Prophylactic Antibiotic Duration and Infectious Complications in Pancreatoduodenectomy Patients With Biliary Stents: Opportunity for De-escalation.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare infectious complications in pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) patients with biliary stents treated with short, medium, or long durations of prophylactic antibiotics. BACKGROUND: Pre-existing biliary stents have historically been associated with higher infection risk after PD. Patients are administered prophylactic antibiotics, but the optimal duration remains unknown. METHODS: This single-institution retrospective cohort study included consecutive PD patients from October 2016 to April 2022. Antibiotics were continued past the operative dose per surgeon discretion. Infection rates were compared by short (≤24 h), medium (>24 but ≤96 h), and long (>96 h) duration antibiotics. Multivariable regression analysis was performed to evaluate associations with a primary composite outcome of wound infection, organ-space infection, sepsis, or cholangitis. RESULTS: Among 542 PD patients, 310 patients (57%) had biliary stents. The composite outcome occurred in 28% (34/122) short, 25% (27/108) medium, and 29% (23/80) long-duration ( P =0.824) antibiotic patients. There were no differences in other infection rates or mortality. On multivariable analysis, antibiotic duration was not associated with infection rate. Only postoperative pancreatic fistula (odds ratio 33.1, P <0.001) and male sex (odds ratio 1.9, P =0.028) were associated with the composite outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Among 310 PD patients with biliary stents, long-duration prophylactic antibiotics were associated with similar composite infection rates to short and medium durations but were used almost twice as often in high-risk patients. These findings may represent an opportunity to de-escalate antibiotic coverage and promote risk-stratified antibiotic stewardship in stented patients by aligning antibiotic duration with risk-stratified pancreatectomy clinical pathways.

Trends Over Time in Recurrence Patterns and Survival Outcomes after Neoadjuvant Therapy and Surgery for Pancreatic Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine if advances in neoadjuvant therapy affected recurrence patterns and survival outcomes after pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). BACKGROUND: Data are limited on how modern multimodality therapy affects PDAC recurrence and post-recurrence survival. METHODS: Patients who received neoadjuvant therapy followed by curative-intent pancreatectomy for PDAC during 1998-2018 were identified. Treatments, recurrence sites and timing, and survival were compared between patients who completed neoadjuvant therapy and pancreatectomy in 1998-2004, 2005-2011, and 2012-2018. RESULTS: The study included 727 patients (203, 251, and 273 in the 1998-2004, 2005-2011, and 2012-2018 cohorts, respectively). Use of neoadjuvant induction chemotherapy increased over time, and regimens changed over time, with >80% of patients treated in 2012-2018 receiving FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel. Overall, recurrence sites and incidence (67.5%, 66.1%, and 65.9%) remained stable, and 85% of recurrences occurred within 2 years of surgery. However, compared to earlier cohorts, the 2012-2018 cohort had lower conditional risk of recurrence in postoperative year 1 and higher risk in postoperative year 2. Overall survival increased over time (median, 30.6, 33.6, and 48.7 mo, P < 0.005), driven by improved post-recurrence overall survival (median, 7.8, 12.5, and 12.6 mo; 3-year rate, 7%, 10%, and 20%; P < 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: We observed changes in neoadjuvant therapy regimens over time and an associated shift in the conditional risk of recurrence from postoperative year 1 to postoperative year 2, although recurrence remained common. Overall survival and post-recurrence survival remarkably improved over time, reflecting improved multimodality regimens for recurrent disease.

