Search

Background: Persisting abdominal complaints are common after an episode of diverticulitis treated conservatively. Furthermore, some patients develop frequent recurrences. These two groups of patients suffer greatly from their disease, as shown by impaired health related quality of life and increased costs due to multiple specialist consultations, pain medication and productivity losses.Both conservative and operative management of patients with persisting abdominal complaints after an episode of diverticulitis and/or frequently recurring diverticulitis are applied. However, direct comparison by a randomised controlled trial is necessary to determine which is superior in relieving symptoms, optimising health related quality of life, minimising costs and preventing diverticulitis recurrences against acceptable morbidity and mortality associated with surgery or the occurrence of a complicated recurrence after conservative management.We, therefore, constructed a randomised clinical trial comparing these two treatment strategies.Methods/design: The DIRECT trial is a multicenter randomised clinical trial. Patients (18-75 years) presenting themselves with persisting abdominal complaints after an episode of diverticulitis and/or three or more recurrences within 2 years will be included and randomised. Patients randomised for conservative treatment are treated according to the current daily practice (antibiotics, analgetics and/or expectant management). Patients randomised for elective resection will undergo an elective resection of the affected colon segment. Preferably, a laparoscopic approach is used.The primary outcome is health related quality of life measured by the Gastro-intestinal Quality of Life Index, Short-Form 36, EQ-5D and a visual analogue scale for pain quantification. Secondary endpoints are morbidity, mortality and total costs. The total follow-up will be three years.Discussion: Considering the high incidence and the multicenter design of this study, it may be assumed that the number of patients needed for this study (n = 214), may be gathered within one and a half year.Depending on the expertise and available equipment, we prefer to perform a laparoscopic resection on patients randomised for elective surgery. Should this be impossible, an open technique may be used as this also reflects the current situation.Trial Registration: (Trial register number: NTR1478). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Practice variation exists in venous resection during pancreatoduodenectomy, but little is known about the potential causes and consequences as large studies are lacking. This study explores the potential causes and consequences of practice variation in venous resection during pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer in the Netherlands., Methods: This nationwide retrospective cohort study included patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer in 18 centers from 2013 through 2017., Results: Among 1,311 patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy, 351 (27%) had a venous resection, and the overall median annual center volume of venous resection was 4. No association was found between the center volume of pancreatoduodenectomy and the rate of venous resections, nor between patient and tumor characteristics and the rate of venous resections per center. Female sex, lower body mass index, neoadjuvant therapy, venous involvement, and stenosis on imaging were predictive for venous resection. Adjusted for these factors, 3 centers performed significantly more, and 3 centers performed significantly fewer venous resections than expected. In patients with venous resection, significantly less major morbidity (22% vs 38%) and longer overall survival (median 16 vs 12 months) were observed in centers with an above-median annual volume of venous resections (>4)., Conclusion: Patient and tumor characteristics did not explain significant practice variation between centers in the Netherlands in venous resection during pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer. The clinical outcomes of venous resection might be related to the volume of the procedure., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Surgical resection followed by adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil with leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) is currently the standard of care for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. The main concern regarding adjuvant chemotherapy is that only half of patients actually receive adjuvant treatment. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, on the other hand, guarantees early systemic treatment and may increase chemotherapy use and thereby improve overall survival. Furthermore, it may prevent futile surgery in patients with rapidly progressive disease. However, some argue that neoadjuvant therapy delays surgery, which could lead to progression towards unresectable disease and thus offset the potential benefits. Comparison of perioperative (i.e., neoadjuvant and adjuvant) with (only) adjuvant administration of mFOLFIRINOX in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) is needed to determine the optimal approach., Methods: This multicenter, phase 3, RCT will include 378 patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1. Patients are recruited from 20 Dutch centers and three centers in Norway and Sweden. Resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as no arterial contact and ≤ 90 degrees venous contact. Patients in the intervention arm are scheduled for 8 cycles of neoadjuvant mFOLFIRINOX followed by surgery and 4 cycles of adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX (2-week cycle of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m 2 , leucovorin 400 mg/m 2 , irinotecan 150 mg/m 2 at day 1, followed by 46 h continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil 2400 g/m 2 ). Patients in the comparator arm start with surgery followed by 12 cycles of adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX. The primary outcome is overall survival by intention-to-treat. Secondary outcomes include progression-free survival, resection rate, quality of life, adverse events, and surgical complications. To detect a hazard ratio of 0.70 with 80% power, 252 events are needed. The number of events is expected to be reached after the inclusion of 378 patients in 36 months, with analysis planned 18 months after the last patient has been randomized., Discussion: The multicenter PREOPANC-3 trial compares perioperative mFOLFIRINOX with adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer., Trial Registration: Clinical Trials: NCT04927780. Registered June 16, 2021., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Venous resection of the superior mesenteric or portal vein is increasingly performed in pancreatic cancer surgery, whereas results of studies on short- and long-term outcomes are contradictory. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the type of venous resection in pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer on postoperative morbidity and overall survival., Methods: This nationwide retrospective cohort study included all patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer in 18 centres (2013-2017)., Results: A total of 1311 patients were included, of whom 17 per cent underwent wedge resection and 10 per cent segmental resection. Patients with segmental resection had higher rates of major morbidity (39 versus 20 versus 23 per cent, respectively; P < 0.001) and portal or superior mesenteric vein thrombosis (18 versus 5 versus 1 per cent, respectively; P < 0.001) and worse overall survival (median 12 versus 16 versus 20 months, respectively; P < 0.001), compared to patients with wedge resection and those without venous resection. Multivariable analysis showed patients with segmental resection, but not those who had wedge resection, had higher rates of major morbidity (odds ratio = 1.93, 95 per cent c.i. 1.20 to 3.11) and worse overall survival (hazard ratio = 1.40, 95 per cent c.i. 1.10 to 1.78), compared to patients without venous resection. Among patients who received neoadjuvant therapy, there was no difference in overall survival among patients with segmental and wedge resection and those without venous resection (median 32 versus 25 versus 33 months, respectively; P = 0.470), although there was a difference in major morbidity rates (52 versus 19 versus 21 per cent, respectively; P  = 0.012)., Conclusion: In pancreatic surgery, the short- and long-term outcomes are worse in patients with venous segmental resection, compared to patients with wedge resection and those without venous resection., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd.)

