Search

Background Insulinomas are found in 10–15 per cent of patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) and lead to life‐threatening hypoglycaemia. Surgical outcome and the optimal surgical strategy for MEN1‐related insulinoma are unknown. Methods Patients with MEN1‐related insulinomas were identified in 46 centres in Europe and North America between 1990 and 2016. Insulinomas were considered localized if the lesion was in the pancreatic head or body/tail. Patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours throughout the pancreas were suspected of having multifocal insulinoma. The primary outcome was postoperative hypoglycaemia, defined as persistent hypoglycaemia, or recurrent hypoglycaemia caused by a new insulinoma or insulin‐producing liver metastases. Hypoglycaemia‐free survival was estimated by the Kaplan–Meier method. Results Ninety‐six patients underwent resection for MEN1‐related insulinoma. Sixty‐three and 33 patients had localized and multifocal insulinomas respectively. After a median follow‐up of 8 (range 1–22) years, one patient (1 per cent) had persistent disease and six (6 per cent) had developed recurrent disease, of whom four had a new insulinoma. The 10‐year hypoglycaemia‐free survival rate was 91 (95 per cent c.i. 80 to 96) per cent. Of those with localized disease, 46 patients underwent pancreatic resection and 17 enucleation. One of these patients had persistent disease and one developed recurrent insulinoma. Among patients with multifocal disease, three developed new insulinomas and two developed insulin‐producing liver metastases. Conclusion Surgery for MEN1‐related insulinoma is more successful than previously thought., In this cohort of 96 patients with resected multiple endocrine neoplasia 1 (MEN1)‐related insulinomas, seven patients (7 per cent) developed postoperative persistent or recurrent hypoglycaemia after a median follow‐up of 8 years. The 10‐year hypoglycaemia‐free survival rate was 91 (95 per cent c.i. 80 to 96) per cent. For patients with localized insulinoma, enucleation seems the preferred procedure. PPPD, pylorus‐preserving pancreatoduodenectomy. Outcomes good

Background Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy decreases time to functional recovery compared with open distal pancreatectomy, but the cost-effectiveness and impact on disease-specific quality of life have yet to be established. Methods The LEOPARD trial randomized patients to minimally invasive (robot-assisted or laparoscopic) or open distal pancreatectomy in 14 Dutch centres between April 2015 and March 2017. Use of hospital healthcare resources, complications and disease-specific quality of life were recorded up to 1 year after surgery. Unit costs of hospital healthcare resources were determined, and cost-effectiveness and cost–utility analyses were performed. Primary outcomes were the costs per day earlier functional recovery and per quality-adjusted life-year. Results All 104 patients who had a distal pancreatectomy (48 minimally invasive and 56 open) in the trial were included in this study. Patients who underwent a robot-assisted procedure were excluded from the cost analysis. Total medical costs were comparable after laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy (mean difference €–427 (95 per cent bias-corrected and accelerated confidence interval €–4700 to 3613; P = 0·839). Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy was shown to have a probability of at least 0·566 of being more cost-effective than the open approach at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €0 per day of earlier recovery, and a probability of 0·676 per additional quality-adjusted life-year at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €80 000. There were no significant differences in cosmetic satisfaction scores (median 9 (i.q.r. 5·75–10) versus 7 (4–8·75); P = 0·056) and disease-specific quality of life after minimally invasive (laparoscopic and robot-assisted procedures) versus open distal pancreatectomy. Conclusion Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy was at least as cost-effective as open distal pancreatectomy in terms of time to functional recovery and quality-adjusted life-years. Cosmesis and quality of life were similar in the two groups 1 year after surgery.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The European Liver Transplant Registry (ELTR) has collected data on liver transplant procedures performed in Europe since 1968.APPROACH & RESULTS: Over a 50 years period (1968 - 2017), clinical and laboratory data were collected from 133 transplant centers and analyzed retrospectively (16,641 liver transplants in 14,515 children). Data were analyzed according to 3 successive periods (A: before 2000, B: 2000 to 2009, and C: since 2010), studying donor and graft characteristics, and graft outcome. The use of living donors steadily increased from A to C [A: n=296 (7%), B: n=1131 (23%) and C: n=1985 (39%); P=0.0001]. Overall, the 5-year graft survival rate has improved from 65% in group A to 75% in group B (pCONCLUSIONS: Pediatric liver transplantation has reached a high efficacy as a cure, or treatment, for severe liver disease in infants and children. Grafts that survived the first year had a half-life time similar to standard human half-life. Transplantation before or after puberty may be the pivot-point for lower long-term outcome in children. Further studies are necessary to re-visit some old concepts regarding transplant benefit (survival time) for small children, the role of recipient pathophysiology versus graft aging, and risk at transition to adult age.

