Search

Objectives: To assess the impact of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) on anastomotic leakage (AL) and other postoperative outcomes after esophageal cancer (EC) resection., Background: Conflicting data have emerged from randomized studies regarding the impact of NCRT on AL., Methods: Among 2944 consecutive patients operated on for EC between 2000 and 2010 in 30 European centers, patients treated by NCRT after surgery (n=593) were compared with those treated by primary surgery (n=1487). Multivariable analyses and propensity score matching were used to compensate for the differences in some baseline characteristics., Results: Patients in the NCRT group were younger, with a higher prevalence of male sex, malnutrition, advanced tumor stage, squamous cell carcinoma, and surgery after 2005 when compared with the primary surgery group. Postoperative AL rates were 8.8% versus 10.6% (P=0.220), and 90-day postoperative mortality and morbidity rates were 9.3% versus 7.2% (P=0.110) and 33.4% versus 32.1% (P=0.564), respectively. Pulmonary complication rates did not differ between groups (24.6% vs 22.5%; P=0.291), whereas chylothorax (2.5% vs 1.2%; P=0.020), cardiovascular complications (8.6% vs 0.1%; P=0.037), and thromboembolic events (8.6% vs 6.0%; P=0.037) were higher in the NCRT group. After propensity score matching, AL rates were 8.8% versus 11.3% (P=0.228), with more chylothorax (2.5% vs 0.7%; P=0.030) and trend toward more cardiovascular and thromboembolic events in the NCRT group (P=0.069). Predictors of AL were high American Society of Anesthesiologists scores, supracarinal tumoral location, and cervical anastomosis, but not NCRT., Conclusions: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy does not have an impact on the AL rate after EC resection (NCT 01927016).

Background: Open transthoracic oesophagectomy is the standard treatment for infracarinal resectable oesophageal carcinomas, although it is associated with high mortality and morbidity rates of 2 to 10% and 30 to 50%, respectively, for both the abdominal and thoracic approaches. The worldwide popularity of laparoscopic techniques is based on promising results, including lower postoperative morbidity rates, which are related to the reduced postoperative trauma. We hypothesise that the laparoscopic abdominal approach (laparoscopic gastric mobilisation) in oesophageal cancer surgery will decrease the major postoperative complication rate due to the reduced surgical trauma., Methods/design: The MIRO trial is an open, controlled, prospective, randomised multicentre phase III trial. Patients in study arm A will receive laparoscopic-assisted oesophagectomy, i.e., a transthoracic oesophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy and laparoscopic gastric mobilisation. Patients in study arm B will receive the same procedure, but with the conventional open abdominal approach. The primary objective of the study is to evaluate the major postoperative 30-day morbidity. Secondary objectives are to assess the overall 30-day morbidity, 30-day mortality, 30-day pulmonary morbidity, disease-free survival, overall survival as well as quality of life and to perform medico-economic analysis. A total of 200 patients will be enrolled, and two safety analyses will be performed using 25 and 50 patients included in arm A., Discussion: Postoperative morbidity remains high after oesophageal cancer surgery, especially due to major pulmonary complications, which are responsible for 50% of the postoperative deaths. This study represents the first randomised controlled phase III trial to evaluate the benefits of the minimally invasive approach with respect to the postoperative course and oncological outcomes in oesophageal cancer surgery., Trial Registration: NCT00937456 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Goal: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is performed in certain circumstances after failure of gastric banding. The goal of this study was to evaluate the impact of first-line gastric banding on the morbidity associated with secondary LSG for obesity., Patients and Methods: The case records of 102 consecutive patients undergoing LSG were studied retrospectively. The technique of LSG was standardized. Two groups were compared: one with patients having undergone LSG after first-line gastric banding (n = 31) and the second, with patients having undergone first-line LSG (n = 71). Endpoints were overall morbidity and intra/postoperative complications including gastric leaks consecutive to staple line disruption as well as other septic or hemorrhagic complications. Multivariable analysis was performed to detect independent risk factors for morbidity., Results: Overall morbidity was significantly higher in patients having undergone LSG after first-line gastric banding compared with those undergoing first-line LSG (32.2% vs. 7%, P = 0.002). Gastric leaks secondary to staple line disruption also occurred statistically significantly more often in patients with first-line gastric banding (16.1% vs. 2.8%, P = 0.043). Waiting 6 months between gastric band removal and performing LSG did not prevent the increased morbidity compared with first-line LSG. Multivariable analysis revealed that among the factors analyzed (age, gender, comorbidity, body mass index, surgeon, first-line gastric banding), the only independent risk factor for staple line disruption was first-line gastric banding with an odds ratio = 6.6 (95% confidence interval = [1.2-36.3])., Conclusion: Undergoing first-line gastric banding increases the risk of complications after secondary LSG. We recommend that patients who undergo LSG after a first-line gastric banding should be warned of the increased risks of morbidity or, alternatively, that LSG be performed preferentially as the initial procedure., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Perioperative chemotherapy for gastric cancer is validated by two phase III studies. The impact of the preoperative neoadjuvant sequence is probably major in the benefit of this treatment. This chemotherapy increases the R0 resection without increasing either morbidity or mortality. Furthermore, it reduces local and systemic recurrence improving disease-free survival and overall survival. The drugs used are 5-FU or its oral prodrugs, platinum salts (cisplatin or oxaliplatin) and anthracyclines. The perioperative chemotherapy must be proposed to all patients with a T3 or N+ gastric adenocarcinoma. This requirement imposes a rigorous preoperative evaluation including thoraco-abdominal computed tomography and for all non-metastatic patients an echo-endoscopy with biopsies. For patients not receiving preoperative chemotherapy, multidisciplinary consultations have the choice between an adjuvant chemotherapy based on 5-FU validated by a meta-analysis or a postoperative radio-chemotherapy whose application is validated by this phase III study.

