Search

Background Aortopulmonary collateral flow is considered to have significant impact on the outcome of patients with single ventricle circulation and total cavopulmonary connection (TCPC). There is little information on collateral flow during exercise. Purpose To quantify aortopulmonary collateral flow at rest and during continuous submaximal exercise in clinical patients doing well with TCPC. Study type Prospective, case controlled. Population Thirteen patients with TCPC (17 (11-37) years) and 13 age and sex-matched healthy controls (18 (11-38) years). Field strength 1.5T; free breathing; phase sensitive gradient echo sequence. Assessment Blood flow in the ascending and descending aorta and superior vena cava were measured at rest and during continuous submaximal physical exercise in patients and controls. Systemic blood flow (Qs ) was assumed to be represented by the sum of flow in the superior caval vein (Qsvc ) and the descending aorta (QAoD ) at the diaphragm level. Aortopulmonary collateral flow (Qcoll ) was calculated by subtracting Qs from flow in the ascending aorta (QAoA ). Statistics Mann-Whitney U-test and Wilcoxon test for comparison between groups and between rest and exercise. Results Absolute collateral flow in TCPC patients at rest was 0.4 l/min/m2 (-0.1-1.2), corresponding to 14% (-2-42) of Qs . Collateral flow did not change during exercise (difference -0.01 (-0.7-1.0) l/min/m2 , P = 0.97). TCPC patients had significantly lower Qs at rest (2.5 (1.6-4.1) vs. 3.5 (2.6-4.8) l/min/m2 , P = 0.001) and during submaximal exercise (3.2 (2.0-6.0) vs. 4.8 (3.3-6.9) l/min/m2 , P = 0.001), compared to healthy controls. The increase in Qs with exercise was also significantly lower in patients than in healthy controls (median 0.6 vs. 1.2 l/min/m2 , P Data conclusion Clinical patients doing well with TCPC have significant aortopulmonary collateral flow at rest (14% of Qs ) compared to healthy controls, which does not change during submaximal exercise. Level of evidence 2 Technical Efficacy: Stage 3 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;47:1509-1516.

Obstructive jaundice is a common presenting symptom among patients with pancreatic cancer. While benefits of preoperative biliary drainage have been suggested by previous studies, recent evidence has shown no significant improvements of preoperative biliary drainage on the postoperative outcome but rather an increase of complications. There is no clear consensus on whether to treat malignant obstructive jaundice with preoperative biliary drainage prior to operative intervention or to proceed directly to resection. Thus, our aim was to elucidate the impact of preoperative biliary drainage of obstructive jaundice due to malignant pancreatic head tumors on postoperative morbidity and mortality.We conducted a meta-analysis in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines and carried out a systematic search of medical databases. The results were analyzed according to predefined criteria. We pooled the incidence of overall complications, wound infection, pancreatic fistula, intra-abdominal abscess, and death within the perioperative time period.We initially identified 1,816 studies, and 25 of these (22 retrospective studies, 3 randomized controlled trials) were finally included in the analysis with a total number of 6,214 patients. Analysis revealed an increased incidence of overall complications (odds ratio: 1.40; 95% confidence interval: 1.14-1.72; P = .002) and wound infections (odds ratio: 1.94; 95% confidence interval: 1.48-2.53; P .00001) in patients receiving preoperative biliary drainage compared to operative intervention first. Mortality, incidence of pancreatic fistula, or intra-abdominal abscess formation were not affected by preoperative biliary drainage.Preoperative biliary drainage does not have a beneficial effect on postoperative outcome. The increase of postoperative overall complications and wound infections urges for precise indications for preoperative biliary drainage and against routine preoperative biliary decompression.

Background Neoadjuvant therapy may increase the rate of radical tumour resection in patients with pancreatic cancer. Its impact on tumour recurrence has not been investigated fully. This study aimed to assess the impact of neoadjuvant therapy on patterns of recurrence. Methods A systematic review was performed of articles identified through the PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Ovid and Google Scholar databases that analysed the relationship between neoadjuvant therapy and recurrence published to January 2016. The main endpoint was overall tumour recurrence. Other endpoints included local recurrence, any kind of distant, hepatic, pulmonary or peritoneal metastasis. Results A total of 4257 citations were reviewed. Twelve observational studies comprising 1365 patients were analysed. Neoadjuvant therapy significantly reduced the risk of overall (risk ratio (RR) 0·82, 95 per cent c.i. 0·74 to 0·90; P