Background: Despite the fact that primary percutaneous catheter drainage has become standard practice, some patients with pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy ultimately undergo a relaparotomy. The aim of this study was to compare completion pancreatectomy with a pancreas-preserving procedure in patients undergoing relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy., Methods: This retrospective cohort study of nine institutions included patients who underwent relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy from 2005-2018. Furthermore, a systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to the PRISMA guidelines., Results: From 4877 patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy, 786 (16 per cent) developed a pancreatic fistula grade B/C and 162 (3 per cent) underwent a relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula. Of these patients, 36 (22 per cent) underwent a completion pancreatectomy and 126 (78 per cent) a pancreas-preserving procedure. Mortality was higher after completion pancreatectomy (20 (56 per cent) versus 40 patients (32 per cent); P = 0.009), which remained after adjusting for sex, age, BMI, ASA score, previous reintervention, and organ failure in the 24 h before relaparotomy (adjusted odds ratio 2.55, 95 per cent c.i. 1.07 to 6.08). The proportion of additional reinterventions was not different between groups (23 (64 per cent) versus 84 patients (67 per cent); P = 0.756). The meta-analysis including 33 studies evaluating 745 patients, confirmed the association between completion pancreatectomy and mortality (Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model: odds ratio 1.99, 95 per cent c.i. 1.03 to 3.84)., Conclusion: Based on the current data, a pancreas-preserving procedure seems preferable to completion pancreatectomy in patients in whom a relaparotomy is deemed necessary for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd.)

In this study, we explored the predictive value of serum microRNA (miRNA) expression for early tumor progression during FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy and its association with overall survival (OS) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). A total of 132 PDAC patients of all disease stages were included in this study, of whom 25% showed progressive disease during FOLFIRINOX according to the RECIST criteria. MiRNA expression was analyzed in serum collected before the start and after one cycle of chemotherapy. In the discovery cohort ( n = 12), a 352-miRNA RT-qPCR panel was used. In the validation cohorts (total n = 120), miRNA expression was detected using individual RT-qPCR miRNA primers. Before the start of FOLFIRINOX, serum miR-373-3p expression was higher in patients with progressive disease compared to patients with disease control after FOLFIRINOX (Log2 fold difference (FD) 0.88, p = 0.006). MiR-194-5p expression after one cycle of FOLFIRINOX was lower in patients with progressive disease (Log2 FD -0.29, p = 0.044). Both miRNAs were predictors of early tumor progression in a multivariable model including disease stage and baseline CA19-9 level (miR-373-3p odds ratio (OR) 3.99, 95% CI 1.10-14.49; miR-194-5p OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83-0.99). MiR-373-3p and miR-194-5p did not show an association with OS after adjustment for disease stage, baseline CA19-9, and chemotherapy response. In conclusion, high serum miR-373-3p before the start and low serum miR-194-5p after one cycle are associated with early tumor progression during FOLFIRINOX.

Background: Neoadjuvant therapy has several potential advantages over upfront surgery in patients with localized pancreatic cancer; more patients receive systemic treatment, fewer patients undergo futile surgery, and R0 resection rates are higher, thereby possibly improving overall survival (OS). Two recent randomized trials have suggested benefit of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy over upfront surgery, both including single-agent chemotherapy regimens. Potentially, the multi-agent FOLFIRINOX regimen (5-fluorouracil with leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) may further improve outcomes in the neoadjuvant setting for localized pancreatic cancer, but randomized studies are needed. The PREOPANC-2 trial investigates whether neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX improves OS compared with neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant gemcitabine in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer patients., Methods: This nationwide multicenter phase III randomized controlled trial includes patients with pathologically confirmed resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer with a WHO performance score of 0 or 1. Resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as no arterial and ≤ 90 degrees venous involvement; borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as ≤90 degrees arterial and ≤ 270 degrees venous involvement without occlusion. Patients receive 8 cycles of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy followed by surgery without adjuvant treatment (arm A), or 3 cycles of neoadjuvant gemcitabine with hypofractionated radiotherapy (36 Gy in 15 fractions) during the second cycle, followed by surgery and 4 cycles of adjuvant gemcitabine (arm B). The primary endpoint is OS by intention-to-treat. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, quality of life, resection rate, and R0 resection rate. To detect a hazard ratio of 0.70 with 80% power, 252 events are needed. The number of events is expected to be reached after inclusion of 368 eligible patients assuming an accrual period of 3 years and 1.5 years follow-up., Discussion: The PREOPANC-2 trial directly compares two neoadjuvant regimens for patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Our study will provide evidence on the neoadjuvant treatment of choice for patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer., Trial Registration: Primary registry and trial identifying number: EudraCT: 2017-002036-17 . Date of registration: March 6, 2018. Secondary identifying numbers: The Netherlands National Trial Register - NL7094 , NL61961.078.17, MEC-2018-004.

Background: Abdominoperineal resection (APR) for rectal cancer is associated with high morbidity of the perineal wound, and controversy exists about the optimal closure technique. Primary perineal wound closure is still the standard of care in the Netherlands. Biological mesh closure did not improve wound healing in our previous randomised controlled trial (BIOPEX-study). It is suggested, based on meta-analysis of cohort studies, that filling of the perineal defect with well-vascularised tissue improves perineal wound healing. A gluteal turnover flap seems to be a promising method for this purpose, and with the advantage of not having a donor site scar. The aim of this study is to investigate whether a gluteal turnover flap improves the uncomplicated perineal wound healing after APR for rectal cancer., Methods: Patients with primary or recurrent rectal cancer who are planned for APR will be considered eligible in this multicentre randomised controlled trial. Exclusion criteria are total exenteration, sacral resection above S4/S5, intersphincteric APR, biological mesh closure of the pelvic floor, collagen disorders, and severe systemic diseases. A total of 160 patients will be randomised between gluteal turnover flap (experimental arm) and primary closure (control arm). The total follow-up duration is 12 months, and outcome assessors and patients will be blinded for type of perineal wound closure. The primary outcome is the percentage of uncomplicated perineal wound healing on day 30, defined as a Southampton wound score of less than two. Secondary outcomes include time to perineal wound closure, incidence of perineal hernia, the number, duration and nature of the complications, re-interventions, quality of life and urogenital function., Discussion: The uncomplicated perineal wound healing rate is expected to increase from 65 to 85% by using the gluteal turnover flap. With proven effectiveness, a quick implementation of this relatively simple surgical technique is expected to take place., Trial Registration: The trial was retrospectively registered at Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04004650 on July 2, 2019.

