Browsing by Author "Balik, Emre"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4

Dealing with the gray zones in the management of gastric cancer: The consensus statement of the Istanbul Group
(AVES, 2019-01-01) Aytac, Erman; Aslan, Fatih; Cicek, Bahattin; Erdamar, Sibel; Gurses, Bengi; Guven, Koray; Falay, Okan; Karahasanoglu, Tayfun; Selcukbiricik, Fatih; Selek, Ugur; Atalar, Banu; Balik, Emre; Tozun, Nurdan; Rozanes, Izzet; Arican, Ali; Hamzaoglu, Ismail; Baca, Bilgi; Mandell, Nil Molinas; Saruc, Murat; Goksel, Suha; Demir, Gokhan; Agaoglu, Fulya; Yakicier, Cengiz; Ozbek, Ugur; Ozben, Volkan; Ozyar, Enis; Guner, Ahmet Levent; Er, Ozlem; Kaban, Kerim; Bolukbasi, Yasemin; Bugra, Dursun; Ahishali, Emel; Asian, Fatih; Boz-bas, Aysun; Hamzaoglu, Hulya; Karaman, Ahmet; Kucukmetin, Nurten Turkel; Vardareli, Eser Kutsal; Onder, Fatih Oguz; Sisman, Gurhan; Tiftikci, Arzu; Unal, Hakan Umit; Yapali, Suna; Acar, Sami; Agcaoglu, Orhan; Aghayeva, Afag; Akyuz, Ali; Atasoy, Deniz; Batik, Emre; Bayraktar, Ilknur Erenler; Bayram, Onur; Bilgic, Cagri; Bilgin, Ismail Ahmet; Can, Ugur; Dulgeroglu, Onur; Durukan, Ugur; Gencosmanoglu, Rasim; Gonenc, Murat; Gurbuz, Bulent; Kaya, Mesut; Omarov, Nail; Ozben, Volkan; Ozgur, Ilker; Ozoran, Emre; Sobutay, Erman; Uras, Cihan; Uymaz, Derya; Zenger, Serkan; Ozbek, Ugur; Yakicier, M. Cengiz; Afsar, Cigdem Usul; Bozkurt, Mustafa; Demir, Atakan; Er, Ozlem; Kanitez, Metin; Korkmaz, Taner; Mandel, Nil Molina; Mert, Askhan Guven; Ozer, Leyla; Sonmez, Ozlem; Tunali, Didem; Uluc, Basak Oyan; Yazar, Aziz; Yildiz, Ibrahim; Demirkurek, Cengiz; Guner, Ahmet Levent; Vardareli, Erkan; Armutlu, Aye; Baba, Fisun; Ersozlu, Ilker; Kapran, Yersu; Sahin, Davut; Abacioglu, Mehmet Ufuk; Bese, Nuran; Durankus, Nilufer Kilic; Gural, Zeynep; Ozyar, Enis; Sengoz, Meric; Sezen, Duygu; Caliskan, Can; Guven, Koray; Karaaslan, Ercan; Kizilkaya, Esref; Suleyman, Erdogan; Grp, Istanbul
The geographical location and differences in tumor biology significantly change the management of gastric cancer. The prevalence of gastric cancer ranks fifth and sixth among men and women, respectively, in Turkey. The international guidelines from the Eastern and Western countries fail to manage a considerable amount of inconclusive issues in the management of gastric cancer. The uncertainties lead to significant heterogeneities in clinical practice, lack of homogeneous data collection, and subsequently, diverse outcomes. The physicians who are professionally involved in the management of gastric cancer at two institutions in Istanbul, Turkey, organized a consensus meeting to address current problems and plan feasible, logical, measurable, and collective solutions in their clinical practice for this challenging disease. The evidence-based data and current guidelines were reviewed. The gray zones in the management of gastric cancer were determined in the first session of this consensus meeting. The second session was constructed to discuss, vote, and ratify the ultimate decisions. The identification of the T stage, the esophagogastric area, imaging algorithm for proper staging and follow-up, timing and patient selection for neoadjuvant treatment, and management of advanced and metastatic disease have been accepted as the major issues in the management of gastric cancer. The recommendations are presented with the percentage of supporting votes in the results section with related data.
