PURPOSE: In patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM) from gastric cancer (GC), chemotherapy is the treatment of choice. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) are still being debated. This randomized, controlled, open-label, multicenter phase III trial (EudraCT 2006-006088-22; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02158988 ) explored the impact on overall survival (OS) of HIPEC after CRS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients with GC and histologically proven PM were randomly assigned (1:1) to perioperative chemotherapy and CRS alone (CRS-A) or CRS plus HIPEC (CRS + H). HIPEC comprised mitomycin C 15 mg/m² and cisplatin 75 mg/m² in 5 L of saline perfused for 60 minutes at 42°C. The primary end point was OS; secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), other distant metastasis-free survival (MFS), and safety. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: Between March 2014 and June 2018, 105 patients were randomly assigned (53 patients to CRS-A and 52 patients to CRS + H). The trial stopped prematurely because of slow recruitment. In 55 patients, treatment stopped before CRS mainly due to disease progression/death. Median OS was the same for both groups (CRS + H, 14.9 [97.2% CI, 8.7 to 17.7] months v CRS-A, 14.9 [97.2% CI, 7.0 to 19.4] months; P = .1647). The PFS was 3.5 months (95% CI, 3.0 to 7.0) in the CRS-A group and 7.1 months (95% CI, 3.7 to 10.5; P = .047) in the CRS + H group. The CRS + H group showed better MFS (10.2 months [95% CI, 7.7 to 14.7] v CRS-A, 9.2 months [95% CI, 6.8 to 11.5]; P = .0286). The incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) was similar between groups (CRS-A, 38.1% v CRS + H, 43.6%; P = .79). CONCLUSION: This study showed no OS difference between CRS + H and CRS-A. PFS and MFS were significantly better in the CRS + H group, which needs further exploration. HIPEC did not increase AEs.

The aim of the study was to establish a live/dead qPCR with propidium monoazide (PMA) that can quantitatively differentiate between viable/non-viable microorganisms in dental hard tissues. Human premolars (n = 88) were prepared with nickel–titanium instruments and incubated with E. faecalis (21 d). Subsequently, the bacteria in half of the teeth were devitalized by heat inactivation (100 °C, 2 h). The following parameters were tested: PMA concentrations at 0 µmol (control), 50 µmol, 100 µmol, and 200 µmol; PMA incubation times of 30 min and 60 min, and blue light treatment for 30 min and 60 min. The teeth were ground using a cryomill and the bacterial DNA was quantified using qPCR, ANOVA, and p = 0.05. The qPCR of the control group detected a similar number of avital 9.94 × 10⁶ and vital 1.61 × 10⁷ bacterial cells. The use of PMA inhibited the amplification of DNA from non-viable cells during qPCR. As a result, the best detection of avital bacteria was achieved with the following PMA parameters: (concentration, incubation time, blue light treatment) 200-30-30; 5.53 × 10⁴ (avital) and 1.21 × 10^0.7 (vital). The live/dead qPCR method using PMA treatment is suitable for the differentiation and quantification of viable/non-viable microorganisms in dentin, as well as to evaluate the effectiveness of different preparation procedures and antimicrobial irrigants in other biological hard substances.

The removal of bacterial infections within the root canal system is still a challenge. Therefore, the cleansing effect of established and new irrigation-protocols (IP) containing silver diamine fluoride (SDF) 3.8% on the whole root canal system was analyzed using quantitative PCR (qPCR) and 4′,6-diamidino-phenylindole-(DAPI)-staining. Extracted human premolars were instrumented up to F2 (ProTaper Gold) under NaCl 0.9% irrigation and incubated with Enterococcus faecalis for 42 days. Subsequently, different ultrasonically agitated IP were applied to the roots: control (no irrigation), 1. NaOCl 3%, EDTA 20%, CHX 2%, 2. NaOCl 3%, EDTA 20%, 3. NaOCl 3%, EDTA 20%, SDF 3.8%, 4. SDF 3.8%, and 5. NaCl 0.9%. One half of the root was investigated fluorescent-microscopically with DAPI. The other half was grinded in a cryogenic mill and the bacterial DNA was quantified with qPCR. The qPCR results showed a statistically significant reduction of bacteria after the application of IP 1, 2, and 3 compared to the control group. While IP 4 lead to a bacterial reduction which was not significant, IP 5 showed no reduction. These data corresponded with DAPI staining. With qPCR a new molecular-biological method for the investigation of the complete root canal system was implemented. The novel IP 3 had an equally good cleansing effect as the already established IP.

Background: The purpose of this randomized trial is to evaluate the early removal of postoperative drains after robot-assisted minimally invasive oesophagectomy (RAMIE). Evidence is lacking about feasibility, associated pain, recovery, and morbidity. Methods/design: This is a randomized controlled multicentric trial involving 72 patients undergoing RAMIE. Patients will be allocated into two groups. The “intervention” group consists of 36 patients. In this group, abdominal and chest drains are removed 3 h after the end of surgery in the absence of contraindications. The control group consists of 36 patients with conventional chest drain management. These drains are removed during the further postoperative course according to a standard algorithm. The primary objective is to investigate whether postoperative pain measured by NRS on the second postoperative day can be significantly reduced in the intervention group. Secondary endpoints are the intensity of pain during the first week, analgesic use, number of postoperative chest X-ray and CT scans, interventions, postoperative mobilization (steps per day as measured with an activity tracker), postoperative morbidity and mortality. Discussion: Until now, there have been no trials investigating different intraoperative chest drain strategies in patients undergoing RAMIE for oesophageal cancer with regard to perioperative complications until discharge. Minimally invasive approaches combined with enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols lower morbidity but still include the insertion of chest drains. Reduction and early removal have been proposed after pulmonary surgery but not after RAMIE. The study concept is based on our own experience and the promising current results of the RAMIE procedure. Therefore, the presented randomized controlled trial will provide statistical evidence of the effectiveness and feasibility of the “drainless” RAMIE. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05553795. Registered on 23 September 2022.

Objectives: This pilot study aimed to carry out preliminary tests of the removability of an artificial biofilm equivalent (ABE) and to verify the reproducibility of the ABE testing protocol for a planned main study.Background: There is a lack of data to develop suitable artificial biofilm substitutes, which may be helpful to perform denture hygiene education and to carry out in vitro examinations of oral hygiene products.Materials and Methods: This single‐group, prospective, longitudinal, interventional pilot study was conducted in Dresden (Germany) from February until December 2020. Participants were recruited who wore fully functional upper complete dentures. Denture biofilm was grown on acrylic specimens by wearing dentures for 12 h and 36 h using intraoral appliances. Acrylic specimens were coated with ABEs of three compositions: chitosan (ChS) 0.3 g, methylcellulose (MC) 1.7 g; ChS 0.2 g, MC 1.8 g; ChS 0.1 g, MC 1.9 g (labelled 1.7MC, 1.8MC and 1.9MC, respectively). All specimens underwent standardised mechanical brushing. The percentages of remaining biofilm (POB) were measured.Results: Thirty‐one participants were prescreened, and eight (26%) were included. The appliances were well tolerated, and biofilm was collected. ABE was prepared and brushed as planned. Three and six brushing strokes were needed to remove 12‐h and 36‐h natural denture biofilm, respectively. Correspondingly, three brushing strokes were needed to remove 1.9MC ABE and six brushing strokes to remove 1.8MC and 1.7MC ABE. A reproducibility of ABE removal was indicated.Conclusion: The removability of ABE and the ABE testing protocol were feasible and reproducible for conducting the future main study.