Aim: Anastomotic leakage (AL) is one of the most feared complications after rectal resection. This study aimed to assess a combination of biomarkers for early detection of AL after rectal cancer resection., Method: This study was an international multicentre prospective cohort study. All patients received a pelvic drain after rectal cancer resection. On the first three postoperative days drain fluid was collected daily and C-reactive protein (CRP) was measured. Matrix metalloproteinase-2 (MMP2), MMP9, glucose, lactate, interleukin 1-beta (IL1β), IL6, IL10, tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNFα), Escherichia coli, Enterococcus faecalis, lipopolysaccharide-binding protein and amylase were measured in the drain fluid. Prediction models for AL were built for each postoperative day using multivariate penalized logistic regression. Model performance was estimated by the c-index for discrimination. The model with the best performance was visualized with a nomogram and calibration was plotted., Results: A total of 292 patients were analysed; 38 (13.0%) patients suffered from AL, with a median interval to diagnosis of 6.0 (interquartile ratio 4.0-14.8) days. AL occurred less often after partial than after total mesorectal excision (4.9% vs 15.2%, P = 0.035). Of all patients with AL, 26 (68.4%) required reoperation. AL was more often treated by reoperation in patients without a diverting ileostomy (18/20 vs 8/18, P = 0.03). The prediction model for postoperative day 1 included MMP9, TNFα, diverting ileostomy and surgical technique (c-index = 0.71). The prediction model for postoperative day 2 only included CRP (c-index = 0.69). The prediction model for postoperative day 3 included CRP and MMP9 and obtained the best model performance (c-index = 0.78)., Conclusion: The combination of serum CRP and peritoneal MMP9 may be useful for earlier prediction of AL after rectal cancer resection. In clinical practice, this combination of biomarkers should be interpreted in the clinical context as with any other diagnostic tool., (© 2019 The Authors. Colorectal Disease published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Background: The systemic inflammatory response seen after surgery seems to be related to postoperative complications. A reduction of the inflammatory response through minimally invasive surgery might therefore be the mechanism via which postoperative outcome could be improved. The aim of this study was to investigate if postoperative inflammatory markers differed between laparoscopic (LPD) and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) and if there was a relationship between inflammatory markers and the occurrence of postoperative complications., Methods: A side study of the multicenter randomized controlled LEOPARD-2 trial comparing LPD to OPD was performed. Area under the curve (AUC) for plasma inflammatory markers, including interleukin (IL-) 6, IL-8 and C reactive protein (CRP) levels, were determined during the first 96 postoperative hours and compared between LPD and OPD, Clavien-Dindo ≥ III complications, and postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) grade B/C., Results: Overall, 38 patients were included (18 LPD and 20 OPD). The median AUC of IL-6 was 627 (195-1378) after LPD vs. 338 (175-694)pg/mL after OPD, (p = 0.114). The AUC of IL-8 and CRP were comparable. IL-6 levels were higher in patients with a Clavien-Dindo ≥ III complication (634[309-1489] vs. 297 [171-680], p = 0.034) and POPF grade B/C (994 [534-3265] vs. 334 [173-704], p = 0.003). In patients with a POPF grade B/C, IL-6 levels tended to be higher after LPD, as compared to OPD (3533[IQR 1133-3533] vs. 715[IQR 39-1658], p = 0.053)., Conclusion: LPD, as compared to OPD, did not reduce the postoperative inflammatory response. IL-6 levels were associated with postoperative complications and pancreatic fistula., (Copyright © 2019 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy with open reconstruction (LPD-OR) has been suggested to lower the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula reported after laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy with laparoscopic reconstruction (LPD). Propensity score matched studies are, lacking., Methods: This is a multicenter prospective cohort study including patients from 7 Dutch centers between 2014-2018. Patients undergoing LPD-OR were matched LPD patients in a 1:1 ratio based on propensity scores. Main outcomes were postoperative pancreatic fistulas (POPF) grade B/C and Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications., Results: A total of 172 patients were included, involving the first procedure for all centers. All 56 patients after LPD-OR could be matched to a patient undergoing LPD. With LPD-OR, the unplanned conversion rate was 21% vs. 9% with LPD (P < 0.001). Median blood loss (300 vs. 400 mL, P = 0.85), operative time (401 vs. 378 min, P = 0.62) and hospital stay (10 vs. 12 days, P = 0.31) were comparable for LPD-OR vs. LPD, as were Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications (38% vs. 52%, P = 0.13), POPF grade B/C (23% vs. 21%, P = 0.82), and 90-day mortality (4% vs. 4%, P > 0.99)., Conclusion: In this propensity matched cohort performed early in the learning curve, no benefit was found for LPD-OR, as compared to LPD., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Aim: This subgroup analysis of a prospective multicentre cohort study aims to compare postoperative morbidity between transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LaTME)., Method: The study was designed as a subgroup analysis of a prospective multicentre cohort study. Patients undergoing TaTME or LaTME for rectal cancer were selected. All patients were followed up until the first visit to the outpatient clinic after hospital discharge. Postoperative complications were classified according to the Clavien-Dindo classification and the comprehensive complication index (CCI). Propensity score matching was performed., Results: In total, 220 patients were selected from the overall prospective multicentre cohort study. After propensity score matching, 48 patients from each group were compared. The median tumour height for TaTME was 10.0 cm (6.0-10.8) and for LaTME was 9.5 cm (7.0-12.0) (P = 0.459). The duration of surgery and anaesthesia were both significantly longer for TaTME (221 vs 180 min, P < 0.001, and 264 vs 217 min, P < 0.001). TaTME was not converted to laparotomy whilst surgery in five patients undergoing LaTME was converted to laparotomy (0.0% vs 10.4%, P = 0.056). No statistically significant differences were observed for Clavien-Dindo classification, CCI, readmissions, reoperations and mortality., Conclusion: The study showed that TaTME is a safe and feasible approach for rectal cancer resection. This new technique obtained similar postoperative morbidity to LaTME., (© 2019 The Authors. Colorectal Disease published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Background: Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy may improve postoperative recovery compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy. However, there are concerns that the extensive learning curve of this complex procedure could increase the risk of complications. We aimed to assess whether laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy could reduce time to functional recovery compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy., Methods: This multicentre, patient-blinded, parallel-group, randomised controlled phase 2/3 trial was performed in four centres in the Netherlands that each do 20 or more pancreatoduodenectomies annually; surgeons had to have completed a dedicated training programme for laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and have done 20 or more laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomies before trial participation. Patients with a benign, premalignant, or malignant indication for pancreatoduodenectomy, without signs of vascular involvement, were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo either laparoscopic or open pancreatoduodenectomy using a central web-based system. Randomisation was stratified for annual case volume and preoperative estimated risk of pancreatic fistula. Patients were blinded to treatment allocation. Analysis was done according to the intention-to-treat principle. The main objective of the phase 2 part of the trial was to assess the safety of laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (complications and mortality), and the primary outcome of phase 3 was time to functional recovery in days, defined as all of the following: adequate pain control with only oral analgesia; independent mobility; ability to maintain more than 50% of the daily required caloric intake; no need for intravenous fluid administration; and no signs of infection (temperature <38·5°C). This trial is registered with Trialregister.nl, number NTR5689., Findings: Between May 13 and Dec 20, 2016, 42 patients were randomised in the phase 2 part of the trial. Two patients did not receive surgery and were excluded from analyses in accordance with the study protocol. Three (15%) of 20 patients died within 90 days after laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy, compared with none of 20 patients after open pancreatoduodenectomy. Based on safety data from the phase 2 part of the trial, the data and safety monitoring board and protocol committee agreed to proceed with phase 3. Between Jan 31 and Nov 14, 2017, 63 additional patients were randomised in phase 3 of the trial. Four patients did not receive surgery and were excluded from analyses in accordance with the study protocol. After randomisation of 105 patients (combining patients from both phase 2 and phase 3), of whom 99 underwent surgery, the trial was prematurely terminated by the data and safety monitoring board because of a difference in 90-day complication-related mortality (five [10%] of 50 patients in the laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy group vs one [2%] of 49 in the open pancreatoduodenectomy group; risk ratio [RR] 4·90 [95% CI 0·59-40·44]; p=0·20). Median time to functional recovery was 10 days (95% CI 5-15) after laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy versus 8 days (95% CI 7-9) after open pancreatoduodenectomy (log-rank p=0·80). Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher complications (25 [50%] of 50 patients after laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy vs 19 [39%] of 49 after open pancreatoduodenectomy; RR 1·29 [95% CI 0·82-2·02]; p=0·26) and grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistulas (14 [28%] vs 12 [24%]; RR 1·14 [95% CI 0·59-2·22]; p=0·69) were comparable between groups., Interpretation: Although not statistically significant, laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with more complication-related deaths than was open pancreatoduodenectomy, and there was no difference between groups in time to functional recovery. These safety concerns were unexpected and worrisome, especially in the setting of trained surgeons working in centres performing 20 or more pancreatoduodenectomies annually. Experience, learning curve, and annual volume might have influenced the outcomes; future research should focus on these issues., Funding: Grant for investigator-initiated studies by Johnson & Johnson Medical Limited., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The aim of the study was to assess feasibility and outcomes of a multicenter training program in laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD)., Background: Whereas expert centers have reported promising outcomes of LPD, nationwide analyses have raised concerns on its safety, especially during the learning curve. Multicenter, structured LPD training programs reporting outcomes including the first procedures are lacking. No LPD had been performed in the Netherlands before this study., Methods: During 2014-2016, 8 surgeons from 4 high-volume centers completed the Longitudinal Assessment and Realization of Laparoscopic Pancreatic Surgery (LAELAPS-2) training program in LPD, including detailed technique description, video training, and proctoring. In all centers, LPD was performed by 2 surgeons with extensive experience in pancreatic and laparoscopic surgery. Outcomes of all LPDs were prospectively collected., Results: In total, 114 patients underwent LPD. Median pancreatic duct diameter was 3 mm [interquartile range (IQR = 2-4)] and pancreatic texture was soft in 74% of patients. The conversion rate was 11% (n = 12), median blood loss 350 mL (IQR = 200-700), and operative time 375 minutes (IQR = 320-431). Grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula occurred in 34% of patients, requiring catheter drainage in 22% and re-operation in 2%. A Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III complication occurred in 43% of patients. Median length of hospital stay was 15 days (IQR = 9-25). Overall, 30-day and 90-day mortality were both 3.5%. Outcomes were similar for the first and second part of procedures., Conclusions: This LPD training program was feasible and ensured acceptable outcomes during the learning curve in all centers. Future studies should determine whether such a training program is applicable in other settings and assess the added value of LPD.

