Search

Your search keyword '"Abu-Hilal M"' showing total 864 results
Start Over Author "Abu-Hilal M"
864 results on '"Abu-Hilal M"'

4. Post cholecystectomy bile duct injury: early, intermediate or late repair with hepaticojejunostomy – an E-AHPBA multi-center study

Author

Rystedt, Jenny M.L., Kleeff, Jörg, Salvia, Roberto, Besselink, Mark G., Prasad, Raj, Lesurtel, Mickael, Sturesson, Christian, Abu Hilal, M., Aljaiuossi, A., Antonucci, A., Ardito, F., Ausania, F., Bernon, M., Berrevoet, F., Björnsson, B., Bonsing, B.A., Boonstra, E.A., Bracke, B., Brusadin, R., Burda, L., Caraballo, M., Casellas-Robert, M., Çoker, A., Davide, J., De Gelder, A., De Rose, A.M., Djokic, M., Dudek, K., Ekmekçigil, E., Filauro, M., Fülöp, A., Gallagher, T., Gastaca, M., Gefen, R., Giuliante, F., Habibeh, H., Halle-Smith, J., Haraldsdottir, K.H., Hartman, V., Hauer, A., Hemmingsson, O., Hoskovec, D., Isaksson, B., Jonas, E., Khalaileh, A., Klug, R., Krige, J., Lignier, D., Lindemann, J., López-López, V., Lucidi, V., Mabrut, J.-Y., Månsson, C., Mieog, S., Mirza, D.F., Oldhafer, K.J., Omoshoro-Jones, J.A.O., Ortega-Torrecilla, N., Otto, W., Panaro, F., Pando, E., Paterna-López, S., Pekmezci, S., Pesce, A., Porte, R.J., Poves, I., Prieto Calvo, M., Primavesi, F., Puleo, S., Recordare, A., Rizell, M., Roberts, K., Robles-Campos, R., Sanchiz-Cardenas, E., Sandström, P., Saribeyoglu, K., Schauer, M., Schreuder, M., Siriwardena, A.K., Smith, M.D., Sousa Silva, D., Sparrelid, E., Stättner, S., Stavrou, G.A., Straka, M., Strömberg, C., Sutcliffe, R.P., Szijártó, A., Taflin, H., Trotovšek, B., van Gulik, T., Wallach, N., and Zieniewicz, K.

Published
2019
Full Text
View/download PDF

6. Are the current difficulty scores for laparoscopic liver surgery telling the whole story? An international survey and recommendations for the future

Author

Abu Hilal, M., Aldrighetti, L., Al Saati, H., Alseidi, A., Aroori, S., Belli, G., Besselink, M., Edwin, B., D'Hondt, M., Dagher, I., Dejong, C., Geller, D., Hamady, Z., Hamoui, M., Isaksson, B., Ivanecz, A., Le Roux, G., Lesurtel, M., O'Rouke, N., Prasad, R., Prieto Calvo, M., Reddy, S., Rotellar, F., Santoyo, J., Soonawalla, Z., Soubrane, O., Stavrou, G., Subar, D., Sutcliffe, R., Tanis, P., Troisi, R., Van Dam, Ronald, Wakabayashi, G., White, S., Halls, Mark C., Cherqui, Daniel, Taylor, Mark A., Primrose, John N., and Abu Hilal, Mohammed

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

9. Impact of enhanced recovery protocols after pancreatoduodenectomy: Meta-Analysis

Author

Kuemmerli, C, Tschuor, C, Kasai, M, Alseidi, A, Balzano, G, Bouwense, S, Braga, M, Coolsen, M, Daniel, S, Dervenis, C, Falconi, M, Hwang, D, Kagedan, D, Kim, S, Lavu, H, Liang, T, Nussbaum, D, Partelli, S, Passeri, M, Pecorelli, N, Pillai, S, Pillarisetty, V, Pucci, M, Su, W, Sutcliffe, R, Tingstedt, B, Van Der Kolk, M, Vrochides, D, Wei, A, Yeo, C, Zani, S, Zouros, E, Abu Hilal, M, Kuemmerli C., Tschuor C., Kasai M., Alseidi A. A., Balzano G., Bouwense S., Braga M., Coolsen M., Daniel S. K., Dervenis C., Falconi M., Hwang D. W., Kagedan D. J., Kim S. C., Lavu H., Liang T., Nussbaum D., Partelli S., Passeri M. J., Pecorelli N., Pillai S. A., Pillarisetty V. G., Pucci M. J., Su W., Sutcliffe R. P., Tingstedt B., Van Der Kolk M., Vrochides D., Wei A., Yeo C. J., Zani S., Zouros E., Abu Hilal M., Kuemmerli, C, Tschuor, C, Kasai, M, Alseidi, A, Balzano, G, Bouwense, S, Braga, M, Coolsen, M, Daniel, S, Dervenis, C, Falconi, M, Hwang, D, Kagedan, D, Kim, S, Lavu, H, Liang, T, Nussbaum, D, Partelli, S, Passeri, M, Pecorelli, N, Pillai, S, Pillarisetty, V, Pucci, M, Su, W, Sutcliffe, R, Tingstedt, B, Van Der Kolk, M, Vrochides, D, Wei, A, Yeo, C, Zani, S, Zouros, E, Abu Hilal, M, Kuemmerli C., Tschuor C., Kasai M., Alseidi A. A., Balzano G., Bouwense S., Braga M., Coolsen M., Daniel S. K., Dervenis C., Falconi M., Hwang D. W., Kagedan D. J., Kim S. C., Lavu H., Liang T., Nussbaum D., Partelli S., Passeri M. J., Pecorelli N., Pillai S. A., Pillarisetty V. G., Pucci M. J., Su W., Sutcliffe R. P., Tingstedt B., Van Der Kolk M., Vrochides D., Wei A., Yeo C. J., Zani S., Zouros E., and Abu Hilal M.

Abstract

Background: This individual-patient data meta-Analysis investigated the effects of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols compared with conventional care on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy. Methods: The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched systematically for articles reporting outcomes of ERAS after pancreatoduodenectomy published up to August 2020. Comparative studies were included. Main outcomes were postoperative functional recovery elements, postoperative morbidity, duration of hospital stay, and readmission. Results: Individual-patient data were obtained from 17 of 31 eligible studies comprising 3108 patients. Time to liquid (mean difference (MD)-3.23 (95 per cent c.i.-4.62 to-1.85) days; P < 0.001) and solid (-3.84 (-5.09 to-2.60) days; P < 0.001) intake, time to passage of first stool (MD-1.38 (-1.82 to-0.94) days; P < 0.001) and time to removal of the nasogastric tube (3.03 (-4.87 to-1.18) days; P = 0.001) were reduced with ERAS. ERAS was associated with lower overall morbidity (risk difference (RD)-0.04, 95 per cent c.i.-0.08 to-0.01; P = 0.015), less delayed gastric emptying (RD-0.11,-0.22 to-0.01; P = 0.039) and a shorter duration of hospital stay (MD-2.33 (-2.98 to-1.69) days; P < 0.001) without a higher readmission rate. Conclusion: ERAS improved postoperative outcome after pancreatoduodenectomy. Implementation should be encouraged.

Published
2022

10. Learning Curves of Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy in Experienced Pancreatic Centers.

Author

Lof, S., Claassen, L., Hannink, G.J., Al-Sarireh, B., Björnsson, B., Boggi, U., Burdio, F., Butturini, G., Capretti, G., Casadei, R., Dokmak, S., Edwin, B., Esposito, A., Fabre, J.M., Ferrari, G., Fretland, A.A., Ftériche, F.S., Fusai, G.K., Giardino, A., Groot Koerkamp, B., D'Hondt, M., Jah, A., Kamarajah, S.K., Kauffmann, E.F., Keck, T., Laarhoven, S. van, Manzoni, A., Marino, M.V., Marudanayagam, R., Molenaar, I.Q., Pessaux, P., Rosso, E., Salvia, R., Soonawalla, Z., Souche, R., White, S., Workum, F.T.W.E. van, Zerbi, A., Rosman, C., Stommel, M.W.J., Abu Hilal, M., Besselink, M.G., Lof, S., Claassen, L., Hannink, G.J., Al-Sarireh, B., Björnsson, B., Boggi, U., Burdio, F., Butturini, G., Capretti, G., Casadei, R., Dokmak, S., Edwin, B., Esposito, A., Fabre, J.M., Ferrari, G., Fretland, A.A., Ftériche, F.S., Fusai, G.K., Giardino, A., Groot Koerkamp, B., D'Hondt, M., Jah, A., Kamarajah, S.K., Kauffmann, E.F., Keck, T., Laarhoven, S. van, Manzoni, A., Marino, M.V., Marudanayagam, R., Molenaar, I.Q., Pessaux, P., Rosso, E., Salvia, R., Soonawalla, Z., Souche, R., White, S., Workum, F.T.W.E. van, Zerbi, A., Rosman, C., Stommel, M.W.J., Abu Hilal, M., and Besselink, M.G.

Abstract

Contains fulltext : 296536.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access), IMPORTANCE: Understanding the learning curve of a new complex surgical technique helps to reduce potential patient harm. Current series on the learning curve of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) are mostly small, single-center series, thus providing limited data. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the length of pooled learning curves of MIDP in experienced centers. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This international, multicenter, retrospective cohort study included MIDP procedures performed from January 1, 2006, through June 30, 2019, in 26 European centers from 8 countries that each performed more than 15 distal pancreatectomies annually, with an overall experience exceeding 50 MIDP procedures. Consecutive patients who underwent elective laparoscopic or robotic distal pancreatectomy for all indications were included. Data were analyzed between September 1, 2021, and May 1, 2022. EXPOSURES: The learning curve for MIDP was estimated by pooling data from all centers. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The learning curve was assessed for the primary textbook outcome (TBO), which is a composite measure that reflects optimal outcome, and for surgical mastery. Generalized additive models and a 2-piece linear model with a break point were used to estimate the learning curve length of MIDP. Case mix-expected probabilities were plotted and compared with observed outcomes to assess the association of changing case mix with outcomes. The learning curve also was assessed for the secondary outcomes of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, conversion to open rate, and postoperative pancreatic fistula grade B/C. RESULTS: From a total of 2610 MIDP procedures, the learning curve analysis was conducted on 2041 procedures (mean [SD] patient age, 58 [15.3] years; among 2040 with reported sex, 1249 were female [61.2%] and 791 male [38.8%]). The 2-piece model showed an increase and eventually a break point for TBO at 85 procedures (95% CI, 13-157 procedures), with a plateau TBO rate at

Published
2023

11. Prospective minimally invasive pancreatic resections from the IGOMIPS registry: a snapshot of daily practice in Italy on 1191 between 2019 and 2022

Author

Boggi, U., Donisi, G., Napoli, N., Partelli, S., Esposito, A., Ferrari, G., Butturini, G., Morelli, L., Abu Hilal, M., Viola, M., Di Benedetto, F., Troisi, R., Vivarelli, M., Jovine, E., Ferrero, A., Bracale, U., Alfieri, Sergio, Casadei, R., Ercolani, G., Moraldi, L., Molino, C., Dalla Valle, R., Ettorre, G., Memeo, R., Zanus, G., Belli, A., Gruttadauria, S., Brolese, A., Coratti, A., Garulli, G., Romagnoli, R., Massani, M., Borghi, F., Belli, G., Coppola, R., Falconi, M., Salvia, R., Zerbi, A., Kauffmann, E. F., Capretti, G., Genova, L., Matteo, P., Mazzola, M., Giardino, A., Palmieri, M., Manzoni, A., Barbieri, V., Ballarin, R., Rompianesi, G., Rossi, R., Mastrangelo, L., Langella, S., Ilardi, M., Menghi, Roberta, Ricci, C., Gardini, A., Campra, D., Crolla, E., Cecconi, S., Meniconi, R. L., Ferraro, V., Brizzolari, M., Izzo, F., Cintorino, D., Marcucci, S., Giuliani, G., Veneroni, L., Moro, F., Nistri, C., Caputo, D., Gianluca, B., Mazzaferro, V., Alfieri S. (ORCID:0000-0002-0404-724X), Menghi R., Boggi, U., Donisi, G., Napoli, N., Partelli, S., Esposito, A., Ferrari, G., Butturini, G., Morelli, L., Abu Hilal, M., Viola, M., Di Benedetto, F., Troisi, R., Vivarelli, M., Jovine, E., Ferrero, A., Bracale, U., Alfieri, Sergio, Casadei, R., Ercolani, G., Moraldi, L., Molino, C., Dalla Valle, R., Ettorre, G., Memeo, R., Zanus, G., Belli, A., Gruttadauria, S., Brolese, A., Coratti, A., Garulli, G., Romagnoli, R., Massani, M., Borghi, F., Belli, G., Coppola, R., Falconi, M., Salvia, R., Zerbi, A., Kauffmann, E. F., Capretti, G., Genova, L., Matteo, P., Mazzola, M., Giardino, A., Palmieri, M., Manzoni, A., Barbieri, V., Ballarin, R., Rompianesi, G., Rossi, R., Mastrangelo, L., Langella, S., Ilardi, M., Menghi, Roberta, Ricci, C., Gardini, A., Campra, D., Crolla, E., Cecconi, S., Meniconi, R. L., Ferraro, V., Brizzolari, M., Izzo, F., Cintorino, D., Marcucci, S., Giuliani, G., Veneroni, L., Moro, F., Nistri, C., Caputo, D., Gianluca, B., Mazzaferro, V., Alfieri S. (ORCID:0000-0002-0404-724X), and Menghi R.

