Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is associated with improved disease-free survival in pancreatic cancer patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy with vascular resection.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is becoming favored for all pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Patients with seemingly resectable disease infrequently still display vascular involvement intraoperatively. Outcomes following NAC versus upfront surgery in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) with vascular resection are unknown. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of PDAC patients who underwent PD with vascular resection between January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2020, within a single academic center. Clinicopathologic characteristics and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared between NAC versus upfront surgery cohorts using the Kaplan-Meier estimate and Cox proportional-hazards regression model. RESULTS: Eighty-one patients who underwent PD with vascular resection for PDAC were included. Forty-six patients (56%) received NAC. The NAC cohort more often had pathologic N0 status (47.8% vs. 8.6%, p < 0.001), had decreased vascular invasion (11% vs. 40%, p = 0.002), and completed chemotherapy (80% vs. 40%, p < 0.01). The NAC cohort demonstrated improved DFS (40.5 vs. 14.3 months, p = 0.007). In multivariable analysis, NAC remained independently associated with increased DFS (HR = 0.48, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: NAC was associated with improved clinicopathologic outcomes and DFS in PD with vascular resection. These findings demonstrate the advantage of NAC in PDAC patients undergoing PD with vascular resection.

Dual antiplatelet management in the perioperative period: updated and expanded systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Antiplatelet agents are central in the management of vascular disease. The use of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for the management of thromboembolic complications must be weighed against bleeding risk in the perioperative setting. This balance is critical in patients undergoing cardiac or non-cardiac surgery. The management of patients on DAPT for any indication (including stents) is not clear and there is limited evidence to guide decision-making. This review summarizes current evidence since 2015 regarding the occurrence of major adverse events associated with continuing, suspending, or varying DAPT in the perioperative period. METHODS: A research librarian searched PubMed and Cochrane from November 30, 2015 to May 17, 2022, for relevant terms regarding adult patients on DAPT for any reason undergoing surgery, with a perioperative variation in DAPT strategy. Outcomes of interest included the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events, major adverse limb events, all-cause death, major bleeding, and reoperation. We considered withdrawal or discontinuation of DAPT as stopping either aspirin or a P2Y12 inhibitor or both agents; continuation of DAPT indicates that both drugs were given in the specified timeframe. RESULTS: Eighteen observational studies met the inclusion criteria. No RCTs were identified, and no studies were judged to be at low risk of bias. Twelve studies reported on CABG. Withholding DAPT therapy for more than 2 days was associated with less blood loss and a slight trend favoring less transfusion and surgical re-exploration. Among five observational CABG studies, there were no statistically significant differences in patient death across DAPT management strategies. Few studies reported cardiac outcomes. The remaining studies, which were about procedures other than exclusively CABG, demonstrated mixed findings with respect to DAPT strategy, bleeding, and ischemic outcomes. CONCLUSION: The evidence base on the benefits and risks of different perioperative DAPT strategies for patients with stents is extremely limited. The strongest signal, which was still judged as low certainty evidence, is that suspension of DAPT for greater than 2 days prior to CABG surgery is associated with less bleeding, transfusions, and re-explorations. Different DAPT strategies' association with other outcomes of interest, such as MACE, remains uncertain. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: A preregistered protocol for this review can be found on the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of systematic reviews ( http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ ; registration number: CRD42022371032).

