Search

Background: Data on the incidence and clinical relevance of gallstones in patients with suspected acute alcoholic pancreatitis are lacking and are essential to minimize the risk of recurrent acute pancreatitis. The aim of this study was to assess the incidence of gallstones and the associated rate of recurrent acute pancreatitis in patients with presumed acute alcoholic pancreatitis. Methods: Between 2008 and 2019, 23 hospitals prospectively enrolled patients with acute pancreatitis. Those diagnosed with their first episode of presumed acute alcoholic pancreatitis were included in this study. The term gallstones was used to describe the presence of cholelithiasis or biliary sludge found during imaging. The primary outcome was pancreatitis recurrence during 3 years of follow-up. Results: A total of 334 patients were eligible for inclusion, of whom 316 were included in the follow-up analysis. Gallstone evaluation, either during the index admission or during follow-up, was performed for 306 of 334 patients (91.6%). Gallstones were detected in 54 patients (17.6%), with a median time to detection of 6 (interquartile range 0–42) weeks. During follow-up, recurrent acute pancreatitis occurred in 121 of 316 patients (38.3%), with a significantly higher incidence rate for patients with gallstones compared with patients without gallstones (59% versus 34.2% respectively; P < 0.001), while more patients with gallstones had stopped drinking alcohol at the time of their first recurrence (41% versus 24% respectively; P = 0.020). Cholecystectomy was performed for 19 patients with gallstones (36%). The recurrence rate was lower for patients in the cholecystectomy group compared with patients who did receive inadequate treatment or no treatment (5/19 versus 19/34 respectively; P = 0.038). Conclusion: Gallstones were found in almost one in every five patients diagnosed with acute alcoholic pancreatitis. Gallstones were associated with a higher rate of recurrent pancreatitis, while undergoing cholecystectomy was associated with a reduction in this rate. Almost one in five patients with presumed acute alcoholic pancreatitis have an underlying biliary cause, in addition to their excessive drinking habits, and this has a negative impact on the recurrence of pancreatitis. To prevent the recurrence of pancreatitis, it is important to screen for gallstones and, if found, to perform a cholecystectomy, which is associated with a lower rate of recurrence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cholecystectomy in patients with idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP) is controversial. A randomized trial found cholecystectomy to reduce the recurrence rate of IAP but did not include preoperative endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). As EUS is effective in detecting gallstone disease, cholecystectomy may be indicated only in patients with gallstone disease. This study aimed to determine the diagnostic value of EUS in patients with IAP, and the rate of recurrent pancreatitis in patients in whom EUS could not determine the aetiology (EUS-negative IAP). Methods: This prospective multicentre cohort study included patients with a first episode of IAP who underwent outpatient EUS. The primary outcome was detection of aetiology by EUS. Secondary outcomes included adverse events after EUS, recurrence of pancreatitis, and quality of life during 1-year follow-up. Results: After screening 957 consecutive patients with acute pancreatitis from 24 centres, 105 patients with IAP were included and underwent EUS. In 34 patients (32 per cent), EUS detected an aetiology: (micro)lithiasis and biliary sludge (23.8 per cent), chronic pancreatitis (6.7 per cent), and neoplasms (2.9 per cent); 2 of the latter patients underwent pancreatoduodenectomy. During 1-year follow-up, the pancreatitis recurrence rate was 17 per cent (12 of 71) among patients with EUS-negative IAP versus 6 per cent (2 of 34) among those with positive EUS. Recurrent pancreatitis was associated with poorer quality of life. Conclusion: EUS detected an aetiology in a one-third of patients with a first episode of IAP, requiring mostly cholecystectomy or pancreatoduodenectomy. The role of cholecystectomy in patients with EUS-negative IAP remains uncertain and warrants further study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Active surveillance is being investigated as an alternative to standard surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer. It is unknown whether dysphagia persists or develops when the oesophagus is preserved after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence and severity of dysphagia during active surveillance in patients with an ongoing response. Methods: Patients who underwent active surveillance were identified from the Surgery As Needed for Oesophageal cancer ('SANO') trial. Patients without evidence of residual oesophageal cancer until at least 6 months after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were included. Study endpoints were assessed at time points that patients were cancer-free and remained cancer-free for the next 4 months. Dysphagia scores were evaluated at 6, 9, 12, and 16 months after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Scores were based