Outcomes of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Pancreatoduodenectomy Following Learning Curves of Surgeons: A Multicenter Study on 2255 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) with laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) in operative and oncologic outcomes. BACKGROUND: Previous studies comparing RPD with LPD have only been carried out in small, single-center studies with variable quality. METHODS: Consecutive patients from nine centers in China who underwent RPD or LPD between 2015 and 2022 were included. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was used to minimize bias. RESULTS: Of the 2,255 patients, 1158 underwent RPD and 1097 underwent LPD. Following PSM, 1006 patients were enrolled in each group. The RPD group had significantly shorter operative time (270.0 vs. 305.0 minutes, P<0.001), lower intraoperative blood transfusion rate (5.9% vs. 12.0%, P<0.001), lower conversion rate (3.8% vs. 6.7%, P=0.004), and higher vascular reconstruction rate (7.9% vs. 5.6%, P=0.040) than the LPD group. There were no significant differences in estimated blood loss, postoperative length of stay, perioperative complications, and 90-day mortality. Patients who underwent vascular reconstruction had similar outcomes between the two groups, although they had significantly lower estimated blood loss (300.0 vs. 360.0 mL; P=0.021) in the RPD group. Subgroup analysis on pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) found no significant differences between the two groups in median recurrence-free survival (14.3 vs. 15.3 mo, P=0.573) and overall survival (24.1 vs. 23.7 mo, P=0.710). CONCLUSIONS: In experienced hands, both RPD and LPD are safe and feasible procedures with similar surgical outcomes. RPD had the perioperative advantage over LPD especially in vascular reconstruction. For PDAC patients, RPD resulted in similar oncological and survival outcomes as LPD.

Atorvastatin suppresses LPS-induced rapid upregulation of Toll-like receptor 4 and its signaling pathway in endothelial cells.

In the present study, we tested our hypothesis that atorvastatin exerts its anti-inflammation effect via suppressing LPS-induced rapid upregulation of Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) mRNA and its downstream p38, ERK, and NF-κB signaling pathways in human umbilical-vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) and human aortic endothelial cells (HAECs). TLR4 mRNA expression and its downstream kinase activities induced by LPS alone or atorvastatin + LPS in endothelial cells were quantified using quantitative real-time PCR and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Preincubation of LPS-stimulated endothelial cells with TLR4 siRNA was conducted to identify the target of the anti-inflammatory effects of atorvastatin. Atorvastatin incubation resulted in the reduction of LPS-induced TLR4 mRNA expression, ERK1/2 and P38 MAPK phosphorylation, and NF-κB binding activity. Pretreatment with MEK/ERK1/2 inhibitor PD98059 attenuated atorvastatin + LPS-induced NF-κB activity but had no effect on P38 MAPK phosphorylation. In contrast, pretreatment with P38 MAPK inhibitor SB203580 resulted in upregulation of atorvastatin + LPS-induced ERK1/2 phosphorylation but had no significant effects on NF-κB activity. On the other hand, blocking NF-κB with SN50 produced no effects on atorvastatin + LPS-induced ERK1/2 and P38 MAPK phosphorylation. Moreover, TLR4 gene silencing produced the same effects as the atorvastatin treatment. In conclusion, atorvastatin downregulated TLR4 mRNA expression by two distinct signaling pathways. First, atorvastatin stabilized Iκ-Bα, which directly inhibited NF-κB activation. Second, atorvastatin inactivated ERK phosphorylation, which indirectly inhibited NF-κB activation. Suppression of p38 MAPK by atorvastatin upregulates ERK but exerts no effect on NF-κB.

Transcoronary concentration gradient of sCD40L and hsCRP in patients with coronary heart disease.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies indicated that local inflammation played a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of coronary heart disease. Soluble CD40 ligand (sCD40L) and hsC- reactive protein (hsCRP) are important inflammatory mediators. However, whether they can reflect local coronary inflammation is unclear. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that transcoronary concentration gradient of sCD40L could reflect local inflammation in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) more reliably. METHODS: Forty subjects were divided into unstable angina pectoris (UAP) group (n=20), stable angina pectoris (SAP) group (n=10), and controls (n=10). Blood samples were collected from the coronary sinus (CS), aortic root (AO), and femoral vein (FV). The coronary circulation was expressed as CS-AO difference, while system circulation was expressed as FV-AO difference. sCD40L and hs-CRP were measured. RESULTS: Complex lesions were more frequent in the UAP group than in the SAP group (85% vs. 40%, p < 0.05). CS-AO differences of sCD40L were much greater in the UAP group than in the SAP or control groups, and were greatly higher than FV-AO difference in UAP group (465.49 +/- 247.85 pg/mL vs. -14.94 +/- 83.41 pg/mL; 465.49 +/- 247.85 pg/mL vs. -7.66 +/- 78.54 pg/mL; 465.49 +/- 247.85 pg/mL vs. -7.99 +/- 141.34 pg/mL, all p < 0.001). CS-AO differences of sCD40L were higher in patients with complex lesions than with smooth lesions (657.86 +/- 384.76 pg/mL vs. 317.62 +/- 409.98 pg/mL, p < 0.01). There were no significant differences of CS-AO in hs-CRP among the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CHD, the transcoronary concentration gradient of sCD40L is more sensitive than hsCRP, and sCD40L possibly a better marker of local inflammation and plaque instability.

Feasibility and safety of sorafenib treatment in hepatocellular carcinoma patients with spontaneous rupture.

AIM: To report the outcome of patients with ruptured hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated at a single center during a 5-year period. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 32 patients who presented with ruptured HCC at Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University between 2008 and 2013. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 53 years (range 39-71 years). Of these patients, 22 received surgical management, 10 underwent transarterial embolization (TAE) or transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), and 12 received sorafenib after surgery, TAE or TACE. Cumulative survival rates at 4, 8 and 12 mo were 72.9%, 50.0% and 33.3%, respectively, in the surgery only group and were 90.0%, 80.6% and 64.1%, respectively, in the surgery plus sorafenib group. Cumulative survival rates at 4, 8 and 12 mo were 68.4%, 43.6% and 19.4%, respectively, in the surgery only or TAE/TACE only groups, and were 91.7%, 75.0% and 60.2%, respectively, in the sorafenib combination groups (P = 0.04). No unexpected side effects due to sorafenib were observed. The most common side effect was hand-foot skin reaction. To date, 5 patients have died. Median follow-up from the start of sorafenib therapy for the remaining 7 patients is 12.7 mo (range 5.8-32.2 mo). CONCLUSION: Sorafenib can be used in patients with ruptured HCC as it has interesting activity and is well tolerated; dose adjustment is generally not required. However, a larger prospective study is necessary to determine the efficacy of sorafenib in this group of patients.