Endoscopic therapies for patients with obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is a major threat to public health and traditional bariatric surgery continues to have low utilization. Endoscopic treatments for obesity have emerged that offer less risk, but questions remain regarding efficacy, durability, and safety. We compared the efficacy of endoscopic bariatric procedures as compared to other existing treatments. METHODS: A literature search of Embase, Cochrane Central, and Pubmed was conducted from January 1, 2014 to December 7, 2021, including endoscopic bariatric therapies that were FDA or CE approved at the time of search to non-endoscopic treatments. Thirty-seven studies involving 15,639 patients were included. Primary outcomes included % total body weight loss (%TBWL), % excess body weight loss (%EBWL), and adverse events. Secondary outcomes included quality of life data and differences in hemoglobin A1C levels. Strength of clinical trial and observational data were graded according to the Cochrane methods. RESULTS: Intragastric balloons achieved greater %TBWL with a range of 7.6-14.1% compared to 3.3-6.7% with lifestyle modification at 6 months, and 7.5-14.0% compared to 3.1-7.9%, respectively, at 12 months. When endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) was compared to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), ESG had less %TBWL at 4.7-14.4% compared to 18.8-26.5% after LSG at 6 months, and 4.5-18.6% as compared to 28.4-29.3%, respectively, at 12 months. For the AspireAssist, there was greater %TBWL with aspiration therapy compared to lifestyle modification at 12 months, 12.1-18.3% TBWL versus 3.5-5.9% TBWL, respectively. All endoscopic interventions had higher adverse events rates compared to lifestyle modification. CONCLUSION: This review is the first to evaluate various endoscopic bariatric therapies using only RCTs and observational studies for evaluation of weight loss compared with conservative management, lifestyle modification, and bariatric surgery. Endoscopic therapies result in greater weight loss compared to lifestyle modification, but not as much as bariatric surgery. Endoscopic therapies may be beneficial as an alternative to bariatric surgery.

Surgical and Endoscopic Resection of Duodenal Neuroendocrine Tumors Have Similar Disease-Specific Survival Outcome.

BACKGROUND: Duodenal neuroendocrine tumors (dNETs) are rare, and their management is not well-defined. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend surgical resection of large dNETs (> 2 cm) and endoscopic resection of small tumors (< 2 cm). We compared the survival outcomes between surgical and endoscopic resection in various dNET sizes. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using patient data from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) database. Variables analyzed included age, tumor size, grade, stage, and lymph node status. Disease-specific survival (DSS) was compared for endoscopic and surgical groups in dNET size strata: 0-0.5, 0.5-1, 1-2, 2-3, and > 3 cm. Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used for survival analysis. RESULTS: The study included 465 patients, with 124 (26.7%) undergoing surgical resection. The average age was 61.9 years, and tumor sizes ranged from 0.1 to 10.5 cm. Endoscopic resection had 40.5% of tumors between 0 and 0.5 cm, while surgery had only 21% (p < 0.001). In the surgical cohort, 79.8% had grade 1 tumors compared to 88.3% in the endoscopy group (P = 0.024). Among surgically resected cases, 48.4% (60 patients) had lymph node involvement. Age, tumor size, grade, and stage did not significantly predict survival after surgical resection. Stratified by tumor size, no difference in DSS was observed between surgery and endoscopy groups. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic resection demonstrated similar survival outcomes to surgical resection across dNET sizes in this national analysis. Given the risks and the lack of survival benefits for surgery, endoscopic resection may be beneficial for both small and large tumors. Further studies are warranted to validate the current NCCN guidelines.

Gastric outlet obstruction caused by heterotopic pancreas in a patient with alcohol use disorder.

INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE: Heterotopic Pancreas (HP) is defined by the presence of pancreatic tissue in an anatomically distinct location from the main pancreas. While often clinically silent, it may present symptomatically. If located in the gastric antrum, HP may cause gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). The objective of this paper is to present a rare case of HP in the gastric antrum causing GOO. CASE PRESENTATION: Herein, we report a 43-year-old man who presented with abdominal pain and non-bilious emesis in the setting of COVID-19 infection and alcohol consumption. During the initial workup, computed-tomography (CT) was non-specific but demonstrated GOO, concerning for cancer. Cold forceps biopsies taken during esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) confirmed benign HP. Since the patient was symptomatic from gastric outlet compression, he underwent resection via laparoscopic distal gastrectomy and Billroth II gastrojejunostomy. At 1-month postoperative follow-up, the patient recovered uneventfully. We hypothesized that GOO by HP in this case may have been associated with cumulative effects of alcohol consumption and COVID-19 infection on the ectopic tissue. CLINICAL DISCUSSION: HP is rare and difficult to diagnose preoperatively. When located in gastric antrum, HP can cause GOO, mimicking gastric malignancy. Combination of EGD/EUS, biopsy/FNA, and surgical resection are necessary to definitively make the diagnosis. Finally, it is important to consider that heterotopic pancreatitis or structural changes in HP may occur due to classic pancreatic stressors like alcohol and viral infections. CONCLUSION: HP may cause GOO presenting with non-bilious emesis and abdominal pain, mistaken for malignancy on CT imaging.

Robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy in elderly patients: a propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is complex procedure with high morbidity in the elderly. This retrospective study aimed to compare post-operative outcomes in patients ≥75 years of age who underwent robot-assisted (RA)PD and open PD. METHODS: We analyzed 2502 patients ≥75 years of age who underwent PD from 2015 to 2018 in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. RAPD and open PD patients were propensity score matched 1:5 to assess the 30-day outcomes of interest: postoperative complications, length of stay, discharge destination, and readmissions. RESULTS: Of 725 matched patients, 110 underwent RAPD, 615 OPD, and 12 were converted to an open operation. Post-operative outcomes were largely similar between cohorts. RAPD was associated a shorter length of stay (median 8 days, interquartile range [IQR] 6 to 11) than OPD (median 8 days, IQR 7 to 13) (p = 0.003). However, RAPD was associated with more readmissions (28.1% vs. 17.7%; p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: RAPD in patients ≥75 years of age appears to be safe and has a similar complication profile to open PD. Randomized or well-designed prospective matched studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Trends in Robot-Assisted Procedures for General Surgery in the Veterans Health Administration.

INTRODUCTION: Implementation of robot-assisted procedures is growing. Utilization within the country's largest healthcare network, the Veterans Health Administration, is unclear. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using data from the Department of Veterans Affairs Corporate Data Warehouse from January 2015 through December 2019. Trends in robot utilization for cholecystectomy, ventral hernia repair, and inguinal hernia repair were characterized nationally and regionally by Veterans Integrated Services Network. Patients, who underwent laparoscopic repairs for these procedures and open hernia repairs, were included to determine proportion performed robotically. RESULTS: We identified 119,191 patients, of which 5689 (4.77%) received a robotic operation. The proportion of operations performed robotically increased from 1.49% to 10.55% (7.08-fold change; slope, 2.14% per year; 95% confidence interval [0.79%, 3.49%]). Ventral hernia repair had the largest growth in robotic procedures (1.51% to 13.94%; 9.23-fold change; slope, 2.86% per year; 95% confidence interval [1.04%, 4.68%]). Regions with the largest increase in robotic utilization were primarily along the Northeast, Midwest, and West Coast. CONCLUSIONS: Robot utilization in general surgery is increasing at different rates across the United States in the Veterans Health Administration. Future studies should investigate the regional disparities and drivers of this approach.

Robot-Assisted General Surgery Procedures at the Veterans Health Administration: A Comparison of Surgical Techniques.

INTRODUCTION: The use of the robot in general surgery has exploded in the last decade. The Veterans Health Administration presents a unique opportunity to study differences between surgical approaches due to the ability to control for health system and insurance variability. This study compares clinical outcomes between robot-assisted and laparoscopic or open techniques for three general surgery procedures. METHODS: A retrospective observational study using the Veterans Affair Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Operative time, length of stay, and complications were compared for cholecystectomy (robot-assisted versus laparoscopic), ventral, and inguinal hernia repair (robot-assisted versus laparoscopic or open) from 2015 to 2019. RESULTS: More than 80,000 cases were analyzed (21,652 cholecystectomy, 9214 ventral hernia repairs, and 51,324 inguinal hernia repairs). Median operative time was longer for all robot-assisted approaches as compared to laparoscopic or open techniques with the largest difference seen between open and robot-assisted primary ventral hernia repair (unadjusted difference of 93 min, P < 0.001). Median length of stay was between 1 and 4 d and significantly for robot-assisted ventral hernia repairs (versus open, P < 0.01; versus lap for recurrent hernia, P < 0.05). Specific postoperative outcomes of interest were overall low with few differences between techniques. CONCLUSIONS: While the robotic platform was associated with longer operative time, these findings must be interpreted in the context of a learning curve and indications for use (i.e., use of the robot for technically challenging cases). Our findings suggest that at the Veterans Health Administration, the robot is as safe a platform for common general surgery procedures as traditional approaches. Future studies should focus on patient-centered outcomes including pain and cosmesis.

