Search

Background Several studies have suggested a survival benefit of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in the pancreatic head. Data concerning NAT for PDAC located in pancreatic body or tail are lacking. Methods Post hoc analysis of an international multicenter retrospective cohort of distal pancreatectomy for PDAC in 34 centers from 11 countries (2007–2015). Patients who underwent resection after NAT were matched (1:1 ratio), using propensity scores based on baseline characteristics, to patients who underwent upfront resection. Median overall survival was compared using the stratified log-rank test. Results Among 1236 patients, 136 (11.0%) received NAT, most frequently FOLFIRINOX (25.7%). In total, 94 patients receiving NAT were matched to 94 patients undergoing upfront resection. NAT was associated with less postoperative major morbidity (Clavien–Dindo ≥ 3a, 10.6% vs. 23.4%, P = 0.020) and pancreatic fistula grade B/C (9.6% vs. 21.3%, P = 0.026). NAT did not improve overall survival [27 (95% CI 14–39) versus 31 months (95% CI 19–42), P = 0.277], as compared with upfront resection. In a sensitivity analysis of 251 patients with radiographic tumor involvement of splenic vessels, NAT (n = 37, 14.7%) was associated with prolonged overall survival [36 (95% CI 18–53) versus 20 months (95% CI 15–24), P = 0.049], as compared with upfront resection. Conclusion In this international multicenter cohort study, NAT for resected PDAC in pancreatic body or tail was associated with less morbidity and pancreatic fistula but similar overall survival in comparison with upfront resection. Prospective studies should confirm a survival benefit of NAT in patients with PDAC and splenic vessel involvement.

Item does not contain fulltext BACKGROUND: A radical left pancreatectomy in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) may require extended, multivisceral resections. The role of a laparoscopic approach in extended radical left pancreatectomy (ERLP) is unclear since comparative studies are lacking. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes after laparoscopic vs open ERLP in patients with PDAC. METHODS: An international multicenter propensity-score matched study including patients who underwent either laparoscopic or open ERLP (L-ERLP; O-ERLP) for PDAC was performed (2007-2015). The ISGPS definition for extended resection was used. Primary outcomes were overall survival, margin negative rate (R0), and lymph node retrieval. RESULTS: Between 2007 and 2015, 320 patients underwent ERLP in 34 centers from 12 countries (65 L-ERLP vs. 255 O-ERLP). After propensity-score matching, 44 L-ERLP could be matched to 44 O-ERLP. In the matched cohort, the conversion rate in L-ERLP group was 35%. The L-ERLP R0 resection rate (matched cohort) was comparable to O-ERLP (67% vs 48%; P = 0.063) but the lymph node yield was lower for L-ERLP than O-ERLP (median 11 vs 19, P = 0.023). L-ERLP was associated with less delayed gastric emptying (0% vs 16%, P = 0.006) and shorter hospital stay (median 9 vs 13 days, P = 0.005), as compared to O-ERLP. Outcomes were comparable for additional organ resections, vascular resections (besides splenic vessels), Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III complications, or 90-day mortality (2% vs 2%, P = 0.973). The median overall survival was comparable between both groups (19 vs 20 months, P = 0.571). Conversion did not worsen outcomes in L-ERLP. CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic approach may be used safely in selected patients requiring ERLP for PDAC, since morbidity, mortality, and overall survival seem comparable, as compared to O-ERLP. L-ERLP is associated with a high conversion rate and reduced lymph node yield but also with less delayed gastric emptying and a shorter hospital stay, as compared to O-ERLP.

