4.6 Article

Pyogenic liver abscesses associated with nonmetastatic colorectal cancers: An increasing problem in Eastern Asia

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 18, 期 23, 页码 2948-2955

出版社

BAISHIDENG PUBL GRP CO LTD
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i23.2948

关键词

Colorectal cancer; Pyogenic liver abscess; Etiology; Microbiology; Treatment

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30872482, 81072051]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

AIM: To elaborate the clinicopathologic features of colorectal cancer-related pyogenic liver abscess (PLA). METHODS: Reported cases of colorectal cancer-related PLAs were collected from the literature published up to October 2011 and evaluated for their clinicopathologic features. Data of collected cases included demographics, clinical presentation, microbial findings and treatment. Categorical variables were compared by chi(2) analysis and continuous variables were evaluated using Student's t test. RESULTS: A total 96 cases of colorectal cancer-related PLA were collected from the previous literature. Most patients (60%) were male and 40% cases occurred in the age group of 61-70 years. Apart from some special types of PLA, there were significant differences in the microbiological spectrum between Eastern Asia and non-Eastern Asian countries, which implied different risk factors and courses of the disease. Gram negative bacteria especially Klebsiella pneumoniae (K. pneumoniae) PLA was predominant in Eastern Asia (80.0%) in contrast to non-Eastern Asian countries (P < 0.01). Meanwhile, most of the Eastern Asian patients exhibited smaller size of liver abscess and atypical presentation. Sigmoid colon and rectum (72.73%) were the main sites of tumor in Eastern Asian patients, whereas tumor sites were uneven among most of the non-Easter Asian PLA patients. CONCLUSION: K. pneumoniae PLA was strongly associated with colorectal cancer, especially those occurring in sigmoid colon and rectum, in elderly Eastern Asian male patients. (C) 2012 Baishideng. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据