18F-FDG PET/CT Imaging Biomarkers for Early and Late Evaluation of Response to First-Line Chemotherapy in Patients with Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate 18F-FDG PET/CT as an early and late interim imaging biomarker in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who undergo first-line systemic therapy. Methods: This was a prospective, single-center, single-arm, open-label study (IRB12-000770). Patient receiving first-line chemotherapy were planned to undergo baseline 18F-FDG PET/CT, early interim 18F-FDG PET/CT, and late interim 18F-FDG PET/CT. Cutoffs for metabolic and radiographic tumor response assessment as selected and established by receiver-operating-characteristic analysis were applied (modified PERCIST/RECIST1.1). Patients were followed to collect data on further treatments and overall survival. Results: The study population consisted of 28 patients who underwent baseline 18F-FDG PET/CT. Twenty-three of these (82%) underwent early interim 18F-FDG PET/CT, and 21 (75%) underwent late interim 18F-FDG PET/CT. Twenty-three deaths occurred during a median follow-up period of 14 mo (maximum follow-up, 58.3 mo). The median overall survival was 36.2 mo (95% CI, 28 mo to not yet reached [NYR]) in early metabolic responders (6/23 [26%], P = 0.016) and 25.4 mo (95% CI, 19.6 mo-NYR) in early radiographic responders (7/23 [30%], P = 0.16). The median overall survival was 27.4 mo (95% CI, 21.4 mo-NYR) in late metabolic responders (10/21 [48%], P = 0.058) and 58.2 mo (95% CI, 21.4 mo-NYR) in late radiographic responders (7/21 [33%], P = 0.008). Conclusion: 18F-FDG PET may serve as an early interim imaging biomarker (at ∼4 wk) for evaluation of response to first-line chemotherapy in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Radiographic changes might be sufficient for response evaluation after the completion of first-line chemotherapy.

Correlation of 68Ga-FAPi-46 PET Biodistribution with FAP Expression by Immunohistochemistry in Patients with Solid Cancers: Interim Analysis of a Prospective Translational Exploratory Study.

Fibroblast activation protein (FAP)-expressing cancer-associated fibroblasts confer treatment resistance and promote metastasis and immunosuppression. Because FAP is overexpressed in many cancers, radiolabeled molecules targeting FAP are studied for their use as pancancer theranostic agents. This study aimed to establish the spectrum of FAP expression across various cancers by immunohistochemistry and to explore whether 68Ga FAP inhibitor (FAPi)-46 PET biodistribution faithfully reflects FAP expression from resected cancer and non-cancer specimens. Methods: We conducted a FAP expression screening using immunohistochemistry on a pancancer human tissue microarray (141 patients, 14 different types of cancer) and an interim analysis of a prospective exploratory imaging trial in cancer patients. Volunteer patients underwent 1 whole-body 68Ga-FAPi-46 PET/CT scan and, subsequently, surgical resection of their primary tumor or metastasis. 68Ga-FAPi-46 PET SUVmax and SUVmean was correlated with FAP immunohistochemistry score in cancer and tumor-adjacent non-cancer tissues for each patient. Results: FAP was expressed across all 14 cancer types on tissue microarray with variable intensity and frequency, ranging from 25% to 100% (mean, 76.6% ± 25.3%). Strong FAP expression was observed in 50%-100% of cancers of the bile duct, bladder, colon, esophagus, stomach, lung, oropharynx, ovary, and pancreas. Fifteen patients with various cancer types (colorectal [n = 4], head and neck [n = 3], pancreas [n = 2], breast [n = 2], stomach [n = 1], esophagus [n = 2], and uterus [n = 1]) underwent surgery after their 68Ga-FAPi-46 PET/CT scan within a mean interval of 16.1 ± 14.4 d. 68Ga-FAPi-46 SUVs and immunohistochemistry scores were higher in cancer than in tumor-adjacent non-cancer tissue: mean SUVmax 7.7 versus 1.6 (P < 0.001), mean SUVmean 6.2 versus 1.0 (P < 0.001), and mean FAP immunohistochemistry score 2.8 versus 0.9 (P < 0.001). FAP immunohistochemistry scores strongly correlated with 68Ga-FAPi 46 SUVmax and SUVmean: r = 0.781 (95% CI, 0.376-0.936; P < 0.001) and r = 0.783 (95% CI, 0.379-0.936; P < 0.001), respectively. Conclusion: In this interim analysis of a prospective exploratory imaging trial, 68Ga-FAPi-46 PET biodistribution across multiple cancers strongly correlated with FAP tissue expression. These findings support further exploration of FAPi PET as a pancancer imaging biomarker for FAP expression and as a stratification tool for FAP-targeted therapies.