Despite many developments, postoperative bile leakage (POBL) remains a relatively common postoperative complication after laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR). Previous studies regarding the incidence and clinical impact of POBL have mainly focused on patients undergoing OLR. The aim of this study is to compare the incidence and clinical impact of POBL between patients undergoing LLR and OLR in a large international multicenter cohort using a propensity score matched analysis.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is increasingly being performed as an alternative to open surgery. Whether the implementation and corresponding learning curve of LDP have an impact on patient outcome is unknown. The aim was to investigate the temporal trends in practice across UK centres.This was a retrospective multicentre observational cohort study of LDP in 11 tertiary referral centres in the UK between 2006 and 2016. The learning curve was analysed by pooling data for the first 15 consecutive patients who had LDP and examining trends in surgical outcomes in subsequent patients.In total, 570 patients underwent LDP, whereas 888 underwent open resection. For LDP the median duration of operation was 240 min, with 200 ml blood loss. The conversion rate was 12·1 per cent. Neuroendocrine tumours (26·7 per cent) and mucinous cystic neoplasms (19·7 per cent) were commonest indications. The proportion of LDPs increased from 24·4 per cent in 2006-2009 (P1) to 46·0 per cent in 2014-2016 (P3) (P 0·001). LDP was increasingly performed for patients aged 70 years or more (16 per cent in P1 versus 34·4 per cent in P3; P = 0·002), pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (6 versus 19·1 per cent; P = 0·005) and advanced malignant tumours (27 versus 52 per cent; P = 0·016). With increasing experience, there was a trend for a decrease in blood transfusion rate (14·1 per cent for procedures 1-15 to 3·5 per cent for procedures 46-75; P = 0·008), ICU admissions (32·7 to 19·2 per cent; P = 0·021) and median duration of hospital stay (7 (i.q.r. 5-9) to 6 (4-7) days; P = 0·002). After 30 procedures, a decrease was noted in rates of both overall morbidity (57·7 versus 42·2 per cent for procedures 16-30 versus 46-75 respectively; P = 0·009) and severe morbidity (18·8 versus 9·7 per cent; P = 0·031).LDP has increased as a treatment option for lesions of the distal pancreas as indications for the procedure have expanded. Perioperative outcomes improved with the number of procedures performed.Cada día se utiliza más la pancreatectomía distal laparoscópica (laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy, LDP) como una alternativa a la cirugía abierta. Se desconoce si la implementación y la correspondiente curva de aprendizaje de la LDP tienen impacto en los resultados. El objetivo fue investigar las tendencias relacionadas con su implementación en los centros del Reino Unido a los largo del tiempo. MÉTODOS: Se realizó el estudio observacional retrospectivo y multicéntrico de una cohorte de LDP en once centros de referencia terciarios del Reino Unido entre 2006-2016. Se analizó la curva de aprendizaje agrupando los 15 primeros pacientes consecutivos de LDP y se compararon los resultados quirúrgicos con los obtenidos en los pacientes subsiguientes.En total, se incluyeron 570 pacientes con LDP y 888 con resección abierta. Para el LDP, la mediana de tiempo operatorio fue de 240 minutos con 200 ml de pérdida de sangre. La tasa de conversión fue del 12,2%. Las indicaciones más frecuentes fueron los tumores neuroendocrinos (26,7%) y las neoplasias quísticas mucinosas (19,7%). La proporción de LDP aumentó del 24% al 46% (de 2006-2009 a 2014-2016; P 0,001). La LDP se realizó cada vez con mayor frecuencia en pacientes de ≥ 70 años (15,8% versus 34,4%, P = 0,002), en pacientes con adenocarcinoma ductal pancreático (6,5% versus 19,1%, P = 0,005) y en pacientes con tumores malignos avanzados (27,3% versus 51,85%, P = 0,016). Con el aumento de la experiencia, disminuyeron las tendencias de la tasa de transfusión sanguínea (14,1% al 3,5%, P = 0,008), los ingresos en la UCI (32,7% a 19,2%, P = 0.021) y la mediana de la duración de la estancia hospitalaria (7 (rango intercuartílico 5-9) a 6 (rango intercuartilico 4-7) días, P = 0,002). Tras 30 procedimientos, disminuyeron tanto la morbilidad global (57,7% versus 42,2%, P = 0,009) como las tasas de morbilidad grave (21,5% versus 14,6%, P = 0,022). CONCLUSIÓN: La pancreatectomía distal laparoscópica se ha incrementado como una opción de tratamiento para las lesiones del páncreas distal a medida que se han ido ampliando las indicaciones del procedimiento. Los resultados perioperatorios mejoran con el número de procedimientos realizados.