Palliative Surgery for Patients with Gastroesophageal Junction or Gastric Cancer: A Report on Clinical Observational Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have focused on palliative surgery in patients with advanced gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) or gastric cancer. We sought to evaluate clinical observational outcomes following palliative surgery in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with GEJ or gastric cancer who underwent palliative surgery (1/2010-11/2022) were identified. The primary outcomes were symptom improvement, ability to tolerate an oral diet, discharge to home, 30 "good days" without hospitalization, and receipt of systemic treatment. Postoperative outcomes and survival were secondarily evaluated. RESULTS: Among 93 patients, the median age was 59 (IQR 47-68) years, and the median Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) was 1 (range 0-3). The most frequent indication for palliative surgery was primary tumor obstruction [75 (81%) patients]. The most common procedures were feeding tube placement in 60 (65%) and intestinal bypass in 15 (16%) patients. A total of 75 (81%) patients experienced symptom improvement. Of these, 19 (25%) developed recurrent and 49 (65%) developed new symptoms. ECOG-PS was significantly associated with symptom-free time. Among those who underwent a bypass, resection, or ostomy creation for malignant obstruction, 16 (80%) tolerated an oral diet. Postoperatively, 87 (94%) were discharged home, 72 (77%) had 30 good days, and 64 (69%) received systemic treatment. Postoperative complications occurred in 35 (38%) patients, and 7 (8%) died within 30 days. The median survival time was 7.7 (95% CI 6.4-10.40) months. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with incurable GEJ or gastric cancer can benefit from palliative surgery. Prognosis and performance status should inform goals-of-care discussions and patient selection for surgical palliation.

A Practical Guide to Inflow Control, Retraction, and Exposure for Robotic Hepatectomy.

Establishment of inflow control and gentle effective retraction of the liver for optimal exposure are critical to safe hepatectomy. Multiple methods have been previously reported for inflow control in minimally invasive (MIS) hepatectomy including Huang's Loop.1-3 We describe here the assembly and use of our modified version of Huang's loop that permits adjustable, atraumatic, and totally intracorporeal inflow control. We use a soft 16-French urinary catheter with a single premade opening near the blunt tip, across which a small slit is created. A beveled cut is made to the catheter 12-15 cm from the blunt tip and a suture sewn there that can be grasped to pull this beveled tail through the slit and window around the porta hepatis; this loop can be tightened or loosened with ease. For liver retraction, current techniques can be traumatic, especially when instruments apply traction directly onto the liver.4 Our preferred approach utilizes a liver sling made from a soft, rolled surgical sponge with 15-cm silk ties secured at each end; the length of the sling can be adjusted on the basis of thickness of the liver. The sling applies gentle, atraumatic "pulling" traction and is especially useful for exposure of the right posterior sector. We also use external band retraction to align the transection plane with the camera.5 Both also provide countertraction when advancing instruments into a firm or fibrotic liver. These techniques are commonly used in our MIS practice, and we have found them to be cost-efficient, easily reproducible, and effective.

Prevalence of and Factors Associated with Financial Toxicity After Pancreatectomy and Gastrectomy.

BACKGROUND: Financial toxicity (FT) refers to the adverse impact of cancer treatment costs on patients' experiences, potentially leading to poor adherence to treatment and outcomes. However, the prevalence of FT among patients undergoing major upper gastrointestinal cancer operations, as well as factors associated with FT, remain unclear. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study by sending the Comprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST) survey and Surgery-Q (a survey specifically developed for this study) to patients who underwent gastrectomy or pancreatectomy for malignant disease at our institution in 2019-2021. RESULTS: We sent the surveys to 627 patients and received responses from 101 (16%) patients. The FT prevalence (COST score <26) was 48 (48%). Patients likely to experience FT were younger than 50 years of age, of non-White race, earned an annual income <$75,000, and had credit scores <740 (all p < 0.05). Additionally, longer hospital stay (p = 0.041), extended time off work for surgery (p = 0.011), and extended time off work for caregivers (p = 0.005) were associated with FT. Procedure type was not associated with FT; however, patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery (MIS) had a lower FT probability (p = 0.042). In a multivariable analysis, age <50 years (p = 0.031) and credit score <740 (p < 0.001) were associated with high FT risk, while MIS was associated with low FT risk (p = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with upper gastrointestinal cancer have a major risk of FT. In addition to predicting the FT risk before surgery, facilitating quicker functional recovery with the appropriate use of MIS is considered important to reducing the FT risk.

High symptom burden in patients undergoing gastrectomy for cancer.

BACKGROUND: There is little data describing symptom burden before or after gastrectomy for patients with cancer. We aimed to examine the perioperative patterns of symptom severity in patients undergoing gastrectomy. METHODS: In this single-institution prospective cohort study, patients scheduled to undergo gastrectomy for cancer completed serial symptom measurement questionnaires preoperatively, at postoperative day (POD) 1-3, and POD 4-7. The percent of patients with moderate to severe scores was calculated at each time point. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients completed 94 surveys. Preoperatively, 46% reported at least one moderate/severe symptom. This increased to 88% during POD 1-3 and 79% during POD 4-7. During the preoperative period, 25% of patients reported moderate to severe interference in at least one aspect of daily life. This increased to 73% of patients at both POD 1-3 and POD 4-7. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing gastrectomy for cancer frequently experience symptoms that interfere with daily life. A better understanding of these symptoms may improve patients' experiences with, and recovery from, gastrectomy.

Patient-reported outcome measures in surgical patients with upper gastrointestinal cancers: A qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patients with pancreatic and gastroesophageal (PGE) cancers experience high symptom burden, but patient experience throughout multimodality treatment remains unclear. We aimed to delineate the experience and symptom burden of patients throughout their perioperative course. METHODS: Qualitative interviews were performed with 17 surgical patients with PGE cancer. Interview transcripts were analyzed and symptoms were ranked by frequency. An expert panel assessed the relevance of these symptom inventory items. RESULTS: Of the 17 patients included, 35% (n = 6) underwent gastrectomy, 30% (n = 5) underwent esophagectomy, and 35% (n = 6) underwent pancreatectomy; 76% (n = 13) received neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy and/or chemoradiation. Overall, 32 symptoms were reported, and 19 were reported by over 20% of patients. An expert panel rated nine symptoms to be relevant or very relevant to PGE surgical patients. These symptoms (difficulty swallowing, heartburn/reflux, diarrhea, constipation, flushing/sweating, stomach feeling full, malaise, dizziness, or feeling cold) were added to the core MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI) if they were commonly reported or reached a threshold relevancy score. CONCLUSIONS: In this qualitative study, we developed a provisional symptom inventory for patients undergoing surgery for PGE cancer. This symptom inventory module of the MDASI for PGE surgical patients will be psychometrically tested for validity and reliability.

Surgical Eligibility Does Not Imply Surgical Equity: Recommendations for Curative Treatment in Patients With Stage I/II Pancreatic Head Adenocarcinoma Differ by Age and Race.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to characterize differences in pancreatectomy recommendation rates to surgically eligible patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head across age and racial groups. BACKGROUND: Pancreatectomy is not recommended in almost half of otherwise healthy patients with stage I/II pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma lacking a surgical contraindication. We characterized differences in pancreatectomy recommendation among surgically eligible patients across age and racial groups. METHODS: Non-Hispanic White (NHW) and Non-Hispanic Black (NHB) patients were identified in the National Cancer Database with clinical stage I/II pancreatic head adenocarcinoma, Charlson Comorbidity Index of 0 to 1, and age 40 to 89 years. Rates of surgery recommendation and overall survival (OS) by age and race were compared. A Pancreatectomy Recommendation Equivalence Point (PREP) was defined as the age at which the rate of not recommending surgery matched the rate of recommending and completing surgery. Marginal standardization was used to identify association of age and race with recommendation. OS was compared using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models. RESULTS: Among 40,866 patients, 36,133 (88%) were NHW and 4733 (12%) were NHB. For the entire cohort, PREP was 79 years. PREP was 5 years younger in NHB patients than in NHW patients (75 vs 80 years). Adjusted rates of not recommending surgery were significantly higher for NHB than for NHW patients in each age group. After adjusting for surgery recommendation, we found no difference in OS between NHW and NHB patients (hazard ratio 0.98 [95% CI 0.94-1.02]). CONCLUSIONS: PREP of NHB patients was 5 years younger than NHW patients, and in every age group, the rate of not recommending pancreatectomy was higher in NHB patients. Age and race disparities in treatment recommendations may contribute to shorter longevity of NHB patients.