Pathological treatment response has different prognostic implications for pancreatic cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Pathological treatment effect of resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma after neoadjuvant therapy has prognostic implications. The impact for patients who received chemotherapy alone or chemoradiotherapy is not well defined. METHODS: Patients with localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma who had pancreatectomy after neoadjuvant therapy at 3 centers from 2011 to 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. The chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy groups were evaluated separately. RESULTS: Of 525 patients, 148 received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and 377 received chemoradiotherapy. The chemoradiotherapy group had a better treatment effect (score 0: 10%, score 1: 30%, score 2: 42%, and score 3: 18%) than the chemotherapy group (score 0: 2%, score 1: 8%, score 2: 35%, and score 3: 55%) (P < .001). Median overall survival was similar between the 2 groups (25.8 vs 26.4 months). Median overall survival for score 0/1, 2, or 3 was 72.2, 38.5, and 20.0 months in the chemotherapy group and 37.9, 24.5, and 19.0 months in the chemoradiotherapy group. Score 2 in the chemotherapy group was associated with better overall survival compared to score 3 (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.49, P = .005), whereas only combined score 0/1 reached significance over score 2 for the chemoradiotherapy group (hazard ratio: 0.63, P = .006). CONCLUSION: The prognostic significance of pathological treatment effect for localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma differs for patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

