Background and study aims Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for duodenal tumors results in a high delayed perforation rate due to the thinness of the duodenal wall. In most cases with perforation after duodenal ESD, additional surgery is needed due to severe peritonitis. A newly developed procedure, laparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery for duodenal tumors (D-LECS), may help to avoid perforation after ESD. In our institution, patients with superficial non-ampullary duodenal epithelial tumors (SNADET) smaller than 50 mm which could not have en-bloc resection by endoscopic mucosal resection were treated with D-LECS. After a laparoscopic exposure of anterior duodenal wall of second portion, ESD was performed. Laparoscopic suturing from the serosal side of ESD site was performed for reinforcement. There were neither postoperative leakage nor other complications. Therefore, D-LECS can be performed safely and prevent perforation after ESD for SNADET. D-LECS could be selected as a treatment for SNADET which can be cured by ESD.

Although acute appendicitis is a common disease, retroperitoneal abscesses are rarely observed. Here, we report a case consisting of a psoas abscess and cutaneous fistula caused by appendicitis. The patient was a 56-year-old male who was introduced to our institution due to an intractable right psoas abscess. Imaging tests had been performed over the previous 3 years; however, clinicians could not find the origin of the abscess and failed to resolve the problem. A successful operation was performed via a laparoscopic approach, and 17 mo have passed without recurrence. The advantage of laparoscopic surgery is well understood in cases of appendicitis with abscesses. However, the indication for laparoscopic approach is not clear for retroperitoneal abscesses. From our experience, we can conclude that appendicitis with retroperitoneal abscesses can be managed and treated using a laparoscopic approach.

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and lateral pelvic lymph node (LPLN) dissection (LPLD) based on pretreatment imaging are performed to improve oncological outcomes at our institution. However, the advantage of LPLD following preoperative CRT in advanced rectal cancer remains unclear. The objective of the present study was to assess the validity of this approach. Thirty-two patients with advanced rectal cancer were included in the study. All patients were treated with preoperative CRT and curative operation. Of these, 16 patients who were treated between August 2005 and June 2008 underwent LPLD on both sides (LPLD group). Sixteen patients who were treated between July 2008 and January 2013 underwent LPLD only on the side with suspected LPLN metastasis determined by pretreatment imaging; in cases without LPLN metastasis, only total mesorectal excision was performed (limited-LPLD group). The overall survival and relapse-free survival between the LPLD and the limited-LPLD groups were compared. Preoperative CRT was able to lower clinical lymph node status in 50% of the cases. In addition, pathological lymph node status did not exceed the pretreatment clinical lymph node status stage in the LPLD group. There were no differences in the overall survival and relapse-free survival between the two groups (P=0.729 and P=0.874, respectively). We conclude that multi-imaging studies have a very low risk of overlooking pathologically positive LPLN metastases. Therefore, limited LPLD is a feasible strategy for patients with advanced rectal cancer and suspicious LPLN metastases based on pretreatment imaging.