Objectives: To compare the influence of 2 volumes of fluid, integrated with goal-directed fluid therapy, on hypovolemia (a key trigger of tissue hypoperfusion) and central venous oxygen saturation (Scvo₂) and to assess their relationships with postoperative morbidity., Design, Setting, and Patients: A prospective, randomized trial of 70 consecutive patients undergoing major abdominal surgery., Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to 6 mL/kg/h of crystalloid (a restrictive fluid strategy) or 12 mL/kg/h of crystalloid (a more conservative fluid strategy). In both groups, a fluid bolus was administered when respiratory variation in peak aortic flow velocity (ΔPV) was greater than 13%. Data on hypovolemia (ΔPV > 13%), Scvo₂, and postoperative complications were recorded for all patients., Main Outcome Measures: Overall incidence of postoperative complications, especially anastomotic leak and sepsis., Results: Overall incidence of complications, including postoperative anastomotic leak and sepsis, was higher in the restrictive group than in the conservative group (all P < .05). The number of patients with hypovolemia increased significantly in the restrictive group compared with the conservative group (P < .001). The perioperative mean Scvo₂ (P = .02) and mean minimum Scvo₂ (P = .04) were significantly lower in the restrictive group than in the conservative group. Multivariate analysis showed that both hypovolemia and mean minimum Scvo₂ were independently associated with anastomotic leak and sepsis., Conclusions: Excessive fluid restriction increased the level of hypovolemia, leading to reduced Scvo₂ and thereby increased incidence of postoperative complications. Excessive fluid restriction should be applied cautiously in surgical patients., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00852449.

Hepatic necrosis after ethanol ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), although rare, is well known and described, particularly in patients with chronic liver disease. The present report describes a rare case of massive hepatic necrosis with partial gastric, splenic, and pancreatic infarctions after local treatment of liver HCC with ethanol ablation and discusses the reasons for this complication. With the increasing use of percutaneous techniques to treat liver tumors, it is imperative for the interventional radiologist to be aware of the potential vascular complications of these techniques. An appreciation of vascular anatomy via multidetector computed tomography (CT) and/or magnetic resonance (MR) angiography is important when planning image-guided interventions., (Copyright (c) 2010 SIR. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Pancreatic fistula (PF) is the single most important complication after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Recently, a 0% rate of PF was reported using a binding pancreaticojejunostomy with intussusception of the pancreatic stump. The aim of this study was to assess the safety of this new binding pancreaticojejunostomy in condition most susceptible to PF, i.e. soft pancreas and non-dilated main pancreatic duct., Methods: Forty-five consecutive patients with soft pancreas and non-dilated main pancreatic duct underwent a binding pancreaticojejunostomy. Post-operative PF was defined according to the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula., Results: Four patients (8.9%) developed a PF. In one case, PF developed on post-operative day 3 due to a technical deficiency. In the three other cases, pancreatic fistula developed after the tenth post-operative day; all the patients had local and/or general co-morbidities before PF occurrence., Conclusions: Binding pancreaticojejunostomy according to Peng is a safe and secure technique that improves the rate of pancreatic fistula, especially in case of soft texture of the pancreas remnant. However, a 0% rate seems to be hard to achieve because other abdominal and general complications are frequent and can lead to secondary leakage of the pancreatic anastomosis.

Evidence based medicine can be defined as the application of the best evidence in the care of a given patient. When applied to surgical practice, it appears that this concept has some limitations. To discuss these limitations, the authors made the choice to discuss the terms the original definition. Some factors are related to the paucity and the poor quality of randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses in surgery, to the difficulties to appraise the surgical publications and apply the results of randomized trials to a given patient, and to bring the surgeons more willing to endorse the principles of evidence-based medicine. But all these limitations could be overcome making evidence-based surgery not to be a simple passing fad but a formal paradigm.

Mechanical cleansing of the colon prior to elective colorectal surgery is a dogmatically established belief in surgery. Polyethylene glycol was extensively used in the 1980's and 1990's but has been largely replaced by other laxative solutions such as sodium phosphate which are better tolerated by the patient. Evidence-based data in the surgical literature question the dogma of routine mechanical bowel cleansing (8 randomized controlled studies and 4 meta-analyses). These data show with a good level of evidence that mechanical bowel preparation is unnecessary and perhaps harmful.

The relationship between volume and surgical outcome seems logical, but needs to be demonstrated in the real world. A qualitative systematic review has been conducted to verify this hypothesis. Five systematic reviews and hundred original papers have been retrieved and analysed. Most of the studies were retrospective and used administrative data instead of medical charts. Moreover few studies involved a good case mix adjustment when comparing surgical units or individual surgeons. These methodological flaws do not allow any evidence based conclusions. Even though a positive relationship is suggested for surgical units, the relationship between volume and outcome was however less obvious for an individual surgeon. There is some evidence that the relationship varied greatly according to the specialty or the procedure evaluated. A new approach based on predictive scores comparing expected versus observed outcomes is mandatory and seems to be the best way to assess objectively the relationship between surgical volume and outcomes.