Background: There is ongoing debate whether laparoscopic right colectomy is superior to open surgery. The purpose of this study was to address this issue and arrive at a consensus using data from a national database., Methods: Patients who underwent elective open or laparoscopic right colectomy for colorectal cancer during the period 2009-2013 were identified from the Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit. Complications that occurred within 30 days after surgery and 30-day mortality rates were calculated and compared between open and laparoscopic resection., Results: In total, 12,006 patients underwent elective open or laparoscopic surgery for right-sided colorectal cancer. Of these, 6,683 (55.7%) underwent open resection and 5,323 (44.3%) underwent laparoscopic resection. Complications occurred within 30 days after surgery in the laparoscopic group in 26.1% of patients and in 32.1% of patients in the open group (p < 0.001). Thirty-day mortality was also significantly lower in the laparoscopic group (2.2 vs. 3.6% p < 0.001)., Conclusion: In this non-randomized, descriptive study conducted in the Netherlands, open right colectomy seems to have a higher risk for complications and mortality as compared to laparoscopic right colectomy, even after correction for confounding factors., (© 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Aim: Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) is used for the resection of large rectal adenomas and well or moderately differentiated T1 carcinomas. Due to difficulty in preoperative staging, final pathology may reveal a carcinoma not suitable for TEM. Although completion total mesorectal excision is considered standard of care in T2 or more invasive carcinomas, this completion surgery is not always performed. The purpose of this article is to evaluate the outcome of patients after TEM-only, when completion surgery would be indicated., Methods: In this retrospective multicenter, observational cohort study, outcome after TEM-only (n = 41) and completion surgery (n = 40) following TEM for a pT2-3 rectal adenocarcinoma was compared., Results: Median follow-up was 29 months for the TEM-only group and 31 months for the completion surgery group. Local recurrence rate was 35 and 11% for the TEM-only and completion surgery groups respectively. Distant metastasis occurred in 16% of the patients in both groups. The 3-year overall survival was 63% in the TEM-only group and 91% in the completion surgery group respectively. Three-year disease-specific survival was 91 versus 93% respectively., Conclusions: Although local recurrence after TEM-only for pT2-3 rectal cancer is worse compared to the recurrence that occurs after completion surgery, disease-specific survival is comparable between both groups. The lower unadjusted overall survival in the TEM-only group indicates that TEM-only may be a valid alternative in older and frail patients, especially when high morbidity of completion surgery is taken into consideration. Nevertheless, completion surgery should always be advised when curation is intended., (© 2018 The Author(s) Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Present literature exploring neuropsychological characteristics of sexually abusive youth is lacking, especially with regard to females and youth with low intellectual functioning. Moreover, although areas of neuropsychological functioning have been researched in this population, findings are vastly inconsistent and contradictory. Such gaps in the literature create obvious barriers in the ability to adequately assess risk, particularly pertaining to neuropsychological factors that could inform effective treatment, case management, and supervision options. The purpose of this article is to explore neuropsychological and cognitive deficits that may manifest in youth who have and who have not experienced instances of abuse, for those who have and who have not been convicted of a sex offense, and to provide information for treatment providers, case managers, and supervisors regarding when to consider referring for additional testing.

Background: Data from observational studies suggest that minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) is superior to open pancreatoduodenectomy regarding intraoperative blood loss, postoperative morbidity, and length of hospital stay, without increasing total costs. However, several case-matched studies failed to demonstrate superiority of MIPD, and large registry studies from the USA even suggested increased mortality for MIPDs performed in low-volume (<10 MIPDs annually) centers. Randomized controlled multicenter trials are lacking but clearly required. We hypothesize that time to functional recovery is shorter after MIPD compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy, even in an enhanced recovery setting., Methods/design: LEOPARD-2 is a randomized controlled, parallel-group, patient-blinded, multicenter, phase 2/3, superiority trial in centers that completed the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group LAELAPS-2 training program for laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy or LAELAPS-3 training program for robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and have performed ≥ 20 MIPDs. A total of 136 patients with symptomatic benign, premalignant, or malignant disease will be randomly assigned to undergo minimally invasive or open pancreatoduodenectomy in an enhanced recovery setting. After the first 40 patients (phase 2), the data safety monitoring board will assess safety outcomes (not blinded for treatment allocation) and decide on continuation to phase 3. Patients from phase 2 will then be included in phase 3. The primary outcome measure is time (days) to functional recovery. All patients will be blinded for the surgical approach, at least until postoperative day 5, but preferably until functional recovery has been attained. Secondary outcome measures are operative and postoperative outcomes, including clinically relevant complications, mortality, quality of life, and costs., Discussion: The LEOPARD-2 trial is designed to assess whether MIPD reduces time to functional recovery, as compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy in an enhanced recovery setting., Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register, NTR5689 . Registered on 2 March 2016.