Clinical outcomes and cost of robotic ventral hernia repair: systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Robotic ventral hernia repair (VHR) has seen rapid adoption, but with limited data assessing clinical outcome or cost. This systematic review compared robotic VHR with laparoscopic and open approaches. METHODS: This systematic review was undertaken in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for articles with terms relating to 'robot-assisted', 'cost effectiveness', and 'ventral hernia' or 'incisional hernia' from 1 January 2010 to 10 November 2020. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, pain, recurrence, and cost data were extracted for narrative analysis. RESULTS: Of 25 studies that met the inclusion criteria, three were RCTs and 22 observational studies. Robotic VHR was associated with a longer duration of operation than open and laparoscopic repairs, but with fewer transfusions, shorter hospital stay, and lower complication rates than open repair. Robotic VHR was more expensive than laparoscopic repair, but not significantly different from open surgery in terms of cost. There were no significant differences in rates of intraoperative complication, conversion to open surgery, surgical-site infection, readmission, mortality, pain, or recurrence between the three approaches. CONCLUSION: Robotic VHR was associated with a longer duration of operation, fewer transfusions, a shorter hospital stay, and fewer complications compared with open surgery. Robotic VHR had higher costs and a longer operating time than laparoscopic repair. Randomized or matched data with standardized reporting, long-term outcomes, and cost-effectiveness analyses are still required to weigh the clinical benefits against the cost of robotic VHR.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Robot-Assisted, Video-Assisted, and Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: The utilization of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) for esophageal cancer is increasing, despite limited data comparing RAMIE with other surgical approaches. Objective: To evaluate the literature for clinical outcomes of RAMIE compared with video-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (VAMIE) and open esophagectomy (OE). Data Sources: A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane, Ovid Medline, and Embase databases from January 1, 2013, to May 6, 2020, was performed. Study Selection: Studies that compared RAMIE with VAMIE and/or OE for cancer were included. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline, data were extracted by independent reviewers. A random-effects meta-analysis of 9 propensity-matched studies was performed for the RAMIE vs VAMIE comparison only. A narrative synthesis of RAMIE vs VAMIE and OE was performed. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcomes of interest were intraoperative outcomes (ie, estimated blood loss [EBL], operative time, lymph node [LN] harvest), short-term outcomes (anastomotic leak, recurrent laryngeal nerve [RLN] palsy, pulmonary and total complications, and 90-day mortality), and long-term oncologic outcomes. Results: Overall, 21 studies (2 randomized clinical trials, 11 propensity-matched studies, and 8 unmatched studies) with 9355 patients were included. A meta-analysis was performed with 9 propensity-matched studies comparing RAMIE with VAMIE. The random-effects pooled estimate found an adjusted risk difference (RD) of -0.06 (95% CI, -0.11 to -0.01) favoring fewer pulmonary complications with RAMIE. There was no evidence of differences between RAMIE and VAMIE in LN harvest (mean difference [MD], -1.1 LN; 95% CI, -2.45 to 0.25 LNs), anastomotic leak (RD, 0.0; 95% CI, -0.03 to 0.03), EBL (MD, -6.25 mL; 95% CI, -18.26 to 5.77 mL), RLN palsy (RD, 0.01; 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.10), total complications (RD, 0.05; 95% CI, -0.01 to 0.11), or 90-day mortality (RD, -0.01; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.0). There was low certainty of evidence that RAMIE was associated with a longer disease-free survival compared with VAMIE. For OE comparisons (data not pooled), RAMIE was associated with a longer operative time, decreased EBL, and less pulmonary and total complications. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, RAMIE had similar outcomes as VAMIE but was associated with fewer pulmonary complications compared with VAMIE and OE. Studies on long-term functional and cancer outcomes are needed.

Surgical resection of high-grade nonfunctional pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma is associated with improved survival.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The role of surgery in the treatment of nonfunctional pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinomas (PNEC) is not well defined. This study investigated the effect of surgical resection on cause-specific survival compared with nonoperative management. METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) database was utilized to identify patients with nonfunctional pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma diagnosed between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2015. Survival was modeled using Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Of the 488 patients identified, 137 (29%) underwent surgical resection of the primary site. Patients who underwent surgery had a median CSS of 31 months compared with 5 months in those who did not (p < 0.01). A survival benefit was observed when the cohort was stratified into local, nodal, and metastatic disease. CONCLUSION: Resection of the primary site in the cohort of PNEC patients compiled by SEER is associated with improved survival. Further consideration be placed on primary surgical resection for PNEC while additional studies that can select specifically for high-grade, poorly differentiated carcinomas need to be undertaken.

Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of robot-assisted cholecystectomy: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Rapid adoption of robotic-assisted general surgery procedures, particularly for cholecystectomy, continues while questions remain about its benefits and utility. The objective of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness of robot-assisted cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease as compared with the laparoscopic approach. METHODS: A literature search was performed from January 2010 to March 2020, and a narrative analysis was performed as studies were heterogeneous. RESULTS: Of 887 articles screened, 44 met the inclusion criteria (range 20-735,537 patients). Four were randomized controlled trials, and four used propensity-matching. There were variable comparisons between operative techniques with only 19 out of 44 studies comparing techniques using the same number of ports. Operating room time was longer for the robot-assisted technique in the majority of studies (range 11-55 min for 22 studies, p < 0.05; 15 studies showed no difference; two studies showed shorter laparoscopic times), while conversion rates and intraