven to be feasible, efficient, and minimally invasive with excellent results.