Background: Epidural analgesia is the international standard for pain treatment in abdominal surgery. Although some studies have advocated continuous wound infiltration with local anaesthetics, robust evidence is lacking, especially on patient-reported outcome measures. We aimed to determine the effectiveness of continuous wound infiltration in hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery., Methods: In this randomised controlled, open label, non-inferiority trial (POP-UP), we enrolled adult patients undergoing hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery by subcostal or midline laparotomy in two Dutch hospitals. Patients were centrally randomised (1:1) to receive either pain treatment with continuous wound infiltration using bupivacaine plus patient-controlled analgesia with morphine or to receive (patient-controlled) epidural analgesia with bupivacaine and sufentanil. All patients were treated within an enhanced recovery setting. Randomisation was stratified by centre and type of incision. The primary outcome was the mean Overall Benefit of Analgesic Score (OBAS) from day 1-5, a validated composite endpoint of pain scores, opioid side-effects, and patient satisfaction (range 0 [best] to 28 [worst]). Analysis was per-protocol. The non-inferiority limit of the mean difference was + 3·0. This trial is registered with the Netherlands Trial Registry, number NTR4948., Findings: Between Jan 20, 2015, and Sept 16, 2015, we randomly assigned 105 eligible patients: 53 to receive continuous wound infiltration and 52 to receive epidural analgesia. One patient in the continuous wound infiltration group discontinued treatment, as did five in the epidural analgesia group; of these five patients, preoperative placement failed in three (these patients were treated with continuous wound infiltration instead), one patient refused an epidural, and data for the primary endpoint was lost for one. Thus, 55 patients were included in the continuous wound infiltration group and 47 in the epidural analgesia group for the per-protocol analyses. Mean OBAS was 3·8 (SD 2·4) in the continuous wound infiltration group versus 4·4 (2·2) in the epidural group (mean difference -0·62, 95% CI -1·54 to 0·30). Because the upper bound of the one-sided 95% CI did not exceed +3·0, non-inferiority was shown. Four (7%) patients in the continuous wound infiltration group and five (11%) of those in the epidural group had an adverse event. One patient in the continuous wound infiltration group had a serious adverse event (temporary hypotension and arrhythmia after bolus injection); no serious adverse events were noted in the epidural group., Interpretation: These data suggest that continuous wound infiltration is non-inferior to epidural analgesia in hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery within an enhanced recovery setting. Further large-scale trials are required to make a definitive assessment of non-inferiority., Funding: Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, Netherlands., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aim: Colon cancer resection in a nonelective setting is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. The aim of this retrospective study is to identify risk factors for overall mortality after colon cancer resection with a special focus on nonelective resection., Method: Data were obtained from the Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit. Patients undergoing colon cancer resection in the Netherlands between January 2009 and December 2013 were included. Patient, treatment and tumour factors were analysed in relation to the urgency of surgery. The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative mortality., Results: The study included 30 907 patients. A nonelective colon cancer resection was performed in 5934 (19.2%) patients. There was a 4.4% overall mortality rate, with significantly more deaths after nonelective surgery (8.5% vs 3.4%, P < 0.001). Older patients, male patients and patients with high comorbidity, advanced tumours, perforated tumours, a tumour in the right or transverse colon and postoperative anastomotic leakage were at risk of postoperative death. In nonelective resections, a right-sided tumour and postoperative anastomotic leakage were associated with high mortality., Conclusion: Nonelective colon cancer resection is associated with high mortality. In particular, right-sided resections and patients with tumour perforation are at particularly high risk. The optimization of patients prior to surgery and expeditious operation after diagnosis might prevent the need for a nonelective resection., (Colorectal Disease © 2016 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.)

Background: Postoperative pain prevention is essential for the recovery of surgical patients. Continuous (thoracic) epidural analgesia (CEA) is routinely practiced for major abdominal surgery, but evidence is conflicting on its benefits in this setting. Potential disadvantages of epidural analgesia are a) perioperative hypotension, frequently requiring additional intravenous fluid boluses or prolonged use of vasopressors; b) relatively high failure rates, with periods of inadequate analgesia; and c) the risk of rare but serious, at times persistent, neurologic complications (hematoma and abscess). In recent years, continuous (subfascial) wound infiltration (CWI) plus patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) has been suggested as a safe and reliable alternative, which does not have the previously mentioned disadvantages, but evidence from multicenter trials targeting a specific surgical population is lacking. We hypothesize that CWI+PCA is equally as effective as CEA, without the mentioned disadvantages., Methods/design: POP-UP is a randomized controlled noninferiority multicenter trial, recruiting adult patients scheduled for elective hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery via laparotomy in an enhanced recovery setting. A total of 102 patients are being randomly allocated to CWI+PCA or (P)CEA. Our primary endpoint is the Overall Benefit of Analgesic Score (OBAS), a composite endpoint of pain intensity, opioid-related adverse effects and patient satisfaction, during postoperative days 1 to 5. Secondary endpoints include length of the hospital stay, number of patients with severe pain, and the use of rescue medication., Discussion: POP-UP is a pragmatic trial that will provide evidence of whether CWI+PCA is noninferior as compared to (P)CEA after elective hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery via laparotomy in an enhanced recovery setting. If this hypothesis is confirmed, this finding could contribute to more widespread implementation of this technique, especially when the described disadvantages of epidural analgesia are less often observed with CWI+PCA., Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register NTR4948 (registry date 2 January 2015).

Background: Early enteral feeding through a nasoenteric feeding tube is often used in patients with severe acute pancreatitis to prevent gut-derived infections, but evidence to support this strategy is limited. We conducted a multicenter, randomized trial comparing early nasoenteric tube feeding with an oral diet at 72 hours after presentation to the emergency department in patients with acute pancreatitis., Methods: We enrolled patients with acute pancreatitis who were at high risk for complications on the basis of an Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score of 8 or higher (on a scale of 0 to 71, with higher scores indicating more severe disease), an Imrie or modified Glasgow score of 3 or higher (on a scale of 0 to 8, with higher scores indicating more severe disease), or a serum C-reactive protein level of more than 150 mg per liter. Patients were randomly assigned to nasoenteric tube feeding within 24 hours after randomization (early group) or to an oral diet initiated 72 hours after presentation (on-demand group), with tube feeding provided if the oral diet was not tolerated. The primary end point was a composite of major infection (infected pancreatic necrosis, bacteremia, or pneumonia) or death during 6 months of follow-up., Results: A total of 208 patients were enrolled at 19 Dutch hospitals. The primary end point occurred in 30 of 101 patients (30%) in the early group and in 28 of 104 (27%) in the on-demand group (risk ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.79 to 1.44; P=0.76). There were no significant differences between the early group and the on-demand group in the rate of major infection (25% and 26%, respectively; P=0.87) or death (11% and 7%, respectively; P=0.33). In the on-demand group, 72 patients (69%) tolerated an oral diet and did not require tube feeding., Conclusions: This trial did not show the superiority of early nasoenteric tube feeding, as compared with an oral diet after 72 hours, in reducing the rate of infection or death in patients with acute pancreatitis at high risk for complications. (Funded by the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development and others; PYTHON Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN18170985.).