Background Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) is increasingly being performed because of perceived patient benefits. Whether conversion of MIPD to open pancreatoduodenectomy worsens outcome, and which risk factors are associated with conversion, is unclear. Methods This was a post hoc analysis of a European multicentre retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing MIPD (2012–2017) in ten medium-volume (10–19 MIPDs annually) and four high-volume (at least 20 MIPDs annually) centres. Propensity score matching (1 : 1) was used to compare outcomes of converted and non-converted MIPD procedures. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for conversion, with results presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95 per cent confidence intervals (c.i). Results Overall, 65 of 709 MIPDs were converted (9.2 per cent) and the overall 30-day mortality rate was 3.8 per cent. Risk factors for conversion were tumour size larger than 40 mm (OR 2.7, 95 per cent c.i.1.0 to 6.8; P = 0.041), pancreatobiliary tumours (OR 2.2, 1.0 to 4.8; P = 0.039), age at least 75 years (OR 2.0, 1.0 to 4.1; P = 0.043), and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (OR 5.2, 2.5 to 10.7; P Conclusion Risk factors for conversion during MIPD include age, large tumour size, tumour location, laparoscopic approach, and surgery in medium-volume centres. Although conversion during MIPD itself was not associated with worse outcomes, the outcome in these patients was poor in general which should be taken into account during patient selection for MIPD.

BACKGROUND: A recent systematic review recommends against the use of any of the current COVID-19 prediction models in clinical practice. To enable clinicians to appropriately profile and treat suspected COVID-19 patients at the emergency department (ED), externally validated models that predict poor outcome are desperately needed.OBJECTIVE: Our aims were to identify predictors of poor outcome, defined as mortality or ICU admission within 30 days, in patients presenting to the ED with a clinical suspicion of COVID-19, and to develop and externally validate a prediction model for poor outcome.METHODS: In this prospective, multi-center study, we enrolled suspected COVID-19 patients presenting at the EDs of two hospitals in the Netherlands. We used backward logistic regression to develop a prediction model. We used the area under the curve (AUC), Brier score and pseudo-R2 to assess model performance. The model was externally validated in an Italian cohort.RESULTS: We included 1193 patients between March 12 and May 27 2020, of whom 196 (16.4%) had a poor outcome. We identified 10 predictors of poor outcome: current malignancy (OR 2.774; 95%CI 1.682-4.576), systolic blood pressure (OR 0.981; 95%CI 0.964-0.998), heart rate (OR 1.001; 95%CI 0.97-1.028), respiratory rate (OR 1.078; 95%CI 1.046-1.111), oxygen saturation (OR 0.899; 95%CI 0.850-0.952), body temperature (OR 0.505; 95%CI 0.359-0.710), serum urea (OR 1.404; 95%CI 1.198-1.645), C-reactive protein (OR 1.013; 95%CI 1.001-1.024), lactate dehydrogenase (OR 1.007; 95%CI 1.002-1.013) and SARS-CoV-2 PCR result (OR 2.456; 95%CI 1.526-3.953). The AUC was 0.86 (95%CI 0.83-0.89), with a Brier score of 0.32 and, and R2 of 0.41. The AUC in the external validation in 500 patients was 0.70 (95%CI 0.65-0.75).CONCLUSION: The COVERED risk score showed excellent discriminatory ability, also in an external validation. It may aid clinical decision making, and improve triage at the ED in health care environments with high patient throughputs.

Background Surgical factors, including resection of Gerota’s fascia, R0-resection, and lymph node yield, may be associated with survival after distal pancreatectomy (DP) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), but evidence from large multicenter studies is lacking. This study aimed to identify predictors for overall survival after DP for PDAC, especially those related to surgical technique. Patients and Methods Data from an international retrospective cohort including patients from 11 European countries and the USA who underwent DP for PDAC (2007–2015) were analyzed. Cox proportional hazard analyses were performed and included Gerota’s fascia resection, R0 resection, lymph node ratio, extended resection, and a minimally invasive approach. Results Overall, 1200 patients from 34 centers with median follow-up of 15 months [interquartile range (IQR) 5–31 months] and median survival period of 30 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 27–33 months] were included. Gerota’s fascia resection [hazard ratio (HR) 0.74; p = 0.019], R0 resection (HR 0.70; p = 0.006), and decreased lymph node ratio (HR 0.28; p p p = 0.350). Adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 0.67; p = 0.003) was also associated with improved overall survival. Conclusions This international cohort identified Gerota’s fascia resection, R0 resection, and decreased lymph node ratio as factors associated with improved overall survival during DP for PDAC. Surgeons should strive for R0 resection and adequate lymphadenectomy and could also consider Gerota’s fascia resection in their routine surgical approach.