Background Recently, the first randomized trials comparing minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) for non-malignant and malignant disease showed a 2-day reduction in time to functional recovery after MIDP. However, for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), concerns have been raised regarding the oncologic safety (i.e., radical resection, lymph node retrieval, and survival) of MIDP, as compared to ODP. Therefore, a randomized controlled trial comparing MIDP and ODP in PDAC regarding oncological safety is warranted. We hypothesize that the microscopically radical resection (R0) rate is non-inferior for MIDP, as compared to ODP. Methods/design DIPLOMA is an international randomized controlled, patient- and pathologist-blinded, non-inferiority trial performed in 38 pancreatic centers in Europe and the USA. A total of 258 patients with an indication for elective distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy because of proven or highly suspected PDAC of the pancreatic body or tail will be randomly allocated to MIDP (laparoscopic or robot-assisted) or ODP in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome is the microscopically radical resection margin (R0, distance tumor to pancreatic transection and posterior margin ≥ 1 mm), which is assessed using a standardized histopathology assessment protocol. The sample size is calculated with the following assumptions: 5% one-sided significance level (α), 80% power (1-β), expected R0 rate in the open group of 58%, expected R0 resection rate in the minimally invasive group of 67%, and a non-inferiority margin of 7%. Secondary outcomes include time to functional recovery, operative outcomes (e.g., blood loss, operative time, and conversion to open surgery), other histopathology findings (e.g., lymph node retrieval, perineural- and lymphovascular invasion), postoperative outcomes (e.g., clinically relevant complications, hospital stay, and administration of adjuvant treatment), time and site of disease recurrence, survival, quality of life, and costs. Follow-up will be performed at the outpatient clinic after 6, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months postoperatively. Discussion The DIPLOMA trial is designed to investigate the non-inferiority of MIDP versus ODP regarding the microscopically radical resection rate of PDAC in an international setting. Trial registration ISRCTN registry ISRCTN44897265. Prospectively registered on 16 April 2018.

Background: Oncological survival after resection of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (panNEN) is highly variable depending on various factors. Risk stratification with preoperatively available parameters could guide decision-making in multidisciplinary treatment concepts. C-reactive Protein (CRP) is linked to inferior survival in several malignancies. This study assesses CRP within a novel risk score predicting histology and outcome after surgery for sporadic non-functional panNENs. Methods: A retrospective multicenter study with national exploration and international validation. CRP and other factors associated with overall survival (OS) were evaluated by multivariable cox-regression to create a clinical risk score (CRS). Predictive values regarding OS, disease-specific survival (DSS), and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were assessed by time-dependent receiver-operating characteristics. Results: Overall, 364 patients were included. Median CRP was significantly higher in patients &gt, 60 years, G3, and large tumors. In multivariable analysis, CRP was the strongest preoperative factor for OS in both cohorts. In the combined cohort, CRP (cut-off &ge, 0.2mg/dL, hazard-ratio (HR):3.87), metastases (HR:2.80), and primary tumor size &ge, 3.0cm (HR:1.83) showed a significant association with OS. A CRS incorporating these variables was associated with postoperative histological grading, T category, nodal positivity, and 90-day morbidity/mortality. Time-dependent area-under-the-curve at 60 months for OS, DSS, and RFS was 69%, 77%, and 67%, respectively (all p &lt, 0.001), and the inclusion of grading further improved the predictive potential (75%, 84%, and 78%, respectively). Conclusions: CRP is a significant marker of unfavorable oncological characteristics in panNENs. The proposed internationally validated CRS predicts histological features and patient survival.