Prognosis Associated With CA19-9 Response Dynamics and Normalization During Neoadjuvant Therapy in Resected Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize associations between carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) dynamics during neoadjuvant therapy (NT) and survival for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). BACKGROUND: Although normalization of CA19-9 during NT is associated with improved outcomes following PDAC resection, we hypothesize that CA19-9 dynamics during NT can improve prognostication. METHODS: Characteristics for patients with PDAC undergoing NT (July 2011-October 2018) with ≥3 CA19-9 results (bilirubin<2mg/dL) were collected and grouped by CA19-9 dynamics. Nonproducers (<1 U/ml) were excluded, and normal was ≤35 U/ml. Postresection survival was compared among groups. RESULTS: Of 431 patients, 166 had eligible CA19-9 values. Median baseline CA19-9 was 98 U/ml. Overall 2-year postresection recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were 37% and 63%, respectively. Patients with normalization (53%) had improved 2-year RFS (47% vs. 28%, P = 0.01) and OS (75% vs. 49%, P = 0.01). CA19-9 dynamics during NT were analyzed by shape, direction, and normalization creating response types ("A-B-C-D-E"). Type A was "Always" decreasing to normalization, B "Bidirectional" with eventual normalization, C "Consistently" normal, D any "Decrease" without normalization, and E "Elevating" without normalization. Types A and B responses were associated with the longest postresection 2-year RFS (51% and 56%) and OS (75% and 92%, respectively) whereas Types D and E had the worst outcomes. After adjusting for node-positivity, perineural invasion, and margin-positivity, CA19-9 response types were independently associated with both RFS and OS, and predicted outcomes are better than CA19-9 normalization alone (likelihood ratio test RFS P < 0.001, OS P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This novel A-B-C-D-E classification of CA19-9 dynamics during NT was associated with postresection outcomes more precisely than CA19-9 normalization alone.

Classification of Post-Pancreatectomy Readmissions and Opportunities for Targeted Mitigation Strategies.

OBJECTIVE: Within a learning health system paradigm, this study sought to evaluate reasons for readmission to identify opportunities for improvement. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Post-pancreatectomy readmission rates have remained constant despite improved index hospitalization metrics. METHODS: We performed a single-institution case-control study of consecutive pancreatectomy patients (October 2016 - April 2022). Complications were prospectively graded in biweekly faculty and advanced practice provider meetings. We analyzed risk factors during index hospitalization and categorized indications for 90-day readmissions. RESULTS: A total of 835 patients, median age 65 years and 51% (427/835) males, underwent 64% (534/835) pancreatoduodenectomies, 34% (280/835) distal pancreatectomies, and 3% (21/835) other resections. 24% (204/835) of patients were readmitted. Primary indication for readmission was technical in 51% (105/204), infectious in 17% (35/204), and medical/metabolic in 31% (64/204) of patients. Procedures were required in 77% (81/105) and 60% (21/35) of technical and infectious readmissions, respectively, while 66% (42/64) of medical/metabolic readmissions were managed non-invasively. During the index hospitalization, benign pathology (OR 1.8, P=0.049), biochemical pancreatic leak (OR 2.3, P=0.001), bile/gastric/chyle leak (OR 6.4, P=0.001), organ-space infection (OR 3.4, P=0.007), undrained fluid on imaging (OR 2.4, P=0.045), and increasing white blood cell count (OR 1.7, P=0.045) were independently associated with odds of readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Most readmissions following pancreatectomy were technical in origin. Patients with complications during index hospitalization, increasing white blood cell count, or undrained fluid before discharge were at highest risk for readmission. Pre-discharge risk-stratification of readmission risk factors and augmentation of in-clinic resources may be strategies to reduce readmission rates.