Purpose The reported conversion rates for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) range widely from 2 to 38%. The identification of risk factors for conversion may help surgeons during preoperative planning and patient counseling. Moreover, the impact of conversion on outcomes of MIDP is unknown. Methods A systematic review was conducted as part of the 2019 Miami International Evidence-Based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR). The PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched for studies concerning conversion to open surgery in MIDP. Results Of the 828 studies screened, eight met the eligibility criteria, resulting in a combined dataset including 2592 patients after MIDP. The overall conversion rate was 17.1% (range 13.0–32.7%) with heterogeneity between studies associated with the definition of conversion adopted. Only one study divided conversion into elective and emergency conversion. The main indications for conversion were vascular involvement (23.7%), concern for oncological radicality (21.9%), and bleeding (18.9%). The reported risk factors for conversion included a malignancy as an indication for surgery, the proximity of the tumor to vascular structures in preoperative imaging, higher BMI or visceral fat, and multi-organ resection or extended resection. Contrasting results were seen in terms of blood loss and length of stay in comparing converted MIDP and completed MIDP patients. Conclusion The identified risk factors for conversion from this study can be used for patient selection and counseling. Surgeon experience should be considered when contemplating MIDP for a complex patient. Future studies should divide conversion into elective and emergency conversion.

Background In the past infectious diseases affected the quality of lifestyle during home confinement. The study conducted examines the influence of home confinement during the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak on lifestyle, mental wellbeing, nutritional status, and sleeping pattern. Method An online multicategorical questionnaire was distributed to collect demographic information combined with the following tools: Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ), International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ), WHO-5 wellbeing score, and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). A snowball non-discriminate sampling procedure was conducted to collect data from people attending or working at higher institutions from March 1, 2020 to April 24, 2020. A total of 1723 completed responses (917 males, 37.4 ±13.4 years old and 806 females 32.2 ± 11.5 years old) were collected. Results The female participants had significantly lower mental health scores than males (53.9% vs. 46.1%). The mental wellbeing scores were higher among participants with medium and high physical activity (PA) levels (p < 0.00). Additionally, the mental wellbeing scores were significantly improved by dietary quality and it’s sleeping score (p < 0.001). However, PA was by far the major determinant of the mental health scores. Conclusion Factors such as PA, diet, and sleeping patterns were associated with mental wellbeing during the COVID-19 confinement among Arab participants.

Background Based on excellent outcomes from high-volume centres, laparoscopic liver resection is increasingly being adopted into nationwide practice which typically includes low-medium volume centres. It is unknown how the use and outcome of laparoscopic liver resection compare between high-volume centres and low-medium volume centres. This study aimed to compare use and outcome of laparoscopic liver resection in three leading European high-volume centres and nationwide practice in the Netherlands. Method An international, retrospective multicentre cohort study including data from three European high-volume centres (Oslo, Southampton and Milan) and all 20 centres in the Netherlands performing laparoscopic liver resection (low-medium volume practice) from January 2011 to December 2016. A high-volume centre is defined as a centre performing >50 laparoscopic liver resections per year. Patients were retrospectively stratified into low, moderate- and high-risk Southampton difficulty score groups. Results A total of 2425 patients were included (1540 high-volume; 885 low-medium volume). The median annual proportion of laparoscopic liver resection was 42.9 per cent in high-volume centres and 7.2 per cent in low-medium volume centres. Patients in the high-volume centres had a lower conversion rate (7.4 versus 13.1 per cent; P Conclusion High-volume expert centres had a sixfold higher use of laparoscopic liver resection, less conversions, and shorter hospital stay, as compared to a nationwide low-medium volume practice. Stratification into Southampton difficulty score risk groups identified some differences but largely outcomes appeared better for high-volume centres in each risk group.