on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer oesophago-gastric quality-of-life questionnaire 25 (EORTC QLQOG25) (range 0-100; no to severe dysphagia). The rate of patients with a (non-)traversable stenosis was determined based on all available endoscopy reports. Results: In total, 131 patients were included, of whom 93 (71.0 per cent) had adenocarcinoma, 93 (71.0 per cent) had a cT3-4a tumour, and 33 (25.2 per cent) had a tumour circumference of greater than 75 per cent at endoscopy; 60.8 to 71.0 per cent of patients completed questionnaires per time point after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. At all time points after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, median dysphagia scores were 0 (interquartile range 0-0). Two patients (1.5 per cent) underwent an intervention for a stenosis: one underwent successful endoscopic dilatation; and the other patient required temporary tube feeding. Notably, these patients did not participate in questionnaires. Conclusion: Dysphagia and clinically relevant stenosis are uncommon during active surveillance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Centralization of pancreatic cancer surgery aims to improve postoperative outcomes. Consequently, patients with pancreatic cancer may undergo pancreatic surgery in an expert centre and adjuvant chemotherapy in a local hospital (network treatment). The aim of this study was to assess whether network treatment has an impact on time to chemotherapy, failure to complete adjuvant chemotherapy, and survival. Second, whether these parameters varied between pancreatic networks was studied. Methods This retrospective study included all patients diagnosed with non-metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent pancreatic surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy, registered in the Netherlands Cancer Registry (2015–2020). Time to chemotherapy was defined as the time between surgery and the start of adjuvant chemotherapy. Completion of adjuvant chemotherapy was defined as the receipt of 12 cycles of FOLFIRINOX or six cycles of gemcitabine. Analysis was performed with linear mixed models and multilevel logistic regression models. Cox regression analyses were performed for survival. Results In total, 1074 patients were included. Network treatment was observed in 468 patients (43.6 per cent) and was not associated with longer time to chemotherapy (0.77 days, standard error (s.e.) 1.14, P = 0.501), failure to complete adjuvant chemotherapy (odds ratio (OR) = 1.140, 95 per cent c.i. 0.86 to 1.52, P = 0.349), and overall survival (hazards ratio (HR) = 1.04, 95 per cent c.i. 0.88 to 1.22, P = 0.640). Significant variation between the networks was observed for time to chemotherapy (range 40.5–63 days, P < 0.0001) and completion of adjuvant chemotherapy (range 19–52 per cent, P = 0.030). Adjusted for case mix, time to chemotherapy significantly differed between networks. Conclusion In this nationwide analysis, network treatment in patients with resected pancreatic cancer was not associated with longer time to chemotherapy, failure to complete adjuvant chemotherapy, and worse survival. Significant variation between pancreatic cancer networks was found for time to chemotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Anti-tumour necrosis factor [anti-TNF] treatment was demonstrated to have disease-modifying abilities in inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]. In this study, we aimed to determine the effect of anti-TNF treatment timing on IBD disease complications and mucosal healing [MH]. Methods: The following IBD-related complications were tested in relation to timing of anti-TNF therapy start in newly diagnosed IBD patients [n = 413]: fistula formation, abscess formation, extraintestinal manifestations [EIM], surgery, referral to academic centre, and MH. Results: A total of 85 patients [21%] received anti-TNF (66 Crohn's disease [CD], 16 ulcerative colitis [UC], 3 inflammatory bowel disease unclassified [IBDU]) of whom 57% [48 patients] were treated < 16 months after diagnosis. Patients receiving anti-TNF early [< 16 months] did not differ from patients receiving anti-TNF late [> 16 months] regarding gender, age, smoking status, and familial IBD. More importantly, patients receiving anti-TNF early did not suffer less IBD-related complications during followup as compared with patients started on anti-TNF late, nor was more MH observed. Similar results were obtained when anti-TNF treated patient were stratified more stringently, ie < 12 months [40 patients] vs >2 4 months [24 patients]. Cox regression analysis showed no beneficial correlations between anti-TNF timing and IBD-related complications. Anti-TNF treated patients achieving MH were 11 times less likely to develop EIMs compared with patients who did not achieved MH while on anti-TNF. Conclusions: This study was unable to confirm a benefit of earlier anti-TNF treatment on IBD disease complications. This could be explained by more aggressive treatment earlier in disease, resulting in fewer IBD complications. However, it seems more likely that inappropriate selection of patients for therapy leads to suboptimal treatment and subsequently suboptimal outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]