Abstract

This retrospective analysis of the prospective IGOMIPS registry reports on 1191 minimally invasive pancreatic resections (MIPR) performed in Italy between 2019 and 2022, including 668 distal pancreatectomies (DP) (55.7%), 435 pancreatoduodenectomies (PD) (36.3%), 44 total pancreatectomies (3.7%), 36 tumor enucleations (3.0%), and 8 central pancreatectomies (0.7%). Spleen-preserving DP was performed in 109 patients (16.3%). Overall incidence of severe complications (Clavien-Dindo & GE; 3) was 17.6% with a 90-day mortality of 1.9%. This registry analysis provided some important information. First, robotic assistance was preferred for all MIPR but DP with splenectomy. Second, robotic assistance reduced conversion to open surgery and blood loss in comparison to laparoscopy. Robotic PD was also associated with lower incidence of severe postoperative complications and a trend toward lower mortality. Fourth, the annual cut-off of & GE; 20 MIPR and & GE; 20 MIPD improved selected outcome measures. Fifth, most MIPR were performed by a single surgeon. Sixth, only two-thirds of the centers performed spleen-preserving DP. Seventh, DP with splenectomy was associated with higher conversion rate when compared to spleen-preserving DP. Eighth, the use of pancreatojejunostomy was the prevalent reconstruction in PD. Ninth, final histology was similar for MIPR performed at high- and low-volume centers, but neoadjuvant chemotherapy was used more frequently at high-volume centers. Finally, this registry analysis raises important concerns about the reliability of R1 assessment underscoring the importance of standardized pathology of pancreatic specimens. In conclusion, MIPR can be safely implemented on a national scale. Further analyses are required to understand nuances of implementation of MIPR in Italy.

Published
2023

12. Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on the difficulty and outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic major liver resections for colorectal liver metastases: A propensity-score and coarsened exact-matched controlled study

Author

Ghotbi, J., Aghayan, D., Fretland, A., Edwin, B., Syn, N. L., Cipriani, F., Alzoubi, M., Lim, C., Scatton, O., Long, T. C. D., Herman, P., Coelho, F. F., Marino, M. V., Mazzaferro, V., Chiow, A. K. H., Sucandy, I., Ivanecz, A., Choi, S. -H., Lee, J. H., Prieto, M., Vivarelli, M., Giuliante, Felice, Ruzzenente, A., Yong, C. -C., Yin, M., Fondevila, C., Efanov, M., Morise, Z., Di Benedetto, F., Brustia, R., Dalla Valle, R., Boggi, U., Geller, D., Belli, A., Memeo, R., Mejia, A., Park, J. O., Rotellar, F., Choi, G. -H., Robles-Campos, R., Wang, X., Sutcliffe, R. P., Pratschke, J., Tang, C. -N., Chong, C. C. N., D'Hondt, M., Monden, K., Lopez-Ben, S., Kingham, T. P., Ferrero, A., Ettorre, G. M., Levi Sandri, G. B., Pascual, F., Cherqui, D., Liang, X., Mazzotta, A., Wakabayashi, G., Giglio, M., Troisi, R. I., Han, H. -S., Cheung, T. -T., Sugioka, A., Chen, K. -H., Liu, R., Soubrane, O., Fuks, D., Aldrighetti, L., Abu Hilal, M., Goh, B. K. P., Gastaca, M., Meurs, J., De Meyere, C., Lee, K. -F., Ng, K. K., Salimgereeva, D., Alikhanov, R., Lee, L. -S., Jang, J. Y., Kato, Y., Kojima, M., Pirola Kruger, J. A., Lopez-Lopez, V., Casellas I Robert, M., Montalti, R., Lee, B., D'Silva, M., Wang, H. -P., Saleh, M., Chen, Z., Yu, S., Vani, S., Ardito, Francesco, Giustizieri, U., Citterio, D., Mocchegiani, F., Colasanti, M., Guzman, Y., Labadie, K. P., Conticchio, M., Dogeas, E., Kauffmann, E. F., Giuffrida, M., Sommacale, D., Laurent, A., Magistri, P., Nghia, P. P., Mishima, K., Valle, B. D., Krenzien, F., Schmelzle, M., Kadam, P., Liu, Q., Lai, E. C. H., Zheng, J., Siow, T. F., Forchino, F., Giuliante F. (ORCID:0000-0001-9517-8220), Ardito F. (ORCID:0000-0003-1596-2862), Ghotbi, J., Aghayan, D., Fretland, A., Edwin, B., Syn, N. L., Cipriani, F., Alzoubi, M., Lim, C., Scatton, O., Long, T. C. D., Herman, P., Coelho, F. F., Marino, M. V., Mazzaferro, V., Chiow, A. K. H., Sucandy, I., Ivanecz, A., Choi, S. -H., Lee, J. H., Prieto, M., Vivarelli, M., Giuliante, Felice, Ruzzenente, A., Yong, C. -C., Yin, M., Fondevila, C., Efanov, M., Morise, Z., Di Benedetto, F., Brustia, R., Dalla Valle, R., Boggi, U., Geller, D., Belli, A., Memeo, R., Mejia, A., Park, J. O., Rotellar, F., Choi, G. -H., Robles-Campos, R., Wang, X., Sutcliffe, R. P., Pratschke, J., Tang, C. -N., Chong, C. C. N., D'Hondt, M., Monden, K., Lopez-Ben, S., Kingham, T. P., Ferrero, A., Ettorre, G. M., Levi Sandri, G. B., Pascual, F., Cherqui, D., Liang, X., Mazzotta, A., Wakabayashi, G., Giglio, M., Troisi, R. I., Han, H. -S., Cheung, T. -T., Sugioka, A., Chen, K. -H., Liu, R., Soubrane, O., Fuks, D., Aldrighetti, L., Abu Hilal, M., Goh, B. K. P., Gastaca, M., Meurs, J., De Meyere, C., Lee, K. -F., Ng, K. K., Salimgereeva, D., Alikhanov, R., Lee, L. -S., Jang, J. Y., Kato, Y., Kojima, M., Pirola Kruger, J. A., Lopez-Lopez, V., Casellas I Robert, M., Montalti, R., Lee, B., D'Silva, M., Wang, H. -P., Saleh, M., Chen, Z., Yu, S., Vani, S., Ardito, Francesco, Giustizieri, U., Citterio, D., Mocchegiani, F., Colasanti, M., Guzman, Y., Labadie, K. P., Conticchio, M., Dogeas, E., Kauffmann, E. F., Giuffrida, M., Sommacale, D., Laurent, A., Magistri, P., Nghia, P. P., Mishima, K., Valle, B. D., Krenzien, F., Schmelzle, M., Kadam, P., Liu, Q., Lai, E. C. H., Zheng, J., Siow, T. F., Forchino, F., Giuliante F. (ORCID:0000-0001-9517-8220), and Ardito F. (ORCID:0000-0003-1596-2862)

Abstract

Background: Minimal invasive liver resections are a safe alternative to open surgery. Different scoring systems considering different risks factors have been developed to predict the risks associated with these procedures, especially challenging major liver resections (MLR). However, the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAT) on the difficulty of minimally invasive MLRs remains poorly investigated. Methods: Patients who underwent laparoscopic and robotic MLRs for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) performed across 57 centers between January 2005 to December 2021 were included in this analysis. Patients who did or did not receive NAT were matched based on 1:1 coarsened exact and 1:2 propensity-score matching. Pre- and post-matching comparisons were performed. Results: In total, the data of 5189 patients were reviewed. Of these, 1411 procedures were performed for CRLM, and 1061 cases met the inclusion criteria. After excluding 27 cases with missing data on NAT, 1034 patients (NAT: n = 641; non-NAT: n = 393) were included. Before matching, baseline characteristics were vastly different. Before matching, the morbidity rate was significantly higher in the NAT-group (33.2% vs. 27.2%, p-value = 0.043). No significant differences were seen in perioperative outcomes after the coarsened exact matching. After the propensity-score matching, statistically significant higher blood loss (mean, 300 (SD 128–596) vs. 250 (SD 100–400) ml, p-value = 0.047) but shorter hospital stay (mean, 6 [4-8] vs. 6 [5-9] days, p-value = 0.043) were found in the NAT-group. Conclusion: The current study demonstrated that NAT had minimal impact on the difficulty and outcomes of minimally-invasive MLR for CRLM.

Published
2023

13. Machine Learning Predictive Model to Guide Treatment Allocation for Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Surgery

Author

Famularo, S., Donadon, M., Cipriani, F., Fazio, F., Ardito, Francesco, Iaria, M., Perri, P., Conci, S., Dominioni, T., Lai, Q., La Barba, G., Patauner, S., Molfino, S., Germani, P., Zimmitti, G., Pinotti, E., Zanello, M., Fumagalli, L., Ferrari, C., Romano, M., Delvecchio, A., Valsecchi, M. G., Antonucci, A., Piscaglia, F., Farinati, F., Kawaguchi, Y., Hasegawa, K., Memeo, R., Zanus, G., Griseri, G., Chiarelli, M., Jovine, E., Zago, M., Abu Hilal, M., Tarchi, P., Baiocchi, G. L., Frena, A., Ercolani, G., Rossi, M., Maestri, M., Ruzzenente, A., Grazi, G. L., Dalla Valle, R., Romano, F., Giuliante, Felice, Ferrero, A., Aldrighetti, L., Bernasconi, D. P., Torzilli, G., Ardito F. (ORCID:0000-0003-1596-2862), Giuliante F. (ORCID:0000-0001-9517-8220), Famularo, S., Donadon, M., Cipriani, F., Fazio, F., Ardito, Francesco, Iaria, M., Perri, P., Conci, S., Dominioni, T., Lai, Q., La Barba, G., Patauner, S., Molfino, S., Germani, P., Zimmitti, G., Pinotti, E., Zanello, M., Fumagalli, L., Ferrari, C., Romano, M., Delvecchio, A., Valsecchi, M. G., Antonucci, A., Piscaglia, F., Farinati, F., Kawaguchi, Y., Hasegawa, K., Memeo, R., Zanus, G., Griseri, G., Chiarelli, M., Jovine, E., Zago, M., Abu Hilal, M., Tarchi, P., Baiocchi, G. L., Frena, A., Ercolani, G., Rossi, M., Maestri, M., Ruzzenente, A., Grazi, G. L., Dalla Valle, R., Romano, F., Giuliante, Felice, Ferrero, A., Aldrighetti, L., Bernasconi, D. P., Torzilli, G., Ardito F. (ORCID:0000-0003-1596-2862), and Giuliante F. (ORCID:0000-0001-9517-8220)