Background/objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of older age (≥70 years) and obesity (BMI ≥30) on surgical outcomes of minimally invasive pancreatic resections (MIPR). Subsequently, open pancreatic resections or MIPR were compared for elderly and/or obese patients. Methods: A systematic review was conducted as part of the 2019 Miami International Evidence-Based Guidelines on MIPR (IG-MIPR). Study quality assessment was according to The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). A meta-analysis was performed to assess the impact of MIPR or open pancreatic resections in elderly patients. Results: After screening 682 studies, 13 observational studies with 4629 patients were included. Elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) had less blood loss (117 mL, p < 0.001) and a shorter hospital stay (3.5 days p < 0.001) than elderly patients undergoing open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) B/C, major complication and reoperation rate were not significantly different in elderly patients undergoing either laparoscopic or open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD). One study compared robot PD with OPD in obese patients, indicating that patients with robotic surgery had less blood loss (mean 250 ml vs 500 ml, p = 0.001), shorter operative time (mean 381 min vs 428 min, p = 0.003), and lower rate of POPF B/C (13% vs 28%, p = 0.039). Conclusion: The current available limited evidence does not suggest that MIPR is contraindicated in elderly or obese patients. Additionally, outcomes in MIPR are equal or more beneficial compared to the open approach when applied in these patient groups.

Background Pancreatic mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCNs) are rare mucin-producing cystic tumours defined by the presence of ovarian-type stroma. MCNs have a malignant potential and thus surgery is frequently performed. The aim of this cohort study was to define better the criteria for surgical resection in patients with MCN. Methods This multicentre retrospective study included all resected MCNs between 2003 and 2015 in participating centres. Lesions without ovarian-type stroma were excluded. Patient characteristics, preoperative findings, histopathology findings and follow-up data were recorded. Results The study included 211 patients; their median age was 53 (range 18–82) years, and 202 (95·7 per cent) were women. Median preoperative tumour size was 55 (range 12–230) mm. Thirty-four of the 211 (16·1 per cent) were malignant, and high-grade dysplasia (HGD) was found in a further 13 (6·2 per cent). One-third of MCNs in men were associated with invasive cancer, compared with 15·3 per cent in women. Five cases of malignant transformation occurred in MCNs smaller than 4 cm. All cases of malignancy or HGD were associated with symptoms or features of concern on preoperative cross-sectional imaging. In multivariable analysis, raised carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (odds ratio (OR) 10·54, 95 per cent c.i. 2·85 to 218·23; P < 0·001), tumour size (OR 4·23, 3·02 to 11·03; P = 0·001), mural nodules (OR 3·55, 1·31 to 20·55; P = 0·002) and weight loss (OR 3·40, 2·34 to 12·34; P = 0·034) were independent factors predictive of malignant transformation. Conclusions Small indeterminate MCNs with no symptoms or features of concern may safely be observed as they have a low risk of malignant transformation.

Contains fulltext : 245466.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) shortens time to functional recovery and improves 30-day quality of life (QoL), as compared with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) for nonmalignant disease. The impact of MIDP on QoL, cosmetic satisfaction, and overall major complications beyond 1-year follow-up is currently unknown. STUDY DESIGN: The Minimally Invasive Versus Open Distal Pancreatectomy (LEOPARD) trial randomized 108 patients to MIDP (laparoscopic or robotic) or ODP in 14 Dutch centers (April 2015 to March 2017). The primary outcome measure of this study was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), as assessed with the EQ-5D. QoL was assessed using subscales of the EORTC QLQ-C30, PAN-26, and a body image questionnaire. The latter included a cosmetic satisfaction score (range 3-24), and a body image score (range 5-20). Differences between MIDP and ODP for QALYs, generic, and disease-specific QoL and body image were analyzed. Missing QoL data were imputed using multiple imputation. RESULTS: In total, 84 patients were alive, with a median follow-up of 44 months; 62 of these patients (74%) completed the questionnaires (27 MIDP, 35 ODP). There was no significant difference in QALYs between the 2 groups (mean score 2.34 vs 2.46 years, p = 0.63), nor on the QoL subscales. Significant overall change in EQ-5D health utilities were found for both groups over time (p < 0.001). Patients in the MIDP group scored higher on cosmetic satisfaction (21 vs 14, p = 0.049). No differences between the 2 groups were observed for clinical outcomes such as major complications, readmissions, and incisional hernias. CONCLUSIONS: More than 3 years after distal pancreatectomy, no improvement in QALYs and overall QoL was seen after MIDP, whereas cosmetic satisfaction was higher after MIDP as compared with ODP.

Whether patients who undergo resection of ampullary adenocarcinoma have a survival benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy is currently unknown. The aim of this study was to compare survival between patients with and without adjuvant chemotherapy after resection of ampullary adenocarcinoma in a propensity score-matched analysis.An international multicentre cohort study was conducted, including patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for ampullary adenocarcinoma between 2006 and 2017, in 13 centres in six countries. Propensity scores were used to match patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy with those who did not, in the entire cohort and in two subgroups (pancreatobiliary/mixed and intestinal subtypes). Survival was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analyses.Overall, 1163 patients underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for ampullary adenocarcinoma. After excluding 187 patients, median survival in the remaining 976 patients was 67 (95 per cent c.i. 56 to 78) months. A total of 520 patients (53·3 per cent) received adjuvant chemotherapy. In a propensity score-matched cohort (194 patients in each group), survival was better among patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy than in those who did not (median survival not reached versus 60 months respectively; P = 0·051). A survival benefit was seen in patients with the pancreatobiliary/mixed subtype; median survival was not reached in patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy and 32 months in the group without chemotherapy (P = 0·020). Patients with the intestinal subtype did not show any survival benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy.Patients with resected ampullary adenocarcinoma may benefit from gemcitabine-based adjuvant chemotherapy, but this effect may be reserved for those with the pancreatobiliary and/or mixed subtype.Actualmente se desconoce si la quimioterapia adyuvante ofrece un beneficio en la supervivencia de los pacientes que se someten a resección de un adenocarcinoma ampular. El objetivo de este estudio fue comparar la supervivencia mediante la concordancia estimada por emparejamiento por puntaje de propensión, entre pacientes con y sin quimioterapia adyuvante después de la resección de un adenocarcinoma ampular. MÉTODOS: Se realizó un estudio internacional de cohortes multicéntrico, que incluyó a los pacientes que se sometieron a una duodenopancreatectomía por adenocarcinoma ampular (2006-2017) en 13 centros de seis países. Los puntajes de propensión se usaron para emparejar a los pacientes que recibieron quimioterapia adyuvante con los que no; tanto en la cohorte completa como en dos subgrupos (subtipo pancreaticobiliar / mixto e intestinal). La supervivencia se evaluó utilizando el método de Kaplan-Meier y las regresiones de Cox.En total, 1.163 pacientes fueron sometidos a una duodenopancreatectomía por adenocarcinoma ampular. Después de excluir a 179 pacientes, la mediana de supervivencia de los 976 pacientes restantes fue de 67 meses (i.c. del 95%, 56-78), de los cuales un total de 520 pacientes (53%) recibieron quimioterapia adyuvante. En una cohorte de emparejamiento por puntaje de propensión (194 versus 194 pacientes), la mediana de supervivencia fue mejor en los pacientes tratados con quimioterapia adyuvante en comparación con aquellos sin quimioterapia adyuvante (no se alcanzó la mediana de supervivencia versus 60 meses, respectivamente; P = 0,051). En el subtipo pancreaticobiliar/mixto se observó un beneficio en la supervivencia; no se alcanzó la mediana de supervivencia en pacientes que recibieron quimioterapia adyuvante versus 32 meses en el grupo sin quimioterapia, P = 0,020. El subtipo intestinal no mostró beneficio en la supervivencia de la quimioterapia adyuvante. CONCLUSIÓN: Los pacientes con adenocarcinoma ampular resecado pueden beneficiarse de la quimioterapia adyuvante basada en gemcitabina, pero este efecto podría reservarse para aquellos pacientes con subtipo de tumor pancreaticobiliar y/o mixto.