Objective: To investigate the relationship between the route of gastroenteric (GE) reconstruction after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and the postoperative incidence of delayed gastric emptying (DGE)., Background: DGE is one of the most common complications after PD. Recent studies suggest that an antecolic route of the GE reconstruction leads to a lower incidence of DGE, compared to a retrocolic route. In a nonrandomized comparison within our trial center, we found no difference in DGE after antecolic or retrocolic GE reconstruction., Methods: Ten middle- to high-volume centers participated in the patient inclusion. Patients scheduled for PD who gave written informed consent were included and randomized during surgery after resection. Standard operation was a pylorus-preserving PD. Primary endpoint was DGE. Secondary endpoints included other complications and length of hospital stay., Results: There were 125 patients in the retrocolic group, and 121 patients in the antecolic group. Baseline and treatment characteristics did not differ between the study groups. In the retrocolic group, 45 patients (36%) developed clinically relevant DGE compared with 41 (34%) in the antecolic group (absolute risk difference: 2.1%; 95% confidence interval: -9.8% to 14.0%). There were no differences in need for postoperative (par)enteral nutritional support, other complications, hospital mortality, and median length of hospital stay., Conclusions: The route of GE reconstruction after PD does not influence the postoperative incidence of DGE or other complications. The etiology and treatment of DGE, which occurs frequently after both procedures, need further investigation. The GE reconstruction after PD should be routed according to the surgeon's preference.

Background: Early detection of colorectal anastomotic leakage (AL) may lead to better outcome. AL may be preceded by change in local metabolism and local ischaemia. Microdialysis of the peritoneal cavity is able to measure these changes in real-time and is minimally invasive. The aim of this prospective cohort study was to compare values of intraperitoneal microdialysis in patients with AL to patients without AL after open and laparoscopic colorectal surgery., Methods: Twenty-four patients underwent surgery for left-sided, sigmoid and rectal carcinoma with creation of an anastomosis. Intraoperatively a juxta-anastomotical intraperitoneal and subcutaneous microdialysis catheter was placed. The levels of lactate, pyruvate, glucose and glycerol in the dialysate were measured every 4 h during the first 5 post-operative days, and mean values and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated., Results: Mortality was 0 % and morbidity 38 %. In 3 patients (17 %), AL occurred. In patients with AL, post-operative peritoneal lactate level was 3.2 mmol/l (standard deviation (SD) 0.9) for patients without AL, compared to 4.4 mmol/l (SD 1.5) in case of AL (p = 0.03 for AUC). Intraperitoneal glucose levels were 8.1 mmol/l (SD 1.3), compared to 7.8 mmol/l (SD 2.2) in the complicated course (ns for AUC). Mean intraperitoneal lactate/pyruvate-ratio was 19.2 (SD 3) after colorectal surgery without AL compared to 25 (SD 4.7) in case of AL (non-significant (ns) for AUC). No significant differences were observed between patients who underwent laparoscopic resection and those who underwent open resection., Conclusions: Anastomotic leakage was preceded by a significantly higher AUC and mean value of lactate levels during the first 5 post-operative days. To identify cut-off values for clinical use, pooling of data is necessary.

Introduction: In 2009, the nationwide Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit (DSCA) was initiated by the Association of Surgeons of the Netherlands (ASN) to monitor, evaluate and improve colorectal cancer care. The DSCA is currently widely used as a blueprint for the initiation of other audits, coordinated by the Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing (DICA). This article illustrates key elements of the DSCA and results of three years of auditing., Methods: Key elements include: a leading role of the professional association with integration of the audit in the national quality assurance policy; web-based registration by medical specialists; weekly updated online feedback to participants; annual external data verification with other data sources; improvement projects., Results: In two years, all Dutch hospitals participated in the audit. Case-ascertainment was 92% in 2010 and 95% in 2011. External data verification by comparison with the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) showed high concordance of data items. Within three years, guideline compliance for diagnostics, preoperative multidisciplinary meetings and standardised reporting increased; complication-, re-intervention and postoperative mortality rates decreased significantly., Discussion: The success of the DSCA is the result of effective surgical collaboration. The leading role of the ASN in conducting the audit resulted in full participation of all colorectal surgeons in the Netherlands. By integrating the audit into the ASNs' quality assurance policy, it could be used to set national quality standards. Future challenges include reduction of administrative burden; expansion to a multidisciplinary registration; and addition of financial information and patient reported outcomes to the audit data., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: When comparing mortality rates between hospitals to explore hospital performance, there is an important role for adjustment for differences in case-mix. Identifying outcome measures that are less influenced by differences in case-mix may be valuable. The main goal of this study was to explore whether hospital differences in anastomotic leakage (AL) and postoperative mortality are due to differences in case-mix or to differences in treatment factors., Methods: Data of the Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit were used. Case-mix factors and treatment-related factors were identified from the literature and their association with AL and mortality were analysed with logistic regression. Hospital differences in observed AL and mortality rates, and adjusted rates based on the logistic regression models were shown. The reduction in hospital variance after adjustment was analysed with Levene's test for equality of variances., Results: 17 of 22 case-mix factors and 4 of 11 treatment factors related to AL derived from the literature were available in the database. Variation in observed AL rates between hospitals was large with a maximum rate of 17%. This variation could not be attributed to differences in case-mix but more to differences in treatment factors. Hospital variation in observed mortality rates was significantly reduced after adjustment for differences in case-mix., Conclusions: Hospital variation in AL is relatively independent of differences in case-mix. In contrast to 'postoperative mortality' the observed AL rates of hospitals evaluated in our study were only slightly affected after adjustment for case-mix factors. Therefore, AL rates may be suitable as an outcome indicator for measurement of surgical quality of care.

Anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery is correlated with considerable morbidity and mortality. Although many studies focus on risk factors and detection, studies on the treatment strategy for colorectal anastomotic leakage are scarce. A national questionnaire amongst 350 members of the Dutch Society for Gastrointestinal Surgery was undertaken on the current treatment of colorectal anastomotic leakage. The response was 40% after two anonymous rounds. 27% of the respondents state that a leaking anastomosis above the level of the promontory should be salvaged in ASA 1-2 patients <80 years of age, for ASA 3 and/or >80 years of age this percentage is 7.3%. For an anastomosis under the promontory, 50% of the respondents choose preserving the anastomosis for ASA 1-2 compared to 17% for ASA 3 and/or >80 years of age. In ASA 1-2 patients with a local abscess after a rectum resection without protective ileostomy, 31% of the respondents will create an protective ileostomy, 40% break down the anastomosis to create a definite colostomy, in ASA 3 and/or >80 years of age 14% of the respondents create a protective ileostomy and 63% a definitive colostomy. In ASA 1-2 patients with peritonitis after a rectum resection with deviating ileostomy, 31% prefer a laparotomy for lavage and repair of the anastomosis, 25% for lavage without repair and 36% of the respondents prefer to break down the anastomosis. When the patient is ASA 3 and/or >80 years of age, 13% prefer repair, 9% a lavage and 74% breaking down the anastomosis. This questionnaire shows that in contrast to older people, more surgeons make an effort to preserve the anastomosis in younger people., (Copyright © 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: Centralization of pancreatic surgery in high-volume hospitals is under debate in many countries. In the western part of the Netherlands, the professional network of surgical oncologists agreed to centralize all pancreatic surgery from 2006 in two high-volume hospitals. Our aim is to evaluate whether centralization of pancreatic surgery has improved clinical outcomes and has changed referral patterns., Materials and Methods: Data of the Comprehensive Cancer Centre West (CCCW) of all 249 patients who had a resection for suspected pancreatic cancer between 1996 and 2008 in the western part of the Netherlands were analyzed. Multivariable modeling was used to evaluate survival for 3 time periods; 1996-2000, 2001-2005 (introduction of quality standards), and 2006-2008 (after centralization). In addition, the differences in referral pattern were analyzed., Results: From 2006, all pancreatic surgery was centralized in 2 hospitals. The 2-year survival rate increased after centralization from 39% to 55% (P =.09) for all patients who had a pancreatic resection for pancreatic cancer. After adjustment for age, tumor location, stage, histology, and adjuvant treatment, the latter period was significantly associated with improved survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.50; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.34-0.73)., Conclusions: Centralization of pancreatic surgery was successful and has resulted in improved clinical outcomes in the western part of the Netherlands, demonstrating the effectiveness of centralization.

Background: In predicted severe acute pancreatitis, infections have a negative effect on clinical outcome. A start of enteral nutrition (EN) within 24 hours of onset may reduce the number of infections as compared to the current practice of starting an oral diet and EN if necessary at 3-4 days after admission., Methods/design: The PYTHON trial is a randomised controlled, parallel-group, superiority multicenter trial. Patients with predicted severe acute pancreatitis (Imrie-score ≥ 3 or APACHE-II score ≥ 8 or CRP > 150 mg/L) will be randomised to EN within 24 hours or an oral diet and EN if necessary, after 72 hours after hospital admission.During a 3-year period, 208 patients will be enrolled from 20 hospitals of the Dutch Pancreatitis Study Group. The primary endpoint is a composite of mortality or infections (bacteraemia, infected pancreatic or peripancreatic necrosis, pneumonia) during hospital stay or within 6 months following randomisation. Secondary endpoints include other major morbidity (e.g. new onset organ failure, need for intervention), intolerance of enteral feeding and total costs from a societal perspective., Discussion: The PYTHON trial is designed to show that a very early (< 24 h) start of EN reduces the combined endpoint of mortality or infections as compared to the current practice of an oral diet and EN if necessary at around 72 hours after admission for predicted severe acute pancreatitis., Trial Registration: ISRCTN: ISRCTN18170985.

Objective: Despite improvements in anesthesiology and intensive care medicine, mortality for perforated gastroduodenal ulcer disease remains high. This study was designed to evaluate the results of surgery for perforated ulcer disease and to identify prognostic factors for mortality in order to optimize treatment., Patients and Methods: The medical records of 272 patients undergoing emergency surgery for perforated ulcer disease from 2000 to 2005 in two large teaching hospitals and one university hospital in the Netherlands were retrospectively analyzed. Information on 89 pre-, peri- and postoperative data were recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using multiple logistic regression analysis. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality., Results: The 30-day mortality rate was 16%. Variables associated with 30-day mortality were age, shock, tachycardia, anemia and ASA class., Conclusions: A relatively low 30-day mortality rate was achieved. Age, shock, tachycardia and anemia were significantly associated with 30-day mortality. Finding that shock, tachycardia and anemia are independently associated with 30-day mortality could indicate that patients are septic upon admission. Improvements in survival might be achieved by early sepsis treatment., (Copyright © 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: Recently, excellent results are reported on laparoscopic lavage in patients with purulent perforated diverticulitis as an alternative for sigmoidectomy and ostomy.The objective of this study is to determine whether LaparOscopic LAvage and drainage is a safe and effective treatment for patients with purulent peritonitis (LOLA-arm) and to determine the optimal resectional strategy in patients with a purulent or faecal peritonitis (DIVA-arm: perforated DIVerticulitis: sigmoidresection with or without Anastomosis)., Methods/design: In this multicentre randomised trial all patients with perforated diverticulitis are included. Upon laparoscopy, patients with purulent peritonitis are treated with laparoscopic lavage and drainage, Hartmann's procedure or sigmoidectomy with primary anastomosis in a ratio of 2:1:1 (LOLA-arm). Patients with faecal peritonitis will be randomised 1:1 between Hartmann's procedure and resection with primary anastomosis (DIVA-arm). The primary combined endpoint of the LOLA-arm is major morbidity and mortality. A sample size of 132:66:66 patients will be able to detect a difference in the primary endpoint from 25% in resectional groups compared to 10% in the laparoscopic lavage group (two sided alpha = 5%, power = 90%). Endpoint of the DIVA-arm is stoma free survival one year after initial surgery. In this arm 212 patients are needed to significantly demonstrate a difference of 30% (log rank test two sided alpha = 5% and power = 90%) in favour of the patients with resection with primary anastomosis. Secondary endpoints for both arms are the number of days alive and outside the hospital, health related quality of life, health care utilisation and associated costs., Discussion: The Ladies trial is a nationwide multicentre randomised trial on perforated diverticulitis that will provide evidence on the merits of laparoscopic lavage and drainage for purulent generalised peritonitis and on the optimal resectional strategy for both purulent and faecal generalised peritonitis., Trial Registration: Nederlands Trial Register NTR2037.

Aim: To evaluate the development of diagnostic tools, indications for surgery and treatment modalities concerning diverticular disease (DD) in The Netherlands., Methods: Data were collected from 100 patients who underwent surgery for DD in three Dutch hospitals. All hospitals used the same standardized database. The collected data included patient demographics, patient history, type of surgery and complications. Patients were divided into two groups, one undergoing elective surgery (elective group) and the other undergoing acute surgery (acute group)., Results: Two hundred and ninety-nine patients were admitted between 2000 and 2007. One hundred and seventy-eight patients underwent acute surgery and 121 patients received elective operations. The median age of the 121 patients was 69 years (range: 28-94 years), significantly higher in acute patients (P = 0.010). Laparoscopic resection was performed in 31% of elective patients. In the acute setting, 61% underwent a Hartmann procedure. The overall morbidity and mortality were 51% and 10%, and 60% and 16% in the acute group, which were significantly higher than in the elective group (36% and 1%). Only 35% of the temporary ostomies were restored., Conclusion: This study gives a picture of current surgical practice for DD in The Netherlands. New developments are implemented in daily practice, resulting in acceptable morbidity and mortality rates.