Abstract

Importance: Clear indications on how to select retreatments for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are still lacking. Objective: To create a machine learning predictive model of survival after HCC recurrence to allocate patients to their best potential treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: Real-life data were obtained from an Italian registry of hepatocellular carcinoma between January 2008 and December 2019 after a median (IQR) follow-up of 27 (12-51) months. External validation was made on data derived by another Italian cohort and a Japanese cohort. Patients who experienced a recurrent HCC after a first surgical approach were included. Patients were profiled, and factors predicting survival after recurrence under different treatments that acted also as treatment effect modifiers were assessed. The model was then fitted individually to identify the best potential treatment. Analysis took place between January and April 2021. Exposures: Patients were enrolled if treated by reoperative hepatectomy or thermoablation, chemoembolization, or sorafenib. Main Outcomes and Measures: Survival after recurrence was the end point. Results: A total of 701 patients with recurrent HCC were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 71 [9] years; 151 [21.5%] female). Of those, 293 patients (41.8%) received reoperative hepatectomy or thermoablation, 188 (26.8%) received sorafenib, and 220 (31.4%) received chemoembolization. Treatment, age, cirrhosis, number, size, and lobar localization of the recurrent nodules, extrahepatic spread, and time to recurrence were all treatment effect modifiers and survival after recurrence predictors. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the predictive model was 78.5% (95% CI, 71.7%-85.3%) at 5 years after recurrence. According to the model, 611 patients (87.2%) would have benefited from reoperative hepatectomy or thermoablation, 37 (5.2%) from sorafenib, and 53 (7.6%) from chemoembolization in terms of potential survival after re

Published
2023

14. Comparison between the difficulty of laparoscopic limited liver resections of tumors located in segment 7 versus segment 8: An international multicenter propensity-score matched study

Author

Efanov, M., Salimgereeva, D., Alikhanov, R., Wu, A. G. R., Geller, D., Cipriani, F., Aghayan, D. L., Fretland, A. A., Sijberden, J., Belli, A., Marino, M. V., Mazzaferro, V., Chiow, A. K. H., Sucandy, I., Ivanecz, A., Choi, S. H., Lee, J. H., Prieto, M., Vivarelli, M., Giuliante, Felice, Ruzzenente, A., Yong, C. -C., Fondevila, C., Rotellar, F., Choi, G. -H., Robless Campos, R., Wang, X., Sutcliffe, R. P., Pratschke, J., Lai, E., Chong, C. C., D'Hondt, M., Monden, K., Lopez-Ben, S., Herman, P., Di Benedetto, F., Kingham, T. P., Liu, R., Long, T. C. D., Ferrero, A., Levi Sandri, G. B., Cherqui, D., Scatton, O., Wakabayashi, G., Troisi, R. I., Cheung, T. -T., Sugioka, A., Han, H. -S., Abu Hilal, M., Soubrane, O., Fuks, D., Aldrighetti, L., Edwin, B., Goh, B. K. P., Chan, C. -Y., Syn, N., D'Silva, M., Lee, B., Lim, C., Nghia, P. P., Gastaca, M., Schotte, H., De Meyere, C., Krenzien, F., Schmelzle, M., Lee, K. -F., Lee, L. S., Jang, J. Y., Kojima, M., Kato, Y., Ghotbi, J., Kruger, J. A. P., Coelho, F. F., Lopez-Lopez, V., Valle, B. D., Robert, M. C. I., Mishima, K., Montalti, R., Giglio, M., Wang, H. -P., Pascual, F., Saleh, M., Kadam, P., Tang, C. -N., Ardito, Francesco, Vani, S., Giustizieri, U., Citterio, D., Mocchegiani, F., Ettorre, G. M., Colasanti, M., Guzman, Y., Dogeas, E., Magistri, P., Mazzotta, A., Giuliante F. (ORCID:0000-0001-9517-8220), Ardito F. (ORCID:0000-0003-1596-2862), Efanov, M., Salimgereeva, D., Alikhanov, R., Wu, A. G. R., Geller, D., Cipriani, F., Aghayan, D. L., Fretland, A. A., Sijberden, J., Belli, A., Marino, M. V., Mazzaferro, V., Chiow, A. K. H., Sucandy, I., Ivanecz, A., Choi, S. H., Lee, J. H., Prieto, M., Vivarelli, M., Giuliante, Felice, Ruzzenente, A., Yong, C. -C., Fondevila, C., Rotellar, F., Choi, G. -H., Robless Campos, R., Wang, X., Sutcliffe, R. P., Pratschke, J., Lai, E., Chong, C. C., D'Hondt, M., Monden, K., Lopez-Ben, S., Herman, P., Di Benedetto, F., Kingham, T. P., Liu, R., Long, T. C. D., Ferrero, A., Levi Sandri, G. B., Cherqui, D., Scatton, O., Wakabayashi, G., Troisi, R. I., Cheung, T. -T., Sugioka, A., Han, H. -S., Abu Hilal, M., Soubrane, O., Fuks, D., Aldrighetti, L., Edwin, B., Goh, B. K. P., Chan, C. -Y., Syn, N., D'Silva, M., Lee, B., Lim, C., Nghia, P. P., Gastaca, M., Schotte, H., De Meyere, C., Krenzien, F., Schmelzle, M., Lee, K. -F., Lee, L. S., Jang, J. Y., Kojima, M., Kato, Y., Ghotbi, J., Kruger, J. A. P., Coelho, F. F., Lopez-Lopez, V., Valle, B. D., Robert, M. C. I., Mishima, K., Montalti, R., Giglio, M., Wang, H. -P., Pascual, F., Saleh, M., Kadam, P., Tang, C. -N., Ardito, Francesco, Vani, S., Giustizieri, U., Citterio, D., Mocchegiani, F., Ettorre, G. M., Colasanti, M., Guzman, Y., Dogeas, E., Magistri, P., Mazzotta, A., Giuliante F. (ORCID:0000-0001-9517-8220), and Ardito F. (ORCID:0000-0003-1596-2862)

Abstract

Background: Presently, according to different difficulty scoring systems, there is no difference in complexity estimation of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) of segments 7 and 8. However, there is no published data supporting this assumption. To date, no studies have compared the outcomes of laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing resection of the liver segments 7 and 8. Methods: A post hoc analysis of patients undergoing LLR of segments 7 and 8 in 46 centers between 2004 and 2020 was performed. 1:1 Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to compare isolated LLR of segments 7 and 8. Subset analyses were also performed to compare atypical resections and segmentectomies of 7 and 8. Results: A total of 2411 patients were identified, and 1691 patients met the inclusion criteria. Comparison after PSM between the entire cohort of segment 7 and segment 8 resections revealed inferior results for segment 7 resection in terms of increased blood loss, blood transfusions, and conversions to open surgery. Subset analyses of only atypical resections similarly demonstrated poorer outcomes for segment 7 in terms of increased blood loss, operation time, blood transfusions, and conversions to open surgery. Conversely, a subgroup analysis of segmentectomies after PSM found better outcomes for segment 7 in terms of a shorter operation time and hospital stay. Conclusion: Differences in the outcomes of segments 7 and 8 resections suggest a greater difficulty of laparoscopic atypical resection of segment 7 compared to segment 8, and greater difficulty of segmentectomy 8 compared to segmentectomy 7.

Published
2023

15. On the relationship between valence and arousal in samples across the globe

Author

Yik, M., Mues, C., Sze, I.N.L., Kuppens, P., Tuerlinckx, F., de Roover, K., Kwok, F.H.C., Schwartz, S.H., Abu-Hilal, M., Adebayo, D.F., Aguilar, P., Al-Bahrani, M., Anderson, M.H., Andrade, L., Bratko, D., Bushina, E., Choi, J.W., Cieciuch, J., Dru, V., Evers, U., Fischer, R., Florez, I.A., Garðarsdóttir, R.B., Gari, Aikaterini, Graf, Sylvie, Halama, Peter, Halberstadt, Jamin, Halim, Magdalena S, Heilman, Renata M, Hřebíčková, Martina, Karl, Johannes Alfons, Knežević, Goran, Kohút, Michal, Kolnes, Martin, Lazarević, Ljiljana B, Lebedeva, Nadezhda, Lee, Julie, Lee, Young-Ho, Liu, Chunquan, Mannerström, Rasmus, Marušić, Iris, Nansubuga, Florence, Ojedokun, Oluyinka, Park, Joonha, Platt, Tracey, Proyer, René T, Realo, Anu, Rolland, Jean-Pierre, Ruch, Willibald, Ruiz, Desiree, Sortheix, Florencia M, Stahlmann, Alexander Georg, Stojanov, Ana, Strus, Włodzimierz, Tamir, Maya, Torres, Cláudio, Trujillo, Angela, Truong, Thi Khanh Ha, Utsugi, Akira, Vecchione, Michele, Wang, Lei, Russell, James A, Yik, M., Mues, C., Sze, I.N.L., Kuppens, P., Tuerlinckx, F., de Roover, K., Kwok, F.H.C., Schwartz, S.H., Abu-Hilal, M., Adebayo, D.F., Aguilar, P., Al-Bahrani, M., Anderson, M.H., Andrade, L., Bratko, D., Bushina, E., Choi, J.W., Cieciuch, J., Dru, V., Evers, U., Fischer, R., Florez, I.A., Garðarsdóttir, R.B., Gari, Aikaterini, Graf, Sylvie, Halama, Peter, Halberstadt, Jamin, Halim, Magdalena S, Heilman, Renata M, Hřebíčková, Martina, Karl, Johannes Alfons, Knežević, Goran, Kohút, Michal, Kolnes, Martin, Lazarević, Ljiljana B, Lebedeva, Nadezhda, Lee, Julie, Lee, Young-Ho, Liu, Chunquan, Mannerström, Rasmus, Marušić, Iris, Nansubuga, Florence, Ojedokun, Oluyinka, Park, Joonha, Platt, Tracey, Proyer, René T, Realo, Anu, Rolland, Jean-Pierre, Ruch, Willibald, Ruiz, Desiree, Sortheix, Florencia M, Stahlmann, Alexander Georg, Stojanov, Ana, Strus, Włodzimierz, Tamir, Maya, Torres, Cláudio, Trujillo, Angela, Truong, Thi Khanh Ha, Utsugi, Akira, Vecchione, Michele, Wang, Lei, and Russell, James A

Abstract

Affect is involved in many psychological phenomena, but a descriptive structure, long sought, has been elusive. Valence and arousal are fundamental, and a key question-the focus of the present study-is the relationship between them. Valence is sometimes thought to be independent of arousal, but, in some studies (representing too few societies in the world) arousal was found to vary with valence. One common finding is that arousal is lowest at neutral valence and increases with both positive and negative valence: a symmetric V-shaped relationship. In the study reported here of self-reported affect during a remembered moment ( N = 8,590), we tested the valence-arousal relationship in 33 societies with 25 different languages. The two most common hypotheses in the literature-independence and a symmetric V-shaped relationship-were not supported. With data of all samples pooled, arousal increased with positive but not negative valence. Valence accounted for between 5% (Finland) and 43% (China Beijing) of the variance in arousal. Although there is evidence for a structural relationship between the two, there is also a large amount of variability in this relation.

Published
2023

16. Development of biotissue training models for anastomotic suturing in pancreatic surgery

Author

Karadza, E., primary, Haney, C.M., additional, Limen, E.F., additional, Müller, P.C., additional, Kowalewski, K.F., additional, Sandini, M., additional, Wennberg, E., additional, Schmidt, M.W., additional, Felinska, E.A., additional, Lang, F., additional, Salg, G., additional, Kenngott, H.G., additional, Rangelova, E., additional, Mieog, S., additional, Vissers, F., additional, Korrel, M., additional, Zwart, M., additional, Sauvanet, A., additional, Loos, M., additional, Mehrabi, A., additional, de Santibanes, M., additional, Shrikhande, S.V., additional, Abu Hilal, M., additional, Besselink, M.G., additional, Müller-Stich, B.P., additional, Hackert, T., additional, and Nickel, F., additional

Published
2023
Full Text
View/download PDF

23. Prophylactic abdominal drainage or no drainage after distal pancreatectomy (PANDORINA): a binational multicenter randomized controlled trial

Author

Vissers, F.L., Balduzzi, A., Bodegraven, E.A. van, Hilst, J. van, Festen, S., Abu Hilal, M., Asbun, H.J., Mieog, J.S.D., Koerkamp, B.G., Busch, O.R., Daams, F., Luyer, M., Pastena, M. de, Malleo, G., Marchegiani, G., Klaase, J., Molenaar, I.Q., Salvia, R., Santvoort, H.C. van, Stommel, M., Lips, D., Coolsen, M., Bassi, C., Eijck, C. van, Besselink, M.G., and Dutch Pancreatic Canc Grp

Abstract

Background: Prophylactic abdominal drainage is current standard practice after distal pancreatectomy (DP), with the aim to divert pancreatic fluid in case of a postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) aimed to prevent further complications as bleeding. Whereas POPF after pancreatoduodenectomy, by definition, involves infection due to anastomotic dehiscence, a POPF after DP is essentially sterile since the bowel is not opened and no anastomoses are created. Routine drainage after DP could potentially be omitted and this could even be beneficial because of the hypothetical prevention of drain-induced infections (Fisher, Surgery 52:205-22, 2018). Abdominal drainage, moreover, should only be performed if it provides additional safety or comfort to the patient. In clinical practice, drains cause clear discomfort. One multicenter randomized controlled trial confirmed the safety of omitting abdominal drainage but did not stratify patients according to their risk of POPF and did not describe a standardized strategy for pancreatic transection. Therefore, a large pragmatic multicenter randomized controlled trial is required, with prespecified POPF risk groups and a homogeneous method of stump closure.The objective of the PANDORINA trial is to evaluate the non-inferiority of omitting routine intra-abdominal drainage after DP on postoperative morbidity (Clavien-Dindo score >= 3), and, secondarily, POPF grade B/C.Methods/design: Binational multicenter randomized controlled non-inferiority trial, stratifying patients to high and low risk for POPF grade B/C and incorporating a standardized strategy for pancreatic transection. Two groups of 141 patients (282 in total) undergoing elective DP (either open or minimally invasive, with or without splenectomy). Primary outcome is postoperative rate of morbidity (Clavien-Dindo score >= 3), and the most relevant secondary outcome is grade B/C POPF. Other secondary outcomes include surgical reintervention, percutaneous catheter drainage, endoscopic catheter drainage, abdominal collections (not requiring drainage), wound infection, delayed gastric emptying, postpancreatectomy hemorrhage as defined by the international study group for pancreatic surgery (ISGPS) (Wente et al., Surgery 142:20-5, 2007), length of stay (LOS), readmission within 90 days, in-hospital mortality, and 90-day mortality.Discussion: PANDORINA is the first binational, multicenter, randomized controlled non-inferiority trial with the primary objective to evaluate the hypothesis that omitting prophylactic abdominal drainage after DP does not worsen the risk of postoperative severe complications (Wente etal., Surgery 142:20-5, 2007; Bassi et al., Surgery 161:584-91, 2017). Most of the published studies on drain placement after pancreatectomy focus on both pancreatoduodenectomy and DP, but these two entities present are associated with different complications and therefore deserve separate evaluation (McMillan et al., Surgery 159:1013-22, 2016; Pratt et al., J Gastrointest Surg 10:1264-78, 2006). The PANDORINA trial is innovative since it takes the preoperative risk on POPF into account based on the D-FRS and it warrants homogenous stump closing by using the same graded compression technique and same stapling device (de Pastena et al., Ann Surg 2022; Asbun and Stauffer, Surg Endosc 25:2643-9, 2011).

Published
2022

24. Utility of the Iwate difficulty scoring system for laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy: do surgical outcomes differ for tumors in segments VI and VII?

Author

Choi S. H., Chen K. -H., Syn N. L., Cipriani F., Cheung T. -T., Chiow A. K. H., Choi G. -H., Siow T. -F., Sucandy I., Marino M. V., Gastaca M., Chong C. C., Lee J. H., Ivanecz A., Mazzaferro V., Lopez-Ben S., Fondevila C., Rotellar F., Campos R. R., Efanov M., Kingham T. P., Sutcliffe R. P., Troisi R. I., Pratschke J., Wang X., D'Hondt M., Yong C. C., Levi Sandri G. B., Tang C. N., Ruzzenente A., Cherqui D., Ferrero A., Wakabayashi G., Scatton O., Aghayan D., Edwin B., Coelho F. F., Giuliante F., Liu R., Sijberden J., Abu Hilal M., Sugioka A., Long T. C. D., Fuks D., Aldrighetti L., Han H. -S., Goh B. K. P., Kang I., Jang J. Y., Chan C. -Y., D'Silva M., Schotte H., De Meyere C., Lai E., Krenzien F., Schmelzle M., Kadam P., Montalti R., Giglio M., Liu Q., Lee K. -F., Salimgereeva D., Alikhanov R., Lee L. -S., Prieto M., Lim C., Nghia P. P., Kojima M., Kato Y., Forchino F., Herman P., Kruger J. A. P., Saleh M., Pascual F., Dalla Valle B., Lopez-Lopez V., Casellas-Robert M., Giustizieri U., Citterio D., Mishima K., Fretland A. A., Ghotbi J., Ettorre G. M., Colasanti M., Guzman Y., Ardito F., Vani S., Wang H. -P., Choi, S. H., Chen, K. -H., Syn, N. L., Cipriani, F., Cheung, T. -T., Chiow, A. K. H., Choi, G. -H., Siow, T. -F., Sucandy, I., Marino, M. V., Gastaca, M., Chong, C. C., Lee, J. H., Ivanecz, A., Mazzaferro, V., Lopez-Ben, S., Fondevila, C., Rotellar, F., Campos, R. R., Efanov, M., Kingham, T. P., Sutcliffe, R. P., Troisi, R. I., Pratschke, J., Wang, X., D'Hondt, M., Yong, C. C., Levi Sandri, G. B., Tang, C. N., Ruzzenente, A., Cherqui, D., Ferrero, A., Wakabayashi, G., Scatton, O., Aghayan, D., Edwin, B., Coelho, F. F., Giuliante, F., Liu, R., Sijberden, J., Abu Hilal, M., Sugioka, A., Long, T. C. D., Fuks, D., Aldrighetti, L., Han, H. -S., Goh, B. K. P., Kang, I., Jang, J. Y., Chan, C. -Y., D'Silva, M., Schotte, H., De Meyere, C., Lai, E., Krenzien, F., Schmelzle, M., Kadam, P., Montalti, R., Giglio, M., Liu, Q., Lee, K. -F., Salimgereeva, D., Alikhanov, R., Lee, L. -S., Prieto, M., Lim, C., Nghia, P. P., Kojima, M., Kato, Y., Forchino, F., Herman, P., Kruger, J. A. P., Saleh, M., Pascual, F., Dalla Valle, B., Lopez-Lopez, V., Casellas-Robert, M., Giustizieri, U., Citterio, D., Mishima, K., Fretland, A. A., Ghotbi, J., Ettorre, G. M., Colasanti, M., Guzman, Y., Ardito, F., Vani, S., Wang, H. -P., Choi, Sung Hoon, Chen, Kuo-Hsin, Syn, Nicholas L, Cipriani, Federica, Cheung, Tan-To, Chiow, Adrian K H, Choi, Gi-Hong, Siow, Tiing-Foong, Sucandy, Iswanto, Marino, Marco V, Gastaca, Mikel, Chong, Charing C, Lee, Jae Hoon, Ivanecz, Arpad, Mazzaferro, Vincenzo, Lopez-Ben, Santiago, Fondevila, Constantino, Rotellar, Fernando, Campos, Ricardo Roble, Efanov, Mikhail, Kingham, T Peter, Sutcliffe, Robert P, Troisi, Roberto I, Pratschke, Johann, Wang, Xiaoying, D'Hondt, Mathieu, Yong, Chee Chien, Levi Sandri, Giovanni Battista, Tang, Chung Ngai, Ruzzenente, Andrea, Cherqui, Daniel, Ferrero, Alessandro, Wakabayashi, Go, Scatton, Olivier, Aghayan, Davit, Edwin, Bjørn, Coelho, Fabricio Ferreira, Giuliante, Felice, Liu, Rong, Sijberden, Jasper, Abu Hilal, Mohammad, Sugioka, Atsushi, Long, Tran Cong Duy, Fuks, David, Aldrighetti, Luca, Han, Ho-Seong, and Goh, Brian K P

Subjects
Carcinoma, Hepatocellular, Laparoscopic liver, Settore MED/18 - CHIRURGIA GENERALE, Operative Time, Liver Neoplasms, Carcinoma, Hepatocellular, Difficulty score, Length of Stay, Iwate, Laparoscopic hepatectomy, Right posterior sectionectomy, Treatment Outcome, Postoperative Complications, Humans, Hepatectomy, Surgery, Laparoscopy, Retrospective Studies
Abstract

Introduction: The Iwate Score (IS) have not been well-validated for specific procedures, especially for right posterior sectionectomy (RPS). In this study, the utility of the IS was determined for laparoscopic (L)RPS and the effect of tumor location on surgical outcomes was investigated. Methods: Post-hoc analysis of 647 L-RPS performed in 40 international centers of which 596L-RPS cases met the inclusion criteria. Baseline characteristics and perioperative outcomes of patients stratified based on the Iwate score were compared to determine whether a correlation with surgical difficulty existed. A 1:1 Mahalanobis distance matching was utilized to investigate the effect of tumor location on L-RPS outcomes. Results: The patients were stratified into 3 levels of difficulty (31 intermediate, 143 advanced, and 422 expert) based on the IS. When using a stepwise increase of the IS excluding the tumor location score, only Pringle’s maneuver was more frequently used in the higher surgical difficulty level (35.5%, 54.6%, and 65.2%, intermediate, advanced, and expert levels, respectively, Z = 3.34, p = 0.001). Other perioperative results were not associated with a statistical gradation toward higher difficulty level. 80 of 85 patients with a segment VI lesion and 511 patients with a segment VII lesion were matched 1:1. There were no significant differences in the perioperative outcomes of the two groups including open conversion, operating time, blood loss, intraoperative blood transfusion, postoperative stay, major morbidity, and mortality. Conclusion: Among patients undergoing L-RPS, the IS did not significantly correlate with most outcome measures associated with intraoperative difficulty and postoperative outcomes. Similarly, tumor location had no effect on L-RPS outcomes.

Published
2022

25. Comparison between the difficulty of laparoscopic limited liver resections of tumors located in segment 7 versus segment 8

Author

Efanov, M., Salimgereeva, D., Alikhanov, R., A. G. R., Wu, Geller, D., Cipriani, F., Aghayan, D. L., Fretland, A. A., Sijberden, J., Belli, A., Marino, M. V., Mazzaferro, V., Chiow, A. K. H., Sucandy, I., Ivanecz, A., Choi, S. H., Lee, J. H., Prieto, M., Vivarelli, M., Giuliante, Felice, Ruzzenente, A., Yong, C. -C., Fondevila, C., Rotellar, F., Choi, G. -H., Robless Campos, R., Wang, X., Sutcliffe, R. P., Pratschke, J., Lai, E., Chong, C. C., D'Hondt, M., Monden, K., Lopez-Ben, S., Herman, P., Di Benedetto, F., Kingham, T. P., Liu, R., Long, T. C. D., Ferrero, A., Levi Sandri, G. B., Cherqui, D., Scatton, O., Wakabayashi, G., Troisi, R. I., Cheung, T. -T., Sugioka, A., Han, H. -S., Abu Hilal, M., Soubrane, O., Fuks, D., Aldrighetti, L., Edwin, B., Goh, B. K. P., Chan, C. -Y., Syn, N., D'Silva, M., Lee, B., Lim, C., Nghia, P. P., Gastaca, M., Schotte, H., De Meyere, C., Krenzien, F., Schmelzle, M., Lee, K. -F., Lee, L. S., Jang, J. Y., Kojima, M., Kato, Y., Ghotbi, J., Kruger, J. A. P., Coelho, F. F., Lopez-Lopez, V., Valle, B. D., Robert, M. C. I., Mishima, K., Montalti, R., Giglio, M., Wang, H. -P., Pascual, F., Saleh, M., Kadam, P., Tang, C. -N., Ardito, Francesco, Vani, S., Giustizieri, U., Citterio, D., Mocchegiani, F., Ettorre, G. M., Colasanti, M., Guzman, Y., Dogeas, E., Magistri, P., Mazzotta, A., Graduate School, Surgery, CCA - Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, Efanov, M., Salimgereeva, D., Alikhanov, R., Wu, A. G. R., Geller, D., Cipriani, F., Aghayan, D. L., Fretland, A. A., Sijberden, J., Belli, A., Marino, M. V., Mazzaferro, V., Chiow, A. K. H., Sucandy, I., Ivanecz, A., Choi, S. H., Lee, J. H., Prieto, M., Vivarelli, M., Giuliante, F., Ruzzenente, A., Yong, C. -C., Fondevila, C., Rotellar, F., Choi, G. -H., Robless Campos, R., Wang, X., Sutcliffe, R. P., Pratschke, J., Lai, E., Chong, C. C., D'Hondt, M., Monden, K., Lopez-Ben, S., Herman, P., Di Benedetto, F., Kingham, T. P., Liu, R., Long, T. C. D., Ferrero, A., Levi Sandri, G. B., Cherqui, D., Scatton, O., Wakabayashi, G., Troisi, R. I., Cheung, T. -T., Sugioka, A., Han, H. -S., Abu Hilal, M., Soubrane, O., Fuks, D., Aldrighetti, L., Edwin, B., Goh, B. K. P., Chan, C. -Y., Syn, N., D'Silva, M., Lee, B., Lim, C., Nghia, P. P., Gastaca, M., Schotte, H., De Meyere, C., Krenzien, F., Schmelzle, M., Lee, K. -F., Lee, L. S., Jang, J. Y., Kojima, M., Kato, Y., Ghotbi, J., Kruger, J. A. P., Coelho, F. F., Lopez-Lopez, V., Valle, B. D., Robert, M. C. I., Mishima, K., Montalti, R., Giglio, M., Wang, H. -P., Pascual, F., Saleh, M., Kadam, P., Tang, C. -N., Ardito, F., Vani, S., Giustizieri, U., Citterio, D., Mocchegiani, F., Ettorre, G. M., Colasanti, M., Guzman, Y., Dogeas, E., Magistri, P., Mazzotta, A., Efanov, Mikhail, Salimgereeva, Diana, Alikhanov, Ruslan, Wu, Andrew G R, Geller, David, Cipriani, Federica, Aghayan, Davit L, Fretland, Asmund Avdem, Sijberden, Jasper, Belli, Andrea, Marino, Marco V, Mazzaferro, Vincenzo, Chiow, Adrian K H, Sucandy, Iswanto, Ivanecz, Arpad, Choi, Sung Hoon, Lee, Jae Hoon, Prieto, Mikel, Vivarelli, Marco, Giuliante, Felice, Ruzzenente, Andrea, Yong, Chee-Chien, Fondevila, Constantino, Rotellar, Fernando, Choi, Gi-Hong, Robless Campos, Ricardo, Wang, Xiaoying, Sutcliffe, Robert P, Pratschke, Johann, Lai, Eric, Chong, Charing C, D'Hondt, Mathieu, Monden, Kazuteru, Lopez-Ben, Santiago, Herman, Paulo, Di Benedetto, Fabrizio, Kingham, T Peter, Liu, Rong, Long, Tran Cong Duy, Ferrero, Alessandro, Levi Sandri, Giovanni Battista, Cherqui, Daniel, Scatton, Olivier, Wakabayashi, Go, Troisi, Roberto I, Cheung, Tan-To, Sugioka, Atsushi, Han, Ho-Seong, Abu Hilal, Mohammad, Soubrane, Olivier, Fuks, David, Aldrighetti, Luca, Edwin, Bjorn, and Goh, Brian K P

Subjects
hepatectomy, laparoscopy, liver resection, posterosuperior segments, risk score, Hepatology, Settore MED/18 - CHIRURGIA GENERALE, Surgery, posterosuperior segment
Abstract

Background: Presently, according to different difficulty scoring systems, there is no difference in complexity estimation of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) of segments 7 and 8. However, there is no published data supporting this assumption. To date, no studies have compared the outcomes of laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing resection of the liver segments 7 and 8. Methods: A post hoc analysis of patients undergoing LLR of segments 7 and 8 in 46 centers between 2004 and 2020 was performed. 1:1 Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to compare isolated LLR of segments 7 and 8. Subset analyses were also performed to compare atypical resections and segmentectomies of 7 and 8. Results: A total of 2411 patients were identified, and 1691 patients met the inclusion criteria. Comparison after PSM between the entire cohort of segment 7 and segment 8 resections revealed inferior results for segment 7 resection in terms of increased blood loss, blood transfusions, and conversions to open surgery. Subset analyses of only atypical resections similarly demonstrated poorer outcomes for segment 7 in terms of increased blood loss, operation time, blood transfusions, and conversions to open surgery. Conversely, a subgroup analysis of segmentectomies after PSM found better outcomes for segment 7 in terms of a shorter operation time and hospital stay. Conclusion: Differences in the outcomes of segments 7 and 8 resections suggest a greater difficulty of laparoscopic atypical resection of segment 7 compared to segment 8, and greater difficulty of segmentectomy 8 compared to segmentectomy 7.

Published
2022

26. Evidence Map of Pancreatic Surgery–A living systematic review with meta-analyses by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS)

Author

Probst, P, Huttner, F, Meydan, O, Abu Hilal, M, Adham, M, Barreto, S, Besselink, M, Busch, O, Bockhorn, M, Del Chiaro, M, Conlon, K, Castillo, C, Friess, H, Fusai, G, Gianotti, L, Hackert, T, Halloran, C, Izbicki, J, Kalkum, E, Kelemen, D, Kenngott, H, Kretschmer, R, Landre, V, Lillemoe, K, Miao, Y, Marchegiani, G, Mihaljevic, A, Radenkovich, D, Salvia, R, Sandini, M, Serrablo, A, Shrikhande, S, Shukla, P, Siriwardena, A, Strobel, O, Uzunoglu, F, Vollmer, C, Weitz, J, Wolfgang, C, Zerbi, A, Bassi, C, Dervenis, C, Neoptolemos, J, Buchler, M, Diener, M, Probst P., Huttner F. J., Meydan O., Abu Hilal M., Adham M., Barreto S. G., Besselink M. G., Busch O. R., Bockhorn M., Del Chiaro M., Conlon K., Castillo C. F. -D., Friess H., Fusai G. K., Gianotti L., Hackert T., Halloran C., Izbicki J., Kalkum E., Kelemen D., Kenngott H. G., Kretschmer R., Landre V., Lillemoe K. D., Miao Y., Marchegiani G., Mihaljevic A., Radenkovich D., Salvia R., Sandini M., Serrablo A., Shrikhande S., Shukla P. J., Siriwardena A. K., Strobel O., Uzunoglu F. G., Vollmer C., Weitz J., Wolfgang C. L., Zerbi A., Bassi C., Dervenis C., Neoptolemos J., Buchler M. W., Diener M. K., Probst, P, Huttner, F, Meydan, O, Abu Hilal, M, Adham, M, Barreto, S, Besselink, M, Busch, O, Bockhorn, M, Del Chiaro, M, Conlon, K, Castillo, C, Friess, H, Fusai, G, Gianotti, L, Hackert, T, Halloran, C, Izbicki, J, Kalkum, E, Kelemen, D, Kenngott, H, Kretschmer, R, Landre, V, Lillemoe, K, Miao, Y, Marchegiani, G, Mihaljevic, A, Radenkovich, D, Salvia, R, Sandini, M, Serrablo, A, Shrikhande, S, Shukla, P, Siriwardena, A, Strobel, O, Uzunoglu, F, Vollmer, C, Weitz, J, Wolfgang, C, Zerbi, A, Bassi, C, Dervenis, C, Neoptolemos, J, Buchler, M, Diener, M, Probst P., Huttner F. J., Meydan O., Abu Hilal M., Adham M., Barreto S. G., Besselink M. G., Busch O. R., Bockhorn M., Del Chiaro M., Conlon K., Castillo C. F. -D., Friess H., Fusai G. K., Gianotti L., Hackert T., Halloran C., Izbicki J., Kalkum E., Kelemen D., Kenngott H. G., Kretschmer R., Landre V., Lillemoe K. D., Miao Y., Marchegiani G., Mihaljevic A., Radenkovich D., Salvia R., Sandini M., Serrablo A., Shrikhande S., Shukla P. J., Siriwardena A. K., Strobel O., Uzunoglu F. G., Vollmer C., Weitz J., Wolfgang C. L., Zerbi A., Bassi C., Dervenis C., Neoptolemos J., Buchler M. W., and Diener M. K.

Abstract

Background: Pancreatic surgery is associated with considerable morbidity and, consequently, offers a large and complex field for research. To prioritize relevant future scientific projects, it is of utmost importance to identify existing evidence and uncover research gaps. Thus, the aim of this project was to create a systematic and living Evidence Map of Pancreatic Surgery. Methods: PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science were systematically searched for all randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews on pancreatic surgery. Outcomes from every existing randomized controlled trial were extracted, and trial quality was assessed. Systematic reviews were used to identify an absence of randomized controlled trials. Randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews on identical subjects were grouped according to research topics. A web-based evidence map modeled after a mind map was created to visualize existing evidence. Meta-analyses of specific outcomes of pancreatic surgery were performed for all research topics with more than 3 randomized controlled trials. For partial pancreatoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy, pooled benchmarks for outcomes were calculated with a 99% confidence interval. The evidence map undergoes regular updates. Results: Out of 30,860 articles reviewed, 328 randomized controlled trials on 35,600 patients and 332 systematic reviews were included and grouped into 76 research topics. Most randomized controlled trials were from Europe (46%) and most systematic reviews were from Asia (51%). A living meta-analysis of 21 out of 76 research topics (28%) was performed and included in the web-based evidence map. Evidence gaps were identified in 11 out of 76 research topics (14%). The benchmark for mortality was 2% (99% confidence interval: 1%–2%) for partial pancreatoduodenectomy and <1% (99% confidence interval: 0%–1%) for distal pancreatectomy. The benchmark for overall complications was 53% (99%co

Published
2021

27. Risk factors for malignancy in adult‐onset dermatomyositis.

Author

Bednar, E. D., Legault, K., Pavlova, V., and Abu‐Hilal, M.

Subjects
DERMATOMYOSITIS, INSTITUTIONAL review boards, PANCREATIC cancer, MEDICAL screening
Abstract

This article discusses a study on the risk factors for malignancy in adult-onset dermatomyositis (DM). The study found that older age at diagnosis, male sex, dysphagia, and cutaneous necrosis were identified as risk factors for malignancy in adult-onset DM. The most common malignancies associated with DM were breast, colorectal, lung, ovarian, and pancreatic cancers. Certain autoantibodies were also associated with malignancy, but more research is needed. The study provides demographic and clinical information on the study population and compares participants with and without malignancy. The authors suggest that clinicians should have personalized discussions with patients to determine the need for malignancy screening. Future studies should include participants from multiple institutions for more robust data. The study was not funded and the authors have no conflicts of interest. The data are available upon request and the study was approved by the institutional review board. [Extracted from the article]

Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

31. Overcoming obstacles to establish a multidisciplinary team approach to hepatobiliary diseases: a working model in a Caribbean setting

Author

Cawich SO, Johnson PB, Shah S, Roberts P, Arthurs M, Murphy T, Bonadie KO, Crandon IW, Harding HE, Abu Hilal M, and Pearce NW

Subjects
Medicine (General), R5-920
Abstract

Shamir O Cawich,1 Peter B Johnson,2 Sundeep Shah,2 Patrick Roberts,2 Milton Arthurs,2 Trevor Murphy,2 Kimon O Bonadie,2 Ivor W Crandon,1 Hyacinth E Harding,1 Mohammed Abu Hilal,3 Neil W Pearce3 1Department of Clinical Surgical Sciences, University of the West Indies, St Augustine Campus, Trinidad and Tobago; 2Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of the West Indies, Mona Campus, Kingston, Jamaica; 3University Surgical Unit, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, United Kingdom Introduction: By providing a structured forum to exchange information and ideas, multidisciplinary team meetings improve working relationships, expedite investigations, promote evidence-based treatment, and ultimately improve clinical outcomes. Methods: This discursive paper reports the introduction of a multidisciplinary team approach to manage hepatobiliary diseases in Jamaica, focusing on the challenges encountered and the methods used to overcome these obstacles. Conclusion: Despite multiple challenges in resource-limited environments, a multidisciplinary team approach can be incorporated into clinical practice in developing nations. Policy makers should make it a priority to support clinical, operational, and governance aspects of the multidisciplinary teams. Keywords: decision-making, cancer, health care policy