In the absence of randomized controlled data and even propensity-matched data, indications for, and outcomes of, laparoscopic repeat liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remain uncertain. This study aimed to clarify the current indications for laparoscopic repeat liver resection for HCC, and to evaluate outcomes.Forty-two liver surgery centres around the world registered patients who underwent repeat liver resection for HCC. Patient characteristics, preoperative liver function, tumour characteristics, surgical method, and short- and long-term outcomes were recorded.Analyses showed that the laparoscopic procedure was generally used in patients with relatively poor performance status and liver function, but favourable tumour characteristics. Intraoperative blood loss (mean(s.d.) 254(551) versus 748(1128) ml; P 0·001), duration of operation (248(156) versus 285(167) min; P 0·001), morbidity (12·7 versus 18·1 per cent; P = 0·006) and duration of postoperative hospital stay (10·1(14·3) versus 11·8(11·8) days; P = 0·013) were significantly reduced for laparoscopic compared with open procedures, whereas survival time was comparable (median 10·04 versus 8·94 years; P = 0·297). Propensity score matching showed that laparoscopic repeat liver resection for HCC resulted in less intraoperative blood loss (268(730) versus 497(784) ml; P = 0·001) and a longer operation time (272(187) versus 232(129); P = 0·007) than the open approach, and similar survival time (12·55 versus 8·94 years; P = 0·086).Laparoscopic repeat liver resection is feasible in selected patients with recurrent HCC.Dado que no existen ensayos clínicos controlados ni estudios de datos emparejados por puntaje de propensión, todavía hay dudas sobre las indicaciones y los resultados de la resección iterativa laparocópica de un carcinoma hepatocelular (hepatocellular carcinoma, HCC). Este estudio tuvo como objetivo esclarecer las indicaciones actuales y los resultados de la resección hepática laparoscópica iterativa del HCC. MÉTODOS: Se incluyeron los pacientes de 42 centros de cirugía hepática a nivel mundial en los que se había realizado una resección hepática iterativa por HCC. Se analizaron las características del paciente, la función hepática preoperatoria, las características del tumor, el abordaje quirúrgico y los resultados a corto y largo plazo.El análisis demostró que la vía laparoscópica generalmente se utilizaba en pacientes con carácteristicas tumorales favorables, pero con estado funcional y función hepatica relativamente peores. La pérdida de sangre intraoperatoria (254,3 ± 551,2 versus 748,0 ± 1127,7 mL, P 0,001), la duración de la intervención (247,6 ± 155,8 versus 285,1 ± 167,0 minutos, P 0,001), la morbilidad (12,7 versus 18,1%, P = 0,005) y la estancia hospitalaria postoperatoria (10,07 ± 14,29 versus 11,80 ± 11,79 días, P = 0,010) fueron significativamente menores para los pacientes tratados por via laparoscópica en comparacion con la vía abierta, mientra que el tiempo de supervivencia fue comparable (mediana 10,04 versus 8,94 años, P = 0,297). El estudio de emparejamiento por puntaje de propensión mostró que la resección hepática iterativa por vía laparoscópica de un HCC (frente a la vía abierta) conllevaba una menor pérdida sanguínea intraoperatoria (268,0 ± 730,2 versus 496,5 ± 784,2 mL, P = 0,01), una mayor duración de la intervención (272,1 ± 187,2 versus 231,8 ± 129,1 minutos , P = 0,07) y un tiempo de supervivencia similar (mediana 12,55 versus 8,94 años, P = 0,0855). CONCLUSIÓN: La resección hepática iterativa por vía laparoscópica es factible en pacientes seleccionados con HCC recidivado.