Purpose: To evaluate the results of a modified technique of creating a defunctioning end ileostomy., Methods: Medical records of all consecutive patients with a defunctioning end ileostomy with buried efferent limb operated at our hospital between January 2000 and December 2007 were reviewed. The defunctioning end ileostomy with buried efferent limb is created by closing the distal limb and positioning it in the subcutis. Parameters studied were: stomal and reversal related complications., Results: 66 patients were included. Between construction and closure of the stoma, a total of 21 patients (31.8%) developed stoma-related complications. In 1 patient (1.5%) high output occurred, in 6 (9%) stomal retraction and in 4 (6.1%) a parastomal hernia occurred. Peristomal skin problems were observed in 14 patients (21.2%) in the early postoperative period, decreasing to 6 patients (9.1%) after 3 weeks. In 1 patient, stoma closure could not be performed through a local approach and formal laparotomy was necessary. Complications of loop ileostomy as reported in the literature show relatively high rates of peristomal skin and leakage problems., Conclusions: Our results suggest that end ileostomy with subcutaneous buried efferent limb offers advantages over loop ileostomy with regard to the risk of developing peristomal skin and leakage problems., (Copyright © 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: This study was designed to investigate the incidence of technical equipment problems during laparoscopic procedures., Methods: A video-capturing system was used, consisting of an analog video recorder with three camera image inputs and a microphone. Problems with all technical equipment used by the surgical team, such as the insufflator, diathermy apparatus, monitors, light source, camera and camera unit, endoscope, suction devices, and instruments, were registered., Results: In total, 30 procedures were randomly videotaped. In 87% (26/30) of the procedures, one or more incidents with technical equipment (49 incidents) or instruments (9 incidents) occurred. In 22 of those incidents (45%) the technical equipment was not correctly positioned or not present at all; in the other 27 (55%), the equipment malfunctioned as a result of a faulty connection (9), a defect (5), or the wrong setting of the equipment (3). In 10 (20%) cases the exact cause of equipment malfunctioning was unclear., Conclusions: The incidence of problems with laparoscopic technical equipment is high. To prevent such problems, improvement and standardization of equipment is needed, combined with the incorporation of checklist use before the start of a surgical procedure. Future research should be aimed at development, implementation, and evaluation of these measures into the operating room.

Background: The initial treatment of acute necrotizing pancreatitis is conservative. Intervention is indicated in patients with (suspected) infected necrotizing pancreatitis. In the Netherlands, the standard intervention is necrosectomy by laparotomy followed by continuous postoperative lavage (CPL). In recent years several minimally invasive strategies have been introduced. So far, these strategies have never been compared in a randomised controlled trial. The PANTER study (PAncreatitis, Necrosectomy versus sTEp up appRoach) was conceived to yield the evidence needed for a considered policy decision., Methods/design: 88 patients with (suspected) infected necrotizing pancreatitis will be randomly allocated to either group A) minimally invasive 'step-up approach' starting with drainage followed, if necessary, by videoscopic assisted retroperitoneal debridement (VARD) or group B) maximal necrosectomy by laparotomy. Both procedures are followed by CPL. Patients will be recruited from 20 hospitals, including all Dutch university medical centres, over a 3-year period. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients suffering from postoperative major morbidity and mortality. Secondary endpoints are complications, new onset sepsis, length of hospital and intensive care stay, quality of life and total (direct and indirect) costs. To demonstrate that the 'step-up approach' can reduce the major morbidity and mortality rate from 45 to 16%, with 80% power at 5% alpha, a total sample size of 88 patients was calculated., Discussion: The PANTER-study is a randomised controlled trial that will provide evidence on the merits of a minimally invasive 'step-up approach' in patients with (suspected) infected necrotizing pancreatitis.

Objective: To review the effectiveness of preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) in patients with obstructive jaundice resulting from tumors., Summary Background Data: This was a systematic review, including a meta-analysis, of randomized controlled trials and comparative cohort studies conducted worldwide and published between 1966 and September 2001, classified on methodologic strength and subdivided into level 1 (randomized controlled trials) and level 2 (comparative cohort studies)., Methods: Comparison was made of PBD versus no PBD in jaundiced patients undergoing resection of a tumor. Outcome measures were in-hospital death rate, overall complications resulting from the treatment modality (drainage- and surgery-related complications), and hospital stay. Effect sizes were calculated and combined in meta-analyses. Relative differences (%) were calculated to compare effects on outcome measures., Results: Five randomized controlled studies comprising 302 patients met the inclusion criteria for level 1 studies, and 18 cohort studies comprising 2,853 patients met the criteria for level 2 studies. Meta-analysis of level 1 studies showed no difference in the overall death rate between patients who had PBD and those who had surgery without PBD. The overall complication rate, however, was significantly adversely affected by PBD compared with surgery without PBD. At level 2, there was no difference in the death rate between the two treatment modalities. The overall complication rate, however, was significantly adversely affected by PBD compared with surgery without PBD. If PBD had been without complications, then complications would be in favor of drainage based on level 1 studies, and no difference based on level 2 studies. Further, PBD was not able to reduce the length of postoperative hospital stay compared with surgery without PBD; instead, it prolonged the stay., Conclusions: This meta-analysis shows that PBD with current standards for patients with obstructive jaundice resulting from tumors carries no benefit and should not be performed routinely. The potential benefit of PBD in terms of postoperative rates of death and complications does not outweigh the disadvantage of the drainage procedure. Only if PBD-related complications could be reduced by 27% and consequently diminish hospital stay could PBD be beneficial. Further randomized controlled trials with improved PBD techniques are necessary.

Background: The disruption of the hepatocyte tight junctions observed in biliary obstruction suggests altered permeability of the blood-bile barrier. In this study the role of biliary obstruction and increased biliary pressure on the translocation of bacteria from biliary tract to bloodstream and lymphatic system were evaluated., Materials and Methods: Rats underwent distal bile duct ligation (BDL, n = 33) for two weeks or a sham celiotomy (n = 21). Seventeen of the 33 BDL rats underwent subsequent biliary decompression by a choledochojejunostomy (CJ). Two weeks after the final operation, a laparotomy was performed again and the CBD, the thoracic duct, and the caval vein were canulated. Next, a suspension containing 10(8) Escherichia coli/ml was retrogradely infused in the CBD for 5 min at 5 or 20 cm H2O above the secretory biliary pressure., Results: A higher biliary infusion pressure resulted in a significant increase of cfu E.coli per milliliter of blood in all the three groups (Sham, BDL, CJ). BDL rats showed significantly more bacterial translocation to the bloodstream than the shams. After biliary decompression, translocation normalized to the control levels. At 5 cm H2O infusion pressure only one lymph culture was positive (CJ group). At 20 cm H2O overpressure, nine lymph cultures were E.coli positive (P = 0.03). These were found mainly in groups with a nonobstructed bile duct (Sham and CJ 40% vs BDL 10%)., Conclusion: Translocation of bacteria from biliary tract to bloodstream increased at higher intrabiliary pressures. Longstanding bile duct obstruction was an independent determinant for cholangiovenous reflux. Bacterial translocation to the lymphatic system did not parallel translocation to the bloodstream, although in the nonobstructed biliary tract, increased bacterial translocation to the lymphatic system was pressure related.