Published
2014

33. Perspectives from Italy during the COVID-19 pandemic: nationwide survey-based focus on minimally invasive HPB surgery

Author

Aldrighetti, L, Boggi, U, Falconi, M, Giuliante, F, Cipriani, F, Ratti, F, Torzilli, G, Abu Hilal, M, Andrianello, S, Anselmo, A, Ardito, F, Gian, L, Banchini, F, Barabino, M, Barberis, A, Bassi, C, Batignani, G, Battiston, C, Belli, A, Berti, S, Bianco, P, Brolese, A, Brozzetti, S, Butturini, G, Calise, F, Carabott, K, Capretti, G, Casadei, R, Cescon, M, Cesaretti, M, Cillo, U, Cinardi, N, Colledan, M, Coppola, A, Cotsoglou, C, Crippa, S, Bona, E, Valle, R, De Angelis, M, De Carlis, L, Di Benedetto, F, Di Sebastiano, P, Dova, L, Ercolani, G, Esposito, A, Giuseppe, M, Fabris, A, Ferrero, A, Frena, A, Frigerio, I, Gianotti, L, Giuliani, A, Grazi, G, Gringeri, E, Griseri, G, Gruttadauria, S, Guglielmi, A, Izzo, F, Jovine, E, Lanza, E, Malleo, G, Manzini, L, Massani, M, Mazzaferro, V, Memeo, R, Minni, F, Morelli, L, Nappo, G, Nardo, B, Orlando, F, Partelli, S, Patriti, A, Patrone, R, Percivale, A, Piccolo, G, Ravaioli, M, Reggiani, P, Risaliti, M, Rocca, A, Romagnoli, R, Romano, F, Russolillo, N, Ruzzenente, A, Saladino, E, Salvia, R, Santambrogio, R, Tarchi, P, Troci, A, Troisi, R, Urbani, L, Veneroni, L, Vennarecci, G, Vigano, L, Viola, M, Vistoli, F, Vivarelli, M, Zanello, M, Zanus, G, Zerbi, A, Aldrighetti L., Boggi U., Falconi M., Giuliante F., Cipriani F., Ratti F., Torzilli G., Abu Hilal M., Andrianello S., Anselmo A., Ardito F., Gian L. B., Banchini F., Barabino M., Barberis A., Bassi C., Batignani G., Battiston C., Belli A., Berti S., Bianco P., Brolese A., Brozzetti S., Butturini G., Calise F., Carabott K., Capretti G., Casadei R., Cescon M., Cesaretti M., Cillo U., Cinardi N., Colledan M., Coppola A., Cotsoglou C., Crippa S., Bona E. D., Valle R. D., De Angelis M., De Carlis L., Di Benedetto F., Di Sebastiano P., Dova L., Ercolani G., Esposito A., Giuseppe M. E., Fabris A., Ferrero A., Frena A., Frigerio I., Gianotti L., Giuliani A., Grazi G., Gringeri E., Griseri G., Gruttadauria S., Guglielmi A., Izzo F., Jovine E., Lanza E., Malleo G., Manzini L., Massani M., Mazzaferro V., Memeo R., Minni F., Morelli L., Nappo G., Nardo B., Orlando F., Partelli S., Patriti A., Patrone R., Percivale A., Piccolo G., Ravaioli M., Reggiani P., Risaliti M., Rocca A., Romagnoli R., Romano F., Russolillo N., Ruzzenente A., Saladino E., Salvia R., Santambrogio R., Tarchi P., Troci A., Troisi R., Urbani L., Veneroni L., Vennarecci G., Vigano L., Viola M., Vistoli F., Vivarelli M., Zanello M., Zanus G., Zerbi A., Aldrighetti, L, Boggi, U, Falconi, M, Giuliante, F, Cipriani, F, Ratti, F, Torzilli, G, Abu Hilal, M, Andrianello, S, Anselmo, A, Ardito, F, Gian, L, Banchini, F, Barabino, M, Barberis, A, Bassi, C, Batignani, G, Battiston, C, Belli, A, Berti, S, Bianco, P, Brolese, A, Brozzetti, S, Butturini, G, Calise, F, Carabott, K, Capretti, G, Casadei, R, Cescon, M, Cesaretti, M, Cillo, U, Cinardi, N, Colledan, M, Coppola, A, Cotsoglou, C, Crippa, S, Bona, E, Valle, R, De Angelis, M, De Carlis, L, Di Benedetto, F, Di Sebastiano, P, Dova, L, Ercolani, G, Esposito, A, Giuseppe, M, Fabris, A, Ferrero, A, Frena, A, Frigerio, I, Gianotti, L, Giuliani, A, Grazi, G, Gringeri, E, Griseri, G, Gruttadauria, S, Guglielmi, A, Izzo, F, Jovine, E, Lanza, E, Malleo, G, Manzini, L, Massani, M, Mazzaferro, V, Memeo, R, Minni, F, Morelli, L, Nappo, G, Nardo, B, Orlando, F, Partelli, S, Patriti, A, Patrone, R, Percivale, A, Piccolo, G, Ravaioli, M, Reggiani, P, Risaliti, M, Rocca, A, Romagnoli, R, Romano, F, Russolillo, N, Ruzzenente, A, Saladino, E, Salvia, R, Santambrogio, R, Tarchi, P, Troci, A, Troisi, R, Urbani, L, Veneroni, L, Vennarecci, G, Vigano, L, Viola, M, Vistoli, F, Vivarelli, M, Zanello, M, Zanus, G, Zerbi, A, Aldrighetti L., Boggi U., Falconi M., Giuliante F., Cipriani F., Ratti F., Torzilli G., Abu Hilal M., Andrianello S., Anselmo A., Ardito F., Gian L. B., Banchini F., Barabino M., Barberis A., Bassi C., Batignani G., Battiston C., Belli A., Berti S., Bianco P., Brolese A., Brozzetti S., Butturini G., Calise F., Carabott K., Capretti G., Casadei R., Cescon M., Cesaretti M., Cillo U., Cinardi N., Colledan M., Coppola A., Cotsoglou C., Crippa S., Bona E. D., Valle R. D., De Angelis M., De Carlis L., Di Benedetto F., Di Sebastiano P., Dova L., Ercolani G., Esposito A., Giuseppe M. E., Fabris A., Ferrero A., Frena A., Frigerio I., Gianotti L., Giuliani A., Grazi G., Gringeri E., Griseri G., Gruttadauria S., Guglielmi A., Izzo F., Jovine E., Lanza E., Malleo G., Manzini L., Massani M., Mazzaferro V., Memeo R., Minni F., Morelli L., Nappo G., Nardo B., Orlando F., Partelli S., Patriti A., Patrone R., Percivale A., Piccolo G., Ravaioli M., Reggiani P., Risaliti M., Rocca A., Romagnoli R., Romano F., Russolillo N., Ruzzenente A., Saladino E., Salvia R., Santambrogio R., Tarchi P., Troci A., Troisi R., Urbani L., Veneroni L., Vennarecci G., Vigano L., Viola M., Vistoli F., Vivarelli M., Zanello M., Zanus G., and Zerbi A.

Abstract

The safety of minimally invasive procedures during COVID pandemic remains hotly debated, especially in a country, like Italy, where minimally invasive techniques have progressively and pervasively entered clinical practice, in both the hepatobiliary and pancreatic community. A nationwide snapshot of the management of HPB minimally invasive surgery activity during COVID-19 pandemic is provided: a survey was developed and conducted within AICEP (Italian Association of HepatoBilioPancreatic Surgeons) with the final aim of conveying the experience, knowledge, and opinions into a unitary report enabling more efficient crisis management. Results from the survey (81 respondents) show that, in Italian hospitals, minimally invasive surgery maintains its role despite the COVID-19 pandemic, with the registered reduction of cases being proportional to the overall reduction of the HPB surgical activity. Respondents agree that the switch from minimally invasive to open technique can be considered as a valid option for cases with a high technical complexity. Several issues merit specific attention: screening for virus positivity should be universally performed; only expert surgical teams should operate on positive patients and specific technical measures to lower the biological risk of contamination during surgery must be followed. Future studies specifically designed to establish the true risks in minimally invasive surgery are suggested. Furthermore, a standard and univocal process of prioritization of patients from Regional Healthcare Systems is advisable.

Published
2020

34. Outcomes of a Multicenter Training Program in Robotic Pancreatoduodenectomy (LAELAPS-3)

Author

Zwart, M.J.W., Nota, C.L.M., Rooij, T. de, Hilst, J. van, Riele, W.W. te, Santvoort, H.C. van, Hagendoorn, J., Rinkes, I.H.M.B., Dam, J.L. van, Latenstein, A.E.J., Takagi, K., Tran, K.T.C., Schreinemakers, J., Schelling, G.P. van der, Wijsman, J.H., Festen, S., Daams, F., Luyer, M.D., Hingh, I.H.J.T. de, Mieog, J.S.D., Bonsing, B.A., Lips, D.J., Abu Hilal, M., Busch, O.R., Saint-Marc, O., Zehl, H.J.Z., Zureikat, A.H., Hogg, M.E., Molenaar, I.Q., Besselink, M.G., Koerkamp, B.G., Dutch Pancreatic Canc Grp, Graduate School, CCA - Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, AGEM - Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, Anesthesiology, APH - Quality of Care, Surgery, CCA - Cancer Treatment and quality of life, and Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism

Subjects
complication, Robotics, Pancreaticoduodenectomy, Pancreatic Neoplasms, Pancreatic Fistula, Postoperative Complications, learning curve, robotic pancreatoduodectomy, Robotic Surgical Procedures, SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being, robotic surgery, Humans, Laparoscopy, Surgery, Retrospective Studies, operative time
Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess feasibility and safety of a multicenter training program in robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) adhering to the IDEAL framework for implementation of surgical innovation.BACKGROUND: Good results for RPD have been reported from single center studies. However, data on feasibility and safety of implementation through a multicenter training program in RPD are lacking.METHODS: A multicenter training program in RPD was designed together with the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, including an online video bank, robot simulation exercises, biotissue drills, and on-site proctoring. Benchmark patients were based on the criteria of Clavien. Outcomes were collected prospectively (March 2016-October 2019). Cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis of operative time was performed to distinguish the first and second phase of the learning curve. Outcomes were compared between both phases of the learning curve. Trends in nationwide use of robotic and laparoscopic PD were assessed in the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit.RESULTS: Overall, 275 RPD procedures were performed in seven centers by 15 trained surgeons. The recent benchmark criteria for low-risk PD were met by 125 (45.5%) patients. The conversion rate was 6.5% (n = 18) and median blood loss 250 ml (IQR 150-500). The rate of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III complications was 44.4% (n = 122), postoperative pancreatic fistula (grade B/C) rate 23.6% (n = 65), 90-day complication-related mortality 2.5% (n = 7) and 90-day cancer-related mortality 2.2.% (n = 6). Median postoperative hospital stay was 12 days (IQR 8-20). In the subgroup of patients with pancreatic cancer (n = 80), the major complication rate was 31.3% and POPF rate was 10%. CUSUM analysis for operative time found a learning curve inflection point at 22 RPDs (IQR 10-35) with similar rates of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III complications in the first and second phase (43.4% vs 43.8%, P = 0.956, respectively). During the study period the nationwide use of laparoscopic PD reduced from 15% to 1%, whereas the use of RPD increased from 0% to 25%.CONCLUSIONS: This multicenter RPD training program in centers with sufficient surgical volume was found to be feasible without a negative impact of the learning curve on clinical outcomes.