Laparoscopic liver resection demands expertise and a long learning curve. Resection of the posterosuperior segments is challenging, and there are no data on the learning curve. The aim of this study was to evaluate the learning curve for laparoscopic resection of the posterosuperior segments.A cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis of the difficulty score for resection was undertaken using patient data from four specialized centres. Risk-adjusted CUSUM analysis of duration of operation, blood loss and conversions was performed, adjusting for the difficulty score of the procedures. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to identify the completion of the learning curve.According to the CUSUM analysis of 464 patients, the learning curve showed an initial decrease in the difficulty score followed by an increase and, finally, stabilization. More patients with cirrhosis or previous surgery were operated in the latest phase of the learning curve. A smaller number of wedge resections and a larger number of anatomical resections were performed progressively. Dissection using a Cavitron ultrasonic surgical aspirator and the Pringle manoeuvre were used more frequently with time. Risk-adjusted CUSUM analysis showed a progressive decrease in operating time. Blood loss initially increased slightly, then stabilized and finally decreased over time. A similar trend was found for conversions. The learning curve was estimated to be 40 procedures for wedge and 65 for anatomical resections.The learning curve for laparoscopic liver resection of the posterosuperior segments consists of a stepwise process, during which accurate patient selection is key.La resección hepática laparoscópica exige experiencia y una larga curva de aprendizaje. La resección de los segmentos posterosuperiores (PS) es un reto, y no hay datos acerca de la curva de aprendizaje (learning curve, LC). El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar la LC de la resección laparoscópica de los segmentos PS. MÉTODOS: Se realizó un análisis CUSUM de la puntuación de dificultad (difficulty score, DS) de la resección en pacientes de 4 centros especializados. La técnica CUSUM se ajustó al riesgo (risk-adjusted CUSUM, RA-CUSUM) para el tiempo operatorio, la pérdida de sangre y las conversiones a cirugía abierta ajustando según la DS de los procedimientos. Se utilizó una curva ROC para identificar el momento en el que se consideró que la LC había sido completada.De acuerdo con el análisis CUSUM de los 464 pacientes incluidos, se observó una DS baja al inicio, que posteriormente se fue incrementando hasta llegar a una estabilización. En la última fase de la LC se operaron más pacientes con cirrosis o cirugía previa. De forma progresiva se fueron reduciendo el número de resecciones hepáticas en cuña y aumentando el de resecciones anatómicas. A lo largo del tiempo se introdujo el CUSA y la maniobra de Pringle con mayor frecuencia. El RA-CUSUM mostró una reducción progresiva del tiempo operatorio. La pérdida de sangre inicialmente aumentó ligeramente, luego se estabilizó y finalmente disminuyó con el tiempo. Una tendencia similar se observó para las conversiones. La LC se estimó en 40 casos para las resecciones en cuña y en 65 casos para las resecciones anatómicas. CONCLUSIÓN: La LC de la resección hepática laparoscópica de los segmentos PS es un proceso paso a paso durante el cual la selección del paciente es clave.

Background Repeat liver resection is often the best treatment option for patients with recurrent colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Repeat resections can be complex, however, owing to adhesions and altered liver anatomy. It remains uncertain whether the advantages of a laparoscopic approach are upheld in this setting. The aim of this retrospective, propensity score-matched study was to compare the short-term outcome of laparoscopic (LRLR) and open (ORLR) repeat liver resection. Methods A multicentre retrospective propensity score-matched study was performed including all patients who underwent LRLRs and ORLRs for CRLM performed in nine high-volume centres from seven European countries between 2000 and 2016. Patients were matched based on propensity scores in a 1 : 1 ratio. Propensity scores were calculated based on 12 preoperative variables, including the approach to, and extent of, the previous liver resection. Operative outcomes were compared using paired tests. Results Overall, 425 repeat liver resections were included. Of 271 LRLRs, 105 were matched with an ORLR. Baseline characteristics were comparable after matching. LRLR was associated with a shorter duration of operation (median 200 (i.q.r. 123–273) versus 256 (199–320) min; P < 0·001), less intraoperative blood loss (200 (50–450) versus 300 (100–600) ml; P = 0·077) and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (5 (3–8) versus 6 (5–8) days; P = 0·028). Postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were similar after LRLR and ORLR. Conclusion LRLR for CRLM is feasible in selected patients and may offer advantages over an open approach.