Minimally invasive versus open surgery for gastric cancer in Turkish population
(TURKISH SURGICAL ASSOC, 2021-01-01) Agcaoglu, Orhan; Sengun, Berke; Tarcan, Serim; Aytac, Erman; Bayram, Onur; Zenger, Serkan; Benlice, Cigdem; Ozben, Volkan; Balik, Emre; Baca, Bilgi; Hamzaoglu, Ismail; Karahasanoglu, Tayfun; Bugra, Dursun
Objective: In this study, it was aimed to compare short-term outcomes of minimally invasive and open surgery for gastric cancer in the Turkish population carrying both European and Asian characteristics. Material and Methods: Short-term (30-day) outcomes of the patients undergoing minimally invasive and open gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma between January 2013 and December 2017 were compared. Patient demographics, history of previous abdominal surgery, comorbidities, short-term perioperative outcomes and histopathological results were evaluated between the study groups. Results: There were a total of 179 patients. Fifty (28\%) patients underwent minimally invasive {[}laparoscopic (n= 19) and robotic (n= 31)] and 129 (72\%) patients underwent open surgery. There were no differences between the two groups in terms of age, sex, body mass index and ASA scores. While operative time was significantly longer in the minimally invasive surgery group (p< 0.0001), length of hospital stay and operative morbidity were comparable between the groups. Conclusion: While both laparoscopic and robotic surgery is safe and feasible in terms of short-term outcomes in selected patients, long operating time and increased cost are the major drawbacks of the robotic technique preventing its widespread use.
Optimizing the Personalized Care for the Management of Rectal Cancer: A Consensus Statement
(AVES, 2022-01-01) Aytac, Erman; Ozer, Leyla; Baca, Bilgi; Balik, Emre; Kapran, Yersu; Taskin, Orhun Cig; Uluc, Basak Oyan; Abacioglu, Mehmet Ufuk; Gonenc, Murat; Bolukbasi, Yasemin; Cil, Barbaros E.; Baran, Bulent; Aygun, Cem; Yildiz, Mehmet Erdem; Unal, Kemal; Erkol, Burcak; Yalti, Tunc; Ozbek, Ugur; Attila, Tan; Tozun, Nurdan; Gurses, Bengi; Erdamar, Sibel; Er, Ozlem; Bese, Nuran; Bilge, Orhan; Ceyhan, Guralp Onur; Mandel, Nil Molinas; Selek, Ugur; Yakicier, Cengiz; Karabey, Hulya Kayserili; Saruc, Murat; Ozben, Volkan; Esen, Eren; Ozoran, Emre; Vardareli, Erkan; Guner, Levent; Hamzaoglu, Ismail; Bugra, Dursun; Karahasanoglu, Tayfun; Grp, Istanbul
Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in Turkey. The current guidelines do not provide sufficient information to cover all aspects of the management of rectal cancer. Although treatment has been standardized in terms of the basic principles of neoadjuvant, surgical, and adjuvant therapy, uncertainties in the management of rectal cancer may lead to significant differences in clinical practice. In order to clarify these uncertainties, a consensus program was constructed with the participation of the physicians from the Acibadem Mehmet Ali Aydinlar and Koc Universities. This program included the physicians from the departments of general surgery, gastroenterology, pathology, radiology, nuclear medicine, medical oncology, radiation oncology, and medical genetics. The gray zones in the management of rectal cancer were determined by reviewing the evidence-based data and current guidelines before the meeting. Topics to be discussed consisted of diagnosis, staging, surgical treatment for the primary disease, use of neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment, management of recurrent disease, screening, follow-up, and genetic counseling. All those topics were discussed under supervision of a presenter and a chair with active participation of related physicians. The consensus text was structured by centralizing the decisions based on the existing data.
Totally Robotic Versus Totally Laparoscopic Surgery for Rectal Cancer
(LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS \& WILKINS, 2018-01-01) Esen, Eren; Aytac, Erman; Agcaoglu, Orhan; Zenger, Serkan; Balik, Emre; Baca, Bilgi; Hamzaoglu, Ismail; Karahasanoglu, Tayfun; Bugra, Dursun
In this study, perioperative and short-term postoperative results of totally robotic versus totally laparoscopic rectal resections for cancer were investigated in a comparative manner by considering risk factors including obesity, male sex, and neoadjuvant treatment. In addition to overall comparison, the impact of sex, obesity (body mass index >= 30 kg/m(2)), and neoadjuvant treatment was assessed in patients who had a total mesorectal excision (TME). Operative time was longer in the robotic group (P<0.001). In obese patients who underwent TME, the mean length of hospital stay was shorter (7 +/- 2 vs. 9 +/- 4 d, P=0.01), and the mean number of retrieved lymph nodes was higher (30 +/- 19 vs. 23 +/- 10, P=0.02) in the robotic group. Totally robotic and totally laparoscopic surgery appears to be providing similar outcomes in patients undergoing rectal resections for cancer. Selective use of a robot may have a role for improving postoperative outcomes in some challenging cases including obese patients undergoing TME.