National practice patterns in the use of endoscopic ultrasound biopsy for resectable Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: Insights into the role of DOTATATE PET/CT in diagnosis.

INTRODUCTION: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) are typically diagnosed using endoscopic ultrasound-guided (EUS) biopsy, which can be associated with complications. Since 2016, DOTATATE PET/CT has emerged as an effective tool to localize and stage PNETs. METHODS: Patients with PNETs who underwent R0 resections were identified from the 2004-2019 National Cancer Database PUF. Joinpoint regression and multivariable logistic regression were used to analyze trends in the use of biopsy. RESULTS: Of 16,746 R0 resected PNET patients, 44 â€‹% underwent diagnostic biopsy. Joinpoint regression showed a significant increase in the use of biopsy from 2004 to 2019 (APC 1.80, p â€‹< â€‹0.001). A higher percentage of patients diagnosed after DOTATATE approval underwent biopsy compared to those diagnosed before (48 â€‹% vs. 42 â€‹%, p â€‹< â€‹0.001). Adjusted analysis showed diagnosis after 2016 was associated with increased odds of biopsy (OR â€‹= â€‹1.67, p â€‹< â€‹0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite technologic advancement with DOTATATE PET/CT, there has been a significant increase in the proportion of resectable PNETs undergoing preoperative biopsy.

Robotic-assisted endoluminal gastric leiomyoma resection: a novel surgical technique for benign gastroesophageal junction tumors.

Gastric leiomyomas are rare, benign smooth muscle tumors that arise from the muscularis propria and can be found in any part of the stomach. The American College of Gastroenterologists recommends resection only for symptomatic leiomyomas, which can often present with bleeding, abdominal pain, or dyspepsia. Notably, symptomatic leiomyomas that arise at the gastroesophageal (GE) junction, especially those that are large, pose unique challenges. Specifically, total gastrectomy with esophagojejunostomy is often necessary, which can be associated with a compromised quality of life and possible complications such as anastomotic stricture or reflux esophagitis. In this context, we present the case of a young, male patient with a large symptomatic leiomyoma at the GE junction who was offered a robotic-assisted endoluminal leiomyoma resection. By placing endoluminal trocars and utilizing the Da Vinci® robot, we were able to carefully excise the tumor without perforating the stomach or causing GE junction stenosis. This allowed the patient to preserve his stomach and avoid a high-risk anastomosis. Another notable highlight of the case included the use of the endoscope as both a bougie and a source of insufflation. The patient had an uncomplicated postoperative course and a rapid recovery, highlighting the feasibility of this approach for patients with benign GE junction tumors.

Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy Techniques: A Contemporary Analysis Exploring Trends, Similarities, and Differences to Open Surgery.

Limited contemporary data has compared similarities and differences between total laparoscopic (LDP), hand-assisted (HALDP), and open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). This study aimed to examine similarities and differences in outcomes between these three approaches in a contemporary cohort. Methods: Patients undergoing elective LDP, HALDP, and ODP in the NSQIP dataset (2014−2019) were included. Descriptive statistics and multivariate regression analyses were employed to compare postoperative outcomes. Results: Among 5636 patients, 33.9% underwent LDP, 13.1% HALDP, and 52.9% ODP. Compared with the LDP approach, surgical site infections were more frequent in HALDP and ODP approaches (1.2% vs. 2.6% vs. 2.8%, respectively, p < 0.01). After adjustment, the LDP approach was associated with a significantly lower likelihood of surgical site infection (OR 0.25, p = 0.03) when compared to ODP. There was no difference in the likelihood of surgical site infection when HALDP was compared to ODP (OR 0.59, p = 0.40). Unadjusted operative times were similar between approaches (LDP = 192 min, HALDP = 193 min, ODP = 191 min, p = 0.59). After adjustment, the LDP approach had a longer operative time (+10.3 min, p = 0.04) compared to ODP. There was no difference in the adjusted operative time between HALDP and ODP approaches (+5.4 min, p = 0.80). Conclusions: Compared to ODP, LDP was associated with improved surgical site infection rates and slightly longer operative times. There was no difference in surgical site infection rates between ODP and HALDP. Surgeon comfort and experience should decide the operative approach, but it is important to discuss the differences between these approaches with patients.