Published
2021

35. Dragon 1 Protocol Manuscript : Training, Accreditation, Implementation and Safety Evaluation of Portal and Hepatic Vein Embolization (PVE/HVE) to Accelerate Future Liver Remnant (FLR) Hypertrophy

Author

Korenblik, R., Olij, B., Aldrighetti, L. A., Abu Hilal, M., Ahle, Margareta, Arslan, B., van Baardewijk, L. J., Baclija, I, Bent, C., Bertrand, C. L., Björnsson, Bergthor, de Boer, M. T., de Boer, S. W., Bokkers, R. P. H., Rinkes, I. H. M. Borel, Breitenstein, S., Bruijnen, R. C. G., Bruners, P., Camacho, J. C., Cappelli, A., Carling, U., Chan, B. K. Y., Chang, D. H., Choi, J., Codina Font, J., Crawford, M., Croagh, D., Cugat, E., Davis, R., De Boo, D. W., De Cobelli, F., De Wispelaere, J. F., van Delden, O. M., Delle, M., Detry, O., Dili, A., Erdmann, J. I, Fisher, O., Fondevila, C., Fretland, A., Garcia Borobia, F., Gelabert, A., Gerard, L., Giuliante, F., Gobardhan, P. D., Gomez, F., Grunberger, T., Grunhagen, D. J., Guitart, J., Hagendoorn, J., Heil, J., Heise, D., Herrero, E., Hess, G. F., Hoffmann, M. H., Iezzi, R., Imani, F., Nguyen, J., Jovine, E., Kalff, J. C., Kazemier, G., Kingham, T. P., Kleeff, J., Kollmar, O., Leclercq, W. K. G., Lopez Ben, S., Lucidi, V, MacDonald, A., Madoff, D. C., Manekeller, S., Martel, G., Mehrabi, A., Mehrzad, H., Meijerink, M. R., Menon, K., Metrakos, P., Meyer, C., Moelker, A., Modi, S., Montanari, N., Navines, J., Neumann, U. P., Peddu, P., Primrose, J. N., Qu, X., Raptis, D., Ratti, F., Ridouani, F., Rogan, C., Ronellenfitsch, U., Ryan, S., Sallemi, C., Sampere Moragues, J., Sandström, Per A, Sarria, L., Schnitzbauer, A., Serenari, M., Serrablo, A., Smits, M. L. J., Sparrelid, E., Spuntrup, E., Stavrou, G. A., Sutcliffe, R. P., Tancredi, I, Tasse, J. C., Udupa, V, Valenti, D., Fundora, Y., Vogl, T. J., Wang, X., White, S. A., Wohlgemuth, W. A., Yu, D., Zijlstra, I. A. J., Binkert, C. A., Bemelmans, M. H. A., van der Leij, C., Schadde, E., van Dam, R. M., Korenblik, R., Olij, B., Aldrighetti, L. A., Abu Hilal, M., Ahle, Margareta, Arslan, B., van Baardewijk, L. J., Baclija, I, Bent, C., Bertrand, C. L., Björnsson, Bergthor, de Boer, M. T., de Boer, S. W., Bokkers, R. P. H., Rinkes, I. H. M. Borel, Breitenstein, S., Bruijnen, R. C. G., Bruners, P., Camacho, J. C., Cappelli, A., Carling, U., Chan, B. K. Y., Chang, D. H., Choi, J., Codina Font, J., Crawford, M., Croagh, D., Cugat, E., Davis, R., De Boo, D. W., De Cobelli, F., De Wispelaere, J. F., van Delden, O. M., Delle, M., Detry, O., Dili, A., Erdmann, J. I, Fisher, O., Fondevila, C., Fretland, A., Garcia Borobia, F., Gelabert, A., Gerard, L., Giuliante, F., Gobardhan, P. D., Gomez, F., Grunberger, T., Grunhagen, D. J., Guitart, J., Hagendoorn, J., Heil, J., Heise, D., Herrero, E., Hess, G. F., Hoffmann, M. H., Iezzi, R., Imani, F., Nguyen, J., Jovine, E., Kalff, J. C., Kazemier, G., Kingham, T. P., Kleeff, J., Kollmar, O., Leclercq, W. K. G., Lopez Ben, S., Lucidi, V, MacDonald, A., Madoff, D. C., Manekeller, S., Martel, G., Mehrabi, A., Mehrzad, H., Meijerink, M. R., Menon, K., Metrakos, P., Meyer, C., Moelker, A., Modi, S., Montanari, N., Navines, J., Neumann, U. P., Peddu, P., Primrose, J. N., Qu, X., Raptis, D., Ratti, F., Ridouani, F., Rogan, C., Ronellenfitsch, U., Ryan, S., Sallemi, C., Sampere Moragues, J., Sandström, Per A, Sarria, L., Schnitzbauer, A., Serenari, M., Serrablo, A., Smits, M. L. J., Sparrelid, E., Spuntrup, E., Stavrou, G. A., Sutcliffe, R. P., Tancredi, I, Tasse, J. C., Udupa, V, Valenti, D., Fundora, Y., Vogl, T. J., Wang, X., White, S. A., Wohlgemuth, W. A., Yu, D., Zijlstra, I. A. J., Binkert, C. A., Bemelmans, M. H. A., van der Leij, C., Schadde, E., and van Dam, R. M.

Abstract

Study Purpose The DRAGON 1 trial aims to assess training, implementation, safety and feasibility of combined portal- and hepatic-vein embolization (PVE/HVE) to accelerate future liver remnant (FLR) hypertrophy in patients with borderline resectable colorectal cancer liver metastases. Methods The DRAGON 1 trial is a worldwide multicenter prospective single arm trial. The primary endpoint is a composite of the safety of PVE/HVE, 90-day mortality, and one year accrual monitoring of each participating center. Secondary endpoints include: feasibility of resection, the used PVE and HVE techniques, FLR-hypertrophy, liver function (subset of centers), overall survival, and disease-free survival. All complications after the PVE/HVE procedure are documented. Liver volumes will be measured at week 1 and if applicable at week 3 and 6 after PVE/HVE and follow-up visits will be held at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after the resection. Results Not applicable. Conclusion DRAGON 1 is a prospective trial to assess the safety and feasibility of PVE/HVE. Participating study centers will be trained, and procedures standardized using Work Instructions (WI) to prepare for the DRAGON 2 randomized controlled trial. Outcomes should reveal the accrual potential of centers, safety profile of combined PVE/HVE and the effect of FLR-hypertrophy induction by PVE/HVE in patients with CRLM and a small FLR., Funding Agencies|Dutch Cancer Society (KWF); Abbott Laboratories; Maastricht University; Maastricht University Medical Center; NIHR; Guerbet

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

36. Utility of the Iwate difficulty scoring system for laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy: do surgical outcomes differ for tumors in segments VI and VII?

Author

Choi, S. H., Chen, K. -H., Syn, N. L., Cipriani, F., Cheung, T. -T., Chiow, A. K. H., Choi, G. -H., Siow, T. -F., Sucandy, I., Marino, M. V., Gastaca, M., Chong, C. C., Lee, J. H., Ivanecz, A., Mazzaferro, V., Lopez-Ben, S., Fondevila, C., Rotellar, F., Campos, R. R., Efanov, M., Kingham, T. P., Sutcliffe, R. P., Troisi, R. I., Pratschke, J., Wang, X., D'Hondt, M., Yong, C. C., Levi Sandri, G. B., Tang, C. N., Ruzzenente, A., Cherqui, D., Ferrero, A., Wakabayashi, G., Scatton, O., Aghayan, D., Edwin, B., Coelho, F. F., Giuliante, Felice, Liu, R., Sijberden, J., Abu Hilal, M., Sugioka, A., Long, T. C. D., Fuks, D., Aldrighetti, L., Han, H. -S., Goh, B. K. P., Kang, I., Jang, J. Y., Chan, C. -Y., D'Silva, M., Schotte, H., De Meyere, C., Lai, E., Krenzien, F., Schmelzle, M., Kadam, P., Montalti, R., Giglio, M., Liu, Q., Lee, K. -F., Salimgereeva, D., Alikhanov, R., Lee, L. -S., Prieto, M., Lim, C., Nghia, P. P., Kojima, M., Kato, Y., Forchino, F., Herman, P., Kruger, J. A. P., Saleh, M., Pascual, F., Dalla Valle, B., Lopez-Lopez, V., Casellas-Robert, M., Giustizieri, U., Citterio, D., Mishima, K., Fretland, A. A., Ghotbi, J., Ettorre, G. M., Colasanti, M., Guzman, Y., Ardito, Francesco, Vani, S., Wang, H. -P., Giuliante F. (ORCID:0000-0001-9517-8220), Ardito F. (ORCID:0000-0003-1596-2862), Choi, S. H., Chen, K. -H., Syn, N. L., Cipriani, F., Cheung, T. -T., Chiow, A. K. H., Choi, G. -H., Siow, T. -F., Sucandy, I., Marino, M. V., Gastaca, M., Chong, C. C., Lee, J. H., Ivanecz, A., Mazzaferro, V., Lopez-Ben, S., Fondevila, C., Rotellar, F., Campos, R. R., Efanov, M., Kingham, T. P., Sutcliffe, R. P., Troisi, R. I., Pratschke, J., Wang, X., D'Hondt, M., Yong, C. C., Levi Sandri, G. B., Tang, C. N., Ruzzenente, A., Cherqui, D., Ferrero, A., Wakabayashi, G., Scatton, O., Aghayan, D., Edwin, B., Coelho, F. F., Giuliante, Felice, Liu, R., Sijberden, J., Abu Hilal, M., Sugioka, A., Long, T. C. D., Fuks, D., Aldrighetti, L., Han, H. -S., Goh, B. K. P., Kang, I., Jang, J. Y., Chan, C. -Y., D'Silva, M., Schotte, H., De Meyere, C., Lai, E., Krenzien, F., Schmelzle, M., Kadam, P., Montalti, R., Giglio, M., Liu, Q., Lee, K. -F., Salimgereeva, D., Alikhanov, R., Lee, L. -S., Prieto, M., Lim, C., Nghia, P. P., Kojima, M., Kato, Y., Forchino, F., Herman, P., Kruger, J. A. P., Saleh, M., Pascual, F., Dalla Valle, B., Lopez-Lopez, V., Casellas-Robert, M., Giustizieri, U., Citterio, D., Mishima, K., Fretland, A. A., Ghotbi, J., Ettorre, G. M., Colasanti, M., Guzman, Y., Ardito, Francesco, Vani, S., Wang, H. -P., Giuliante F. (ORCID:0000-0001-9517-8220), and Ardito F. (ORCID:0000-0003-1596-2862)

Abstract

Introduction: The Iwate Score (IS) have not been well-validated for specific procedures, especially for right posterior sectionectomy (RPS). In this study, the utility of the IS was determined for laparoscopic (L)RPS and the effect of tumor location on surgical outcomes was investigated. Methods: Post-hoc analysis of 647 L-RPS performed in 40 international centers of which 596L-RPS cases met the inclusion criteria. Baseline characteristics and perioperative outcomes of patients stratified based on the Iwate score were compared to determine whether a correlation with surgical difficulty existed. A 1:1 Mahalanobis distance matching was utilized to investigate the effect of tumor location on L-RPS outcomes. Results: The patients were stratified into 3 levels of difficulty (31 intermediate, 143 advanced, and 422 expert) based on the IS. When using a stepwise increase of the IS excluding the tumor location score, only Pringle’s maneuver was more frequently used in the higher surgical difficulty level (35.5%, 54.6%, and 65.2%, intermediate, advanced, and expert levels, respectively, Z = 3.34, p = 0.001). Other perioperative results were not associated with a statistical gradation toward higher difficulty level. 80 of 85 patients with a segment VI lesion and 511 patients with a segment VII lesion were matched 1:1. There were no significant differences in the perioperative outcomes of the two groups including open conversion, operating time, blood loss, intraoperative blood transfusion, postoperative stay, major morbidity, and mortality. Conclusion: Among patients undergoing L-RPS, the IS did not significantly correlate with most outcome measures associated with intraoperative difficulty and postoperative outcomes. Similarly, tumor location had no effect on L-RPS outcomes.

