Search

Liver resection is the first curative option for most hepatic primary and secondary malignancies. However, post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) still represents a non-negligible postoperative complication, embodying the most frequent cause of hepatic-related mortality. In the absence of a specific treatment, the most effective way to deal with PHLF is its prevention through a careful preoperative assessment of future liver remnant (FLR) volume and function. Apart from the clinical score and classical criteria to define the safe limit of resectability, new imaging modalities have shown their ability to assist surgeons in planning the best operative strategy with a precise estimation of the FLR amount. New technologies leading to liver and tumor 3D reconstruction may guide the surgeon along the best resection planes combining the least liver parenchymal sacrifice with oncological appropriateness. Integration with imaging modalities, such as hepatobiliary scintigraphy, capable of estimating total and regional liver function, may bring about a decrease in postoperative complications. Magnetic resonance imaging with hepatobiliary contrast seems to be predominant since it simultaneously integrates hepatic function and volume information along with a precise characterization of the target malignancy.

Background and Objectives: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is one of the most performed surgeries worldwide. Procedure difficulty and patient outcomes depend on several factors which are not considered in the current literature, including the learning curve, generating confusing and subjective results. This study aims to create a scoring system to calculate the learning curve of LC based on hepatobiliopancreatic (HPB) experts’ opinions during an educational course. Materials and Methods: A questionnaire was submitted to the panel of experts attending the HPB course at Research Institute against Digestive Cancer-IRCAD (Strasbourg, France) from 27–29 October 2022. Experts scored the proposed variables according to their degree of importance in the learning curve using a Likert scale from 1 (not useful) to 5 (very useful). Variables were included in the composite scoring system only if more than 75% of experts ranked its relevance in the learning curve assessment ≥4. A positive or negative value was assigned to each variable based on its effect on the learning curve. Results: Fifteen experts from six different countries attended the IRCAD HPB course and filled out the questionnaire. Ten variables were finally included in the learning curve scoring system (i.e., patient body weight/BMI, patient previous open surgery, emergency setting, increased inflammatory levels, presence of anatomical bile duct variation(s), and appropriate critical view of safety (CVS) identification), which were all assigned positive values. Minor or major intraoperative injuries to the biliary tract, development of postoperative complications related to biliary injuries, and mortality were assigned negative values. Conclusions: This is the first scoring system on the learning curve of LC based on variables selected through the experts’ opinions. Although the score needs to be validated through future studies, it could be a useful tool to assess its efficacy within educational programs and surgical courses.

The relation between the gut microbiota and human health is increasingly recognized. Recently, some evidence suggested that dysbiosis of the oral microbiota may be involved in the development of digestive cancers. A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines to investigate the association between the oral microbiota and digestive cancers. Several databases including Medline, Scopus, and Embase were searched by three independent reviewers, without date restriction. Over a total of 1654 records initially identified, 28 studies (2 prospective cohort studies and 26 case-controls) were selected. They investigated oral microbiota composition in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (n = 5), gastric cancer (n = 5), colorectal cancer (n = 9), liver carcinoma (n = 2), and pancreatic cancer (n = 7). In most of the studies, oral microbiota composition was found to be different between digestive cancer patients and controls. Particularly, oral microbiota dysbiosis and specific bacteria, such as Fusobacterium nucleatum and Porphyromonas gingivalis, appeared to be associated with colorectal cancers. Current evidence suggests that differences exist in oral microbiota composition between patients with and without digestive cancers. Further studies are required to investigate and validate oral–gut microbial transmission patterns and their role in digestive cancer carcinogenesis.

This study aims to define possible predictors of the need of invasive and non-invasive ventilatory support, in addition to predictors of mortality in patients with severe thoracic trauma. Data from 832 patients admitted to our trauma center were collected from 2010 to 2017 and retrospectively analyzed. Demographic data, type of respiratory assistance, chest injuries, trauma scores and outcome were considered. Univariate analysis was performed, and binary logistic regression was applied to significant data. The injury severity score (ISS) and the revised trauma score (RTS) were both found to be predictive factors for invasive ventilation. Multivariate analysis of the anatomical injuries revealed that the association of high-severity thoracic injuries with trauma in other districts is an indicator of the need for orotracheal intubation. From the analysis of physiological parameters, values of systolic blood pressure, lactate, and Glasgow coma scale (GCS) score indicate the need for invasive ventilatory support. Predictive factors for non-invasive ventilation include: RTS, ISS, number of rib fractures and presence of hemothorax. Risk factors for death were: age over 65, the presence of bilateral rib fractures, pulmonary contusion, hemothorax and associated head trauma. In conclusion, the need for invasive ventilatory support in thoracic trauma is associated to the patient’s systemic severity. Non-invasive ventilation is a supportive treatment indicated in physiologically stable patients regardless of the severity of thoracic injury.