Effects of a Pragmatic Home-based Exercise Program Concurrent With Neoadjuvant Therapy on Physical Function of Patients With Pancreatic Cancer: The PancFit Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of a preoperative, home-based exercise program on fitness and physical function in patients with pancreatic cancer. BACKGROUND: We previously established a well-tolerated preoperative exercise program after finding a high frequency of sarcopenia and frailty in patients with pancreatic cancer. METHODS: In this randomized, controlled trial (NCT03187951), patients with pancreatic cancer were randomized to Arm A: enhanced usual care or Arm B: prescribed aerobic and resistance exercise during neoadjuvant therapy. Patients received nutrition counseling and activity trackers. The primary endpoint was a 6-minute walk distance (6MWD; ≥14 meters improvement was clinically meaningful). Secondary endpoints included additional physical function tests, health-related quality of life, and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-one patients were randomized. Objectively measured weekly activity (153.2±135.6 and 159.8±122.8 min in Arm A and B, respectively, P =0.62) and self-reported weekly moderate-to-strenuous physical activity (107.4±160.4 and 129.6±161.6 min in Arm A and Arm B, respectively, P =0.49) were similar, but weekly strength training sessions increased more in Arm B (by 1.8±1.8 vs 0.1±2.4 sessions, P <0.001). 6MWD improved in both Arm A (mean change 18.6±56.8 m, P =0.01) and Arm B (27.3±68.1 m, P =0.002). Quality of life and clinical outcomes did not significantly differ between arms. Pooling patients in both study groups, exercise, and physical activity was favorably associated with physical performance and clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized trial of prescribed exercise versus enhanced usual care during neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer, a high volume of physical activity and increased exercise capacity were observed in both arms, highlighting the importance of activity among patients preparing for surgery.

Evidence-Based Surgical Approach to Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer: How We Do Robotic Transhiatal Lower Mediastinal Dissection and Esophagojejunostomy.

Currently available data suggest that gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers with an esophageal extension less than 2 cm can be removed using gastrectomy with a limited esophagectomy via a transhiatal approach and selective lower mediastinal dissection.1 In this multimedia article, we demonstrate our approach to robotic total gastrectomy with data-driven mediastinal lymph node (LN) dissection and sutured esophagojejunostomy for GEJ cancer.The video shows the case of a 63-year-old man with Siewert type 2 GEJ adenocarcinoma. The size of the tumor was 3 cm, and its esophageal extension was 2 cm. The man underwent preoperative chemoradiotherapy (5-FU/oxaliplatin, 45 Gy) with excellent treatment effect. After dissection of the esophagus from the bilateral diaphragmatic crus, surrounding lymph node (LN) tissue (#110) was identified and dissected. In this case, intraoperative findings showed the posterior lower mediastinal LNs (#112) to be swollen, and they were sampled. Surgeons should take care to avoid penetration of the pleura and thoracic duct injury if pleura penetration is oncologically unnecessary. Because the esophagus often is thickened and prone to ischemia after preoperative chemoradiotherapy,2 the authors perform the anastomosis with hand-suturing techniques regardless whether a robotic or open approach is used. The patient recovered well and was discharged on postoperative day 4 in good condition. Pathology reported a ypT1bN0 tumor with negative margins.