Published
2022

40. On the Relationship Between Valence and Arousal in Samples Across the Globe

Author

Yik, M. Mues, C. Sze, I.N.L. Kuppens, P. Tuerlinckx, F. De Roover, K. Kwok, F.H.C. Schwartz, S.H. Abu-Hilal, M. Adebayo, D.F. Aguilar, P. Al-Bahrani, M. Anderson, M.H. Andrade, L. Bratko, D. Bushina, E. Choi, J.W. Cieciuch, J. Dru, V. Evers, U. Fischer, R. Florez, I.A. Garðarsdóttir, R.B. Gari, A. Graf, S. Halama, P. Halberstadt, J. Halim, M.S. Heilman, R.M. Hřebíčková, M. Karl, J.A. Knežević, G. Kohút, M. Kolnes, M. Lazarević, L.B. Lebedeva, N. Lee, J. Lee, Y.-H. Liu, C. Mannerström, R. Marušić, I. Nansubuga, F. Ojedokun, O. Park, J. Platt, T. Proyer, R.T. Realo, A. Rolland, J.-P. Ruch, W. Ruiz, D. Sortheix, F.M. Stahlmann, A.G. Stojanov, A. Strus, W. Tamir, M. Torres, C. Trujillo, A. Truong, T.K.H. Utsugi, A. Vecchione, M. Wang, L. Russell, J.A.

Abstract

Affect is involved in many psychological phenomena, but a descriptive structure, long sought, has been elusive. Valence and arousal are fundamental, and a key question–the focus of the present study–is the relationship between them. Valence is sometimes thought to be independent of arousal, but, in some studies (representing too few societies in the world) arousal was found to vary with valence. One common finding is that arousal is lowest at neutral valence and increases with both positive and negative valence: a symmetric Vshaped relationship. In the study reported here of self-reported affect during a remembered moment (N = 8,590), we tested the valence-arousal relationship in 33 societies with 25 different languages. The two most common hypotheses in the literature–independence and a symmetric V-shaped relationship–were not supported. With data of all samples pooled, arousal increased with positive but not negative valence. Valence accounted for between 5% (Finland) and 43% (China Beijing) of the variance in arousal. Although there is evidence for a structural relationship between the two, there is also a large amount of variability in this relation © 2022 American Psychological Association

Published
2022

41. Prophylactic abdominal drainage or no drainage after distal pancreatectomy (PANDORINA): a binational multicenter randomized controlled trial

Author

Vissers, F. L., Balduzzi, A., van Bodegraven, E. A., van Hilst, J., Festen, S., Abu Hilal, M., Asbun, H. J., Mieog, J. S. D., Koerkamp, B. Groot, Busch, O. R., Daams, F., Luyer, M., De Pastena, M., Malleo, G., Marchegiani, G., Klaase, J., Molenaar, I. Q., Salvia, R., van Santvoort, H. C., Stommel, M., Lips, D., Coolsen, M., Bassi, C., van Eijck, C., Besselink, M. G., Surgery, MUMC+: MA Heelkunde (9), RS: FHML non-thematic output, Groningen Institute for Organ Transplantation (GIOT), and Value, Affordability and Sustainability (VALUE)

Subjects
OUTCOMES, Abdomen/surgery, SURGERY, INTERNATIONAL STUDY-GROUP, Pancreatic Fistula/etiology, Pancreas/surgery, FISTULA, RESECTIONS, Tumours of the digestive tract Radboud Institute for Health Sciences [Radboudumc 14], Pancreatic Fistula, DEFINITION, Pancreatectomy, Postoperative Complications, Drainage/methods, PANCREATICODUODENECTOMY, CLOSURE, Pancreatectomy/adverse effects, Abdomen, RISK-FACTORS, Drainage, Humans, Postoperative Complications/etiology, BED, Pancreas, Retrospective Studies
Abstract

Contains fulltext : 288480.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) BACKGROUND: Prophylactic abdominal drainage is current standard practice after distal pancreatectomy (DP), with the aim to divert pancreatic fluid in case of a postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) aimed to prevent further complications as bleeding. Whereas POPF after pancreatoduodenectomy, by definition, involves infection due to anastomotic dehiscence, a POPF after DP is essentially sterile since the bowel is not opened and no anastomoses are created. Routine drainage after DP could potentially be omitted and this could even be beneficial because of the hypothetical prevention of drain-induced infections (Fisher, Surgery 52:205-22, 2018). Abdominal drainage, moreover, should only be performed if it provides additional safety or comfort to the patient. In clinical practice, drains cause clear discomfort. One multicenter randomized controlled trial confirmed the safety of omitting abdominal drainage but did not stratify patients according to their risk of POPF and did not describe a standardized strategy for pancreatic transection. Therefore, a large pragmatic multicenter randomized controlled trial is required, with prespecified POPF risk groups and a homogeneous method of stump closure. The objective of the PANDORINA trial is to evaluate the non-inferiority of omitting routine intra-abdominal drainage after DP on postoperative morbidity (Clavien-Dindo score ≥ 3), and, secondarily, POPF grade B/C. METHODS/DESIGN: Binational multicenter randomized controlled non-inferiority trial, stratifying patients to high and low risk for POPF grade B/C and incorporating a standardized strategy for pancreatic transection. Two groups of 141 patients (282 in total) undergoing elective DP (either open or minimally invasive, with or without splenectomy). Primary outcome is postoperative rate of morbidity (Clavien-Dindo score ≥ 3), and the most relevant secondary outcome is grade B/C POPF. Other secondary outcomes include surgical reintervention, percutaneous catheter drainage, endoscopic catheter drainage, abdominal collections (not requiring drainage), wound infection, delayed gastric emptying, postpancreatectomy hemorrhage as defined by the international study group for pancreatic surgery (ISGPS) (Wente et al., Surgery 142:20-5, 2007), length of stay (LOS), readmission within 90 days, in-hospital mortality, and 90-day mortality. DISCUSSION: PANDORINA is the first binational, multicenter, randomized controlled non-inferiority trial with the primary objective to evaluate the hypothesis that omitting prophylactic abdominal drainage after DP does not worsen the risk of postoperative severe complications (Wente etal., Surgery 142:20-5, 2007; Bassi et al., Surgery 161:584-91, 2017). Most of the published studies on drain placement after pancreatectomy focus on both pancreatoduodenectomy and DP, but these two entities present are associated with different complications and therefore deserve separate evaluation (McMillan et al., Surgery 159:1013-22, 2016; Pratt et al., J Gastrointest Surg 10:1264-78, 2006). The PANDORINA trial is innovative since it takes the preoperative risk on POPF into account based on the D-FRS and it warrants homogenous stump closing by using the same graded compression technique and same stapling device (de Pastena et al., Ann Surg 2022; Asbun and Stauffer, Surg Endosc 25:2643-9, 2011).

Published
2022

42. Assessing the Outcomes of Robotic Pancreatoduodenectomy According to the Benchmark Cutoffs for the Open Approach: International Multicenter Study

Author

Jones, L.R., primary, de Graaf, N., additional, Luyer, M.D., additional, Saint-Marc, O., additional, Moraldi, L., additional, Groot Koerkamp, B., additional, de Wilde, R.F., additional, Lips, D., additional, Molenaar, Q., additional, Felix Nickel, T.H., additional, Bonsing, B.A., additional, Moo Kang, C., additional, Shen, B., additional, Shin-E Wang, Y.-M.S., additional, Ying Jui Chao, Y.-S.S., additional, Peng, C.-M., additional, Machado, M., additional, Kim, H., additional, Wei, K., additional, Qu, L., additional, Boggi, U., additional, Liu, R., additional, Jang, J.-Y., additional, Besselink, M.G., additional, and Abu Hilal, M., additional

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

43. Impact of Lymph Node Ratio on Survival in the Histopathological Subtypes of Resected Ampullary Cancer: A Retrospective International Multicenter Cohort Study

Author

Lemmers, D.H., primary, Malleo, G., additional, Khalil, K., additional, Robinson, S., additional, Nappo, G., additional, Gradinariu, G., additional, Bonds, M., additional, Halimi, A., additional, Wellner, U., additional, Pessaux, P., additional, Ielpo, B., additional, Boggi, U., additional, Soonawalla, Z., additional, Al-Sarireh, B., additional, Jamieson, N.B., additional, Zarantonello, L., additional, Armstrong, T., additional, Alseidi, A., additional, Fusai, G.K., additional, Zerbi, A., additional, White, S., additional, Roberts, K.J., additional, Salvia, R., additional, Besselink, M.G., additional, and Abu Hilal, M., additional

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

44. Laparoscopic Versus Open Hemihepatectomy: The ORANGE II PLUS Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

Author

Fichtinger, R., primary, Aldrighetti, L., additional, Troisi, R., additional, Abu Hilal, M., additional, Sutcliffe, R., additional, Besselink, M., additional, Aroori, S., additional, Menon, K., additional, Edwin, B., additional, D'Hondt, M., additional, Lucidi, V., additional, Ulmer, T., additional, Diaz-Nieto, R., additional, Soonawalla, Z., additional, White, S., additional, Sergeant, G., additional, Ratti, F., additional, Olij, B., additional, Kümmerli, C., additional, Brandts, L., additional, Pugh, S., additional, Eminton, Z., additional, Van Breukelen, G., additional, Primrose, J., additional, and Van Dam, R., additional

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

45. Minimally Invasive Liver Resections for Hepatocelullar Carcinoma on Metabolic Syndrome: A Western Perspective on a Rising Disease

Author

Berardi, G., primary, Aldrighetti, L., additional, Ferrone, C., additional, Mazzaferro, V., additional, Serrano, P., additional, Cherqui, D., additional, Geller, D., additional, Cillo, U., additional, Ettorre, G., additional, Ferrero, A., additional, Kwon, D., additional, Cescon, M., additional, Sapisochin, G., additional, Rotellar, F., additional, Torzilli, G., additional, Abu-Hilal, M., additional, Corvera, C., additional, Helton, S., additional, Onkendi, E., additional, Ben, S. Lopez, additional, Troisi, R., additional, Simo, K., additional, Conrad, C., additional, and Kingham, P., additional

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

47. A Model to Predict Outcomes Following Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma on Metabolic Syndrome: A Western Perspective on a Rising Disease

Author

Berardi, G., primary, Aldrighetti, L., additional, Ferrone, C., additional, Mazzaferro, V., additional, Serrano, P., additional, Cherqui, D., additional, Geller, D., additional, Cillo, U., additional, Ettorre, G., additional, Ferrero, A., additional, Kwon, D., additional, Cescon, M., additional, Sapisochin, G., additional, Rotellar, F., additional, Torzilli, G., additional, Abu-Hilal, M., additional, Corvera, C., additional, Helton, S., additional, Onkendi, E., additional, Ben, S. Lopez, additional, Troisi, R., additional, Simo, K., additional, Conrad, C., additional, and Kingham, P., additional

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

48. Bile Leakage after Laparoscopic and Open Liver Resection; Incidence and Clinical Impact: An International Multicenter Propensity Score-Matched Study of 13,379 Patients

Author

Gorgec, B., primary, Benedetti Cacciaguerra, A., additional, Cipriani, F., additional, Ratti, F., additional, Russolillo, N., additional, Lanari, J., additional, Al-Jarrah, R., additional, Aghayan, D., additional, Primrose, J.N., additional, Giuliante, F., additional, D’Hondt, M., additional, Rotellar, F., additional, Fuks, D., additional, Lopez-Ben, S., additional, Vivarelli, M., additional, Edwin, B., additional, Cillo, U., additional, Ferrero, A., additional, Aldrighetti, L.A., additional, Besselink, M.G., additional, and Abu Hilal, M., additional

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

50. Nationwide Outcomes after Robotic versus Open Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Propensity-Score Matched Analysis

Author

de Graaf, N., primary, Zwart, M.J., additional, van Hilst, J., additional, van Dieren, S., additional, Luyer, M.D., additional, Lips, D.J., additional, Stommel, M.W.J., additional, van Santvoort, H.C., additional, Bonsing, B.A., additional, Coene, P.-P.L., additional, van der Schelling, G.P., additional, Busch, O.R.C., additional, Abu Hilal, M., additional, Molenaar, I.Q., additional, Groot Koerkamp, B., additional, and Besselink, M.G.H., additional

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results