Pancreatic Surgery in Children: Complex, Safe and Effective.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to assess indications for and report outcomes of pancreatic surgery in pediatric patients. BACKGROUND: Indications for pancreatic surgery in children are rare and data on surgical outcomes after pediatric pancreatic surgery are scarce. METHODS: All children who underwent pancreatic surgery at a tertiary hospital specializing in pancreatic surgery between 2003 and 2022 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Indications, surgical procedures, and perioperative as well as long-term outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: In total, 73 children with a mean age of 12.8 years (range: 4 months-18 years) underwent pancreatic surgery during the observation period. Indications included chronic pancreatitis (n=35), pancreatic tumors (n=27), and pancreatic trauma (n=11). Distal pancreatectomy was the most frequently performed procedure (n=23), followed by pancreatoduodenectomy (n=19), duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection (n=10), segmental pancreatic resection (n=7), total pancreatectomy (n=3), and others (n=11). Postoperative morbidity occurred in 25 patients (34.2%), including 7 cases (9.6%) with major complications (Clavien-Dindo≥III). There was no postoperative (90-day) mortality. The 5-year overall survival was 90.5%. The 5-year event-free survival of patients with chronic pancreatitis was 85.7%, and 69.0% for patients with pancreatic tumors. CONCLUSION: This is the largest single-center study on pediatric pancreatic surgery in a Western population. Pediatric pancreatic surgery can be performed safely. Centralization in pancreatic centers with high expertise in surgery of adult and pediatric patients is important as it both affords the benefits of pancreatic surgery experience and ensures that surgical management is adapted to the specific needs of children.

Characteristics and Prognostic Factors of Metachronous Second Primary Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with metachronous malignancies before carcinomas of the upper gastrointestinal tract were analyzed regarding clinical parameters, oncological outcome, and prognosis. METHODS: We analyzed the data of 1583 patients with gastroesophageal cancer who underwent oncological resections between 2002 and 2018. Of 1583 patients, 172 had a malignant tumor before the upper gastrointestinal cancer (second primary carcinomas) and 1411 without preceding malignancies served as the control group. The analyses were performed between both groups and within the subgroup of second primary carcinomas. RESULTS: Patients with second primary carcinomas were older (P < 0.0001), had more comorbidities (P < 0.0001), and underwent longer surgical resections (P = 0.0024). They had lower (y)pT-categories (P = 0.0427) and had longer stays in intensive care unit (P = 0.0002) and hospital (P = 0.0018). R0-resection was more frequent (P = 0.0275) while having more surgical complications (P = 0.0378). The median survival was 39.5 mo (primary carcinoma) versus 32.9 mo for (second primary carcinoma) and was not significantly different (P = 0.5359).In the subgroup analysis of second primaries, there were no significant survival differences depending on primary tumor entity (P = 0.4989). pT status (P = 0.0062), pN status (P < 0.0001), pM status (P < 0.0001), and R-status (P < 0.0001) were significant prognostic factors. A time period >9 y after the primary cancer could be identified as a novel and beneficial survival factor (P = 0.0496). Most patients with primary colorectal, prostate, hematogenous, or breast cancer had adenocarcinoma, whereas patients with initial otolaryngologic cancers mainly had squamous cell carcinoma. CONCLUSIONS: Second primary carcinomas of the upper gastrointestinal tract show distinct clinical and oncological characteristics. Common prognostic factors are applicable, and oncologic resection is recommended.

Physics-based shape matching for intraoperative image guidance.

PURPOSE: Soft-tissue deformations can severely degrade the validity of preoperative planning data during computer assisted interventions. Intraoperative imaging such as stereo endoscopic, time-of-flight or, laser range scanner data can be used to compensate these movements. In this context, the intraoperative surface has to be matched to the preoperative model. The shape matching is especially challenging in the intraoperative setting due to noisy sensor data, only partially visible surfaces, ambiguous shape descriptors, and real-time requirements. METHODS: A novel physics-based shape matching (PBSM) approach to register intraoperatively acquired surface meshes to preoperative planning data is proposed. The key idea of the method is to describe the nonrigid registration process as an electrostatic-elastic problem, where an elastic body (preoperative model) that is electrically charged slides into an oppositely charged rigid shape (intraoperative surface). It is shown that the corresponding energy functional can be efficiently solved using the finite element (FE) method. It is also demonstrated how PBSM can be combined with rigid registration schemes for robust nonrigid registration of arbitrarily aligned surfaces. Furthermore, it is shown how the approach can be combined with landmark based methods and outline its application to image guidance in laparoscopic interventions. RESULTS: A profound analysis of the PBSM scheme based on in silico and phantom data is presented. Simulation studies on several liver models show that the approach is robust to the initial rigid registration and to parameter variations. The studies also reveal that the method achieves submillimeter registration accuracy (mean error between 0.32 and 0.46 mm). An unoptimized, single core implementation of the approach achieves near real-time performance (2 TPS, 7-19 s total registration time). It outperforms established methods in terms of speed and accuracy. Furthermore, it is shown that the method is able to accurately match partial surfaces. Finally, a phantom experiment demonstrates how the method can be combined with stereo endoscopic imaging to provide nonrigid registration during laparoscopic interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The PBSM approach for surface matching is fast, robust, and accurate. As the technique is based on a preoperative volumetric FE model, it naturally recovers the position of volumetric structures (e.g., tumors and vessels). It cannot only be used to recover soft-tissue deformations from intraoperative surface models but can also be combined with landmark data from volumetric imaging. In addition to applications in laparoscopic surgery, the method might prove useful in other areas that require soft-tissue registration from sparse intraoperative sensor data (e.g., radiation therapy).