Clinical Impact of Positive Surgical Margins in Gastric Adenocarcinoma in the Era of Preoperative Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Microscopically positive (R1) surgical margins after gastrectomy increase gastric cancer recurrence risk, but optimal management after R1 gastrectomy is controversial. We sought to identify the impact of R1 margins on recurrence patterns and survival in the era of preoperative therapy for gastric cancer. METHODS: Patients who underwent gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma during 1998-2017 at a major cancer center were enrolled. Clinicopathologic factors associated with positive margins were examined, and incidence, sites, and timing of recurrence and survival outcomes were compared between patients with positive and negative margins. RESULTS: Of 688 patients, 432 (63%) received preoperative therapy. Thirty-four patients (5%) had R1 margins. Compared with patients with negative margins, patients with R1 margins more frequently had aggressive clinicopathologic features, such as linitis plastica (odds ratio [OR] 7.79, p < 0.001) and failure to achieve cT downstaging with preoperative treatment (OR 5.20, p = 0.005). The 5 year overall survival (OS) rate was lower in patients with R1 margins (6% vs 60%; p < 0.001), and R1 margins independently predicted worse OS (hazard ratio 2.37, 95% CI 1.51-3.75, p < 0.001). Most patients with R1 margins (58%) experienced peritoneal recurrence, and locoregional recurrence was relatively rare in this group (14%). Median time to recurrence was 8.5 months for peritoneal dissemination and 15.7 months for locoregional recurrence. CONCLUSION: R1 margins after gastrectomy were associated with aggressive tumor biology, high incidence of peritoneal recurrence after a short interval, and poor OS. In patients with R1 margins, re-resection to achieve microscopically negative margins has to be considered with caution.

Preclinical evaluation of sentinel node localization in the stomach via mannose-labelled magnetic nanoparticles and indocyanine green.

BACKGROUND: Gastrectomy with extended (D2) lymphadenectomy is considered standard of care for gastric cancer to provide the best possible outcomes and pathologic staging. However, D2 gastrectomy is a technically demanding operation and reported to be associated with increased complications and mortality. Application of sentinel lymph node (SLN) concept in gastric cancer has the potential to reduce patient morbidity; however, SLN techniques are not established for gastrectomy, in part due to lack of practical tracers. An effective and convenient tracer with enhanced SLN accumulation is critically needed. METHODS: Mannose-labelled magnetic tracer 'FerroTrace' and fluorescent dye indocyanine green (ICG) were injected laparoscopically into the stomach submucosa of 8 healthy swine under general anaesthesia. Intraoperative fluorescence imaging was used to highlight draining lymphatic pathways containing ICG, while preoperative T2-weighted MRI and ex vivo magnetometer probe measurements were used to identify nodes containing FerroTrace. Lymphadenectomy was performed either robotically (n = 2) or via laparotomy (n = 6). RESULTS: Mixing ICG and FerroTrace ensured concurrence of fluorescent and magnetic signals in SLNs. An initial trial with robotic dissection removed all magnetic LNs (n = 4). In the subsequent laparotomy study that targeted all ICG-LNs based on intraoperative fluorescence imaging, dissection removed an average of 4.7 ± 1.2 fluorescent, and 2.0 ± 1.3 magnetic LNs per animal. Both MRI and magnetometer detected 100% of SLNs (n = 7). FerroTrace demonstrated high specificity to SLNs, which contained 76 ± 30% of total lymphotropic iron, and 88 ± 20 % of the overall magnetometer signal. CONCLUSIONS: Through utilisation of this dual tracer approach, SLNs were identified via preoperative MRI, visualised intraoperatively with fluorescence imaging, and confirmed with a magnetometer. This combination pairs the sensitivity of ICG with SLN-specific FerroTrace and can be used for reliable SLN detection in gastric cancer, with potential applications in neoadjuvant therapy.

Laparoscopic transverse abdominis plane block: how I do it and a cost efficiency analysis.

