Multicentre study of multidisciplinary team assessment of pancreatic cancer resectability and treatment allocation.

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings have been adopted widely to ensure optimal treatment for patients with cancer. Agreements in tumour staging, resectability assessments and treatment allocation between different MDTs were assessed. METHODS: Of all patients referred to one hospital, 19 patients considered to have non-metastatic pancreatic cancer for evaluation were selected randomly for a multicentre study of MDT decisions in seven units across Northern Europe. Anonymized clinical information and radiological images were disseminated to the MDTs. All patients were reviewed by the MDTs for radiological T, N and M category, resectability assessment and treatment allocation. Each MDT was blinded to the decisions of other teams. Agreements were expressed as raw percentages and Krippendorff's α values, both with 95 per cent confidence intervals. RESULTS: A total of 132 evaluations in 19 patients were carried out by the seven MDTs (1 evaluation was excluded owing to technical problems). The level of agreement for T, N and M categories ranged from moderate to near perfect (46·8, 61·1 and 82·8 per cent respectively), but there was substantial variation in assessment of resectability; seven patients were considered to be resectable by one MDT but unresectable by another. The MDTs all agreed on either a curative or palliative strategy in less than half of the patients (9 of 19). Only fair agreement in treatment allocation was observed (Krippendorff's α 0·31, 95 per cent c.i. 0·16 to 0·45). There was a high level of agreement in treatment allocation where resectability assessments were concordant. CONCLUSION: Considerable disparities in MDT evaluations of patients with pancreatic cancer exist, including substantial variation in resectability assessments.

Impact of Body Mass Index on Complications and Survival after Surgery for Esophageal and Gastro-Esophageal-Junction Cancer.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The impact of body mass index on complications and survival in patients undergoing esophagectomy has been extensively studied with conflicting results. In this study, we assess the impact of body mass index on complications and survival following surgery for esophageal and gastro-esophageal-junction cancer in a Danish population. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We identified 285 consecutive patients, who underwent curative-intended treatment for esophageal and gastro-esophageal-junction cancer in the period 2003-2010. We manually reviewed the electronic medical records of all patients included in the study. Body mass index was calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared. We grouped patients according to their body mass index, using the World Health Organization definition, as underweight (body mass index < 18.5 kg/m2), normal weight (body mass index: 18.5-24.9 kg/m2), overweight (body mass index: 25-29.9 kg/m2), and obese (body mass index ⩽ 30 kg/m2). RESULTS: Median age at surgery was 65 years (range: 27-84 years), of which 207 (72.6%) were males. Patients with the lowest body mass index and the obese patients seemed to have a higher frequency of minor complications. Anastomotic leakage occurred in less than 10% of the patients and was equally distributed across the groups as was the other major complications. There were no differences in the 1-, 2-, or 5-year survival rates between the four body mass index groups after adjustment for possible confounders. Five-year survival rates for the four body mass index groups were 31.8%, 28.7%, 27.9%, and 26.1%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Body mass index over 30 or under 18.5 does not seem to affect survival rates or the presence of serious postoperative complications following esophagectomy in patients with esophageal and gastro-esophageal-junction cancers not receiving neoadjuvant oncological treatment.

Percutaneous cholecystostomy is an effective definitive treatment option for acute acalculous cholecystitis.

AIMS: Acute acalculous cholecystitis can be treated with percutaneous cholecystostomy in critically ill patients unfit for surgery. However, the evidence on the outcome is sparse. We conducted a retrospective analysis of acute acalculous cholecystitis patients treated with percutaneous cholecystostomy during a 10-year study period. METHODS: An observational study of 56 consecutive patients treated with percutaneous cholecystostomy for acute acalculous cholecystitis was conducted in the period from 1 June 2002 to 31 May 2012. All data were obtained by review of medical records. RESULTS: A total of 56 consecutive patients were treated with percutaneous cholecystostomy for acute acalculous cholecystitis. Six patients (10.7%) died within 30 days after the procedure. Percutaneous cholecystostomy could serve as a definitive treatment option in 45 patients (80.4%), whereas 1 patient (1.8%) required cholecystectomy due to recurrence of cholecystitis. Four patients (7.1%) were treated with percutaneous cholecystostomy as a bridging procedure to subsequent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy within a median of 8.8 months (range: 7.7-33.4 months). There was no significant difference in the risk of cholecystitis recurrence between patients with (6/37) and without (2/3) contrast passage to the duodenum on cholangiography (p = 0.096). CONCLUSION: Percutaneous cholecystostomy is successful as a definitive treatment option in the majority of patients with acute acalculous cholecystitis. It is associated with a low rate of mortality and subsequent cholecystectomy.