Background Pancreatic fistula/PF is the most frequent and feared complication after distal pancreatectomy/DP. However, the safest technique of pancreatic stump closure remains an ongoing debate. Here, we aimed to compare the safety of different pancreatic stump closure techniques for preventing PF during DP. Methods We performed a PRISMA-based meta-analysis of all relevant studies that compared at least two techniques of stump closure during DP with regard to PF rates/PFR. We further performed a retrospective analysis of our institutional PFR in correlation with stump closure techniques. Results 8301 studies were initially identified. From these, ten randomized controlled trials/RCTs, eleven prospective and 59 retrospective studies were eligible. Stapler closure (26%vs.31%, OR:0.73, p = 0.02), combination of stapler and suture (30%vs.33%, OR:0.70, p = 0.05), or stump anastomosis (14%vs.28%, OR:0.51, p = 0.02) were associated with lower PFR than suture closure alone. Spleen preservation/splenectomy, or laparoscopic/open DP, TachoSil®, fibrin-like glue-application, or bioabsorbable-stapler-reinforcements (Seamguard®) did not influence PFR after DP. In contrast, autologous patches (falciform ligament/seromuscular patches) resulted in lower PFR than no patch application (21.9%vs.25,8%, OR:0.60, p = 0.006). In our institution, the major three techniques of stump closure resulted in comparable PFR (suture:27%, stapler:29%, or combination:24%). However, selective suturing/clipping of the main pancreatic duct during pancreatic stump closure prevented severe PF (p = 0.02). Conclusion After DP, stapler closure, pancreatic anastomosis, or falciform/seromuscular patches lead to lower PFR than suture closure alone. However, the differences are rather small, and further RCTs are needed to test these effects. Selective closure of the main pancreatic duct during stump closure may prevent severe PF.

The aim of this study was to decipher the true importance of R0 versus R1 resection for survival in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).PDAC is characterized by poor survival, even after curative resection. In many studies, R0 versus R1 does not result in different prognosis and does not affect the postoperative management.Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were screened for prognostic studies on the association between resection status and survival. Hazard ratios (HRs) were pooled in a meta-analysis. Furthermore, our prospective database was retrospectively screened for curative PDAC resections according to inclusion criteria (n = 254 patients) between July 2007 and October 2014.In the meta-analysis, R1 was associated with a decreased overall survival [HR 1.45 (95% confidence interval, 95% CI 1.37-1.52)] and disease-free survival [HR 1.44 (1.30-1.59)] in PDAC when compared with R0. Importantly, this effect held true only for pancreatic head resection both in the meta-analysis [R0 ≥0 mm: HR 1.21 (1.05-1.39) vs R0 ≥1 mm: HR 1.66 (1.46-1.89)] and in our cohort (R0 ≥0 mm: 31.8 vs 14.5 months, P0.001; R0 ≥1 mm, 41.2 vs 16.8 months; P0.001). Moreover, R1 resections were associated with advanced tumor disease, that is, larger tumor size, lymph node metastases, and extended resections. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard model suggested G3, pN1, tumor size, and R1 (0 mm/1 mm) as independent predictors of overall survival.Resection margin is not a valid prognostic marker in publications before 2010 due to heterogeneity of cohorts and lack of standardized histopathological examination. Within standardized pathology protocols, R-status' prognostic validity may be primarily confined to pancreatic head cancers.

Examination of major duodenal papilla (MDP) by standard forward-viewing esophagogastroduodenoscopy (S-EGD) is limited. Cap assisted esophagogastroduodenoscopy (CA-EGD) utilizes a cap fitted to the tip of the endoscope that can depress the mucosal folds and thus might improve visualization of MDP. The aim of this study was to compare CA-EGD to S-EGD for complete examination of the MDP.Prospective, randomized, blinded, controlled crossover study. Subjects scheduled for elective EGD were randomized to undergo S-EGD (group A) or CA-EGD (group B) before undergoing a second examination by the alternate method. Images of the MDP were evaluated by three blinded multicenter-experts. Our primary outcome measure was complete examination of the papilla. Secondary outcome measures were duration and overall diagnostic yield.A total of 101 patients were randomized and completed the study. Complete examination of MDP was achieved in 98 patients using CA-EGD compared to 24 patients using S-EGD (97 vs. 24%, P0.001). Median duration from intubation of the esophagus until localization of the MDP was shorter with CA-EGD (46. vs. 96 s., P0.001). In group A, 11 extra lesions and 12 additional incidental findings were detected by secondary CA-EGD, whereas neither were detected by secondary S-EGD in group B (22 vs. 0% and 24 vs. 0%, P0.001 and P0.001).CA-EGD enabled complete examination of MDP in almost all cases compared to a low success rate of S-EGD. CA-EGD detected a significant amount of lesions and incidental findings when added to S-EGD. CA-EGD is a safe and effective method for examination of MDP.

In patients with aortic regurgitation (AR), exercise testing plays a pivotal role in clinical decision making according to American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines. However, it is unclear exactly how AR behaves during exercise, as it has only been estimated but not