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy and efficiency of laparoscopic transverse abdominis plane block (Lap-TAP) in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy and gastrectomy compared to those of ultrasound-guided TAP (US-TAP). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the records of patients who underwent open or minimally invasive (MIS) pancreatoduodenectomy and major gastrectomy with the use of Lap-TAP or US-TAP at our institution between November 1, 2018, and September 30, 2021. We compared the estimated time and cost associated with Lap-TAP and US-TAP. We also compared postoperative opioid use and pain scores between patients who underwent open laparotomy with these TAPs. RESULTS: A total of 194 patients were included. Overall, 114 patients (59%) underwent pancreatectomy, and 80 patients (41%) underwent gastrectomy. Additionally, 138 patients (71%) underwent an open procedure, and 56 patients (29%) underwent MIS. A total of 102 patients (53%) underwent US-TAP, and 92 (47%) underwent Lap-TAP. The median time to skin incision was significantly shorter in the Lap-TAP group (US-TAP, 59 min vs. Lap-TAP, 45 min; P < 0.001), resulting in an estimated reduction in operation cost by $602. Pain scores and postoperative opioid use were similar between Lap-TAP and US-TAP among open surgery patients, indicating equivalent pain control between Lap-TAP and US-TAP. CONCLUSION: Lap-TAP was equally effective in pain control as US-TAP after pancreatectomy and gastrectomy, and Lap-TAP can reduce operation time and cost. Lap-TAP is considered the preferred approach for MIS pancreatectomy and gastrectomy, which occasionally needs conversion to laparotomy.

Trans-pacific multicenter collaborative study of minimally invasive proximal versus total gastrectomy for proximal gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancers.

BACKGROUND: The current standard operation for proximal gastric and gastroesophageal junction (P/GEJ) cancers with limited esophageal extension is total gastrectomy (TG). TG is associated with impaired appetite and weight loss due to the loss of gastric functions such as production of ghrelin and with anemia due to intrinsic factor loss and vitamin B12 malabsorption. Theoretically, proximal gastrectomy (PG) can mitigate these problems by preserving gastric function. However, PG with direct esophagogastric reconstruction is associated with severe postoperative reflux, delayed gastric emptying, and poor quality of life (QoL). Minimally invasive PG (MIPG) with antireflux techniques has been increasingly performed by experts but is technically demanding owing to its complexity. Moreover, the actual advantages of MIPG over minimally invasive TG (MITG) with regards to postoperative QoL are unknown. Our overall objective of this study is to determine the short-term QoL benefits of MIPG. Our central hypotheses are that MIPG is safe and that patients have improved appetite after MIPG with effective antireflux techniques, which leads to an overall QoL improvement when compared with MITG. METHODS: Enrollment of a total of 60 patients in this prospective survey-collection study is expected. Procedures (MITG versus MIPG, antireflux techniques for MIPG [double-tract reconstruction versus the double-flap technique]) will be chosen based on surgeon and/or patient preference. Randomization is not considered feasible because patients often have strong preferences regarding MITG and MIPG. The primary outcome is appetite level (reported on a 0-10 scale) at 3 months after surgery. With an expected 30 patients per cohort (MITG versus MIPG), this study will have 80% power to detect a one-point difference in appetite level. Patient-reported outcomes will be longitudinally collected (including questions about appetite and reflux), and specific QoL items, body weight, body mass index and ghrelin, albumin, and hemoglobin levels will be compared. DISCUSSION: Surgeons from the US, Japan, and South Korea formed this collaboration with the agreement that the surgical approach to P/GEJ cancers is an internationally important but controversial topic that requires immediate action. At the completion of the proposed research, our expected outcome is the establishment of the benefit and safety of MIPG. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered with Clinical Trials Reporting Program Registration under the registration number NCI-2022-00267 on January 11, 2022, as well as with ClinicalTrials.gov under the registration number NCT05205343 on January 11, 2022.

What is "Value"? Results of a Survey of Cancer Patients and Providers.

BACKGROUND: We measured the importance patients with gastrointestinal cancer and health care providers place on treatment outcomes, quality of life, and costs. METHODS: This cross-sectional survey study was conducted between June 1, 2020 and November 30, 2020. We identified surviving patients who had been treated or were anticipating treatment for pancreatic or gastric cancer at our single institution from January 1, 2000 through January 31, 2020. Surveys assessed the importance patients and providers placed on outcomes, well-being, costs, and experiences. Surveys measured how these values had changed over time. We compared the importance patients and providers place on each of the attributes of value. RESULTS: A total of 383 patients and 164 providers responded. Providers felt experience, emotional well-being, and costs were more important than patients themselves did (all p < 0.05). Patients more commonly reported that survival had become more important to them over time, while providers believed that emotional well-being, experience, and costs had become more important to patients (all p < 0.05). Postoperative patients ranked functional well-being as more important than preoperative patients did (p = 0.031). Patients of lower income and education levels more reported concerns of costs over the course of their care (both p < 0.05). Younger age was associated with concern for direct (r = -0.167, p = 0.004) and indirect costs (r = -0.318, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although there are consistencies amongst the views of cancer patients and providers, there remain discordances in the perception of value. Patients' values differed across their treatment and survivorship course. These data demonstrate the importance of accounting for multistakeholder perspectives in assessments of value in health care.

Robotic Extended Right Hepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastasis.

BACKGROUND: Advantages of minimally invasive compared with open hepatobiliary surgery include quicker functional recovery, decreased postoperative length of stay, and decreased postoperative opioid use. As more complex operations are approached in minimally invasive fashion, it is imperative to maintain safety and excellent oncologic outcomes. METHODS: In this video, we demonstrate the key principles in performing a safe robotic extended right hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastasis following sound oncologic principles. RESULTS: Key preoperative considerations include (1) early referral to a hepatobiliary surgeon, (2) careful review of cross-sectional imaging to identify the relationship of tumors to major vasculature and any aberrant vascular anatomy, and (3) liver volumetry for every right hepatectomy to determine the need for future liver remnant volume augmentation. Key intraoperative techniques include (1) liberal use of ultrasound before and during transection to determine the relationship of major vasculature to tumor to preserve liver parenchyma without compromising tumor margins, (2) external retraction with vessel loops placed on either side of the transection line as stay sutures to facilitate parenchymal transection, and (3) a crush clamp technique to safely identify and control crossing vessels while dividing liver parenchyma. CONCLUSIONS: With proper preoperative planning and intraoperative use of these techniques, the benefits of a minimally invasive approach can be achieved while maintaining excellence in surgical quality and safety.

Analysis of Opioid Use in Patients Undergoing Open Versus Robotic Gastrectomy.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive, robotic gastrectomy is associated with better short-term outcomes and quicker functional recovery. However, the degree to which the robotic approach influences postoperative pain and opioid use after gastrectomy is unknown. Our primary aim was to determine whether the robotic approach to gastrectomy reduces postoperative opioid use compared with the open approach. METHODS: Patients who underwent gastrectomy (November 2018 to September 2021) were identified retrospectively. Clinical characteristics, short-term surgical outcomes, oral morphine equivalent (OME) use, and pain scores were collected. Both groups were managed through an enhanced recovery program in the perioperative period. RESULTS: Of 81 patients, 50 underwent open and 31 underwent robotic gastrectomy. Compared with open gastrectomy patients, robotic gastrectomy patients had longer surgery time (360 vs. 288 min), less blood loss (50 vs. 138 mL), and shorter hospital stay (4 vs. 6 days) (all medians, P < 0.001). Robotic gastrectomy patients used lower OMEs on postoperative days 0-4 (all P < 0.05) and in total for days 0-4 (total mean dose 65.0 vs. 169.5 mg; P < 0.001) than did open gastrectomy patients. The robotic gastrectomy patients were prescribed a lower mean OME dose than the open gastrectomy patients (19.0 vs. 29.0 mg, respectively; P = 0.001). Multivariable analysis showed that robotic approach was associated with lower opioid use (odds ratio 3.70; 95% CI 1.01-14.3; P = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with open gastrectomy, robotic gastrectomy reduces opioid use in the early postoperative period and is associated with fewer OME discharge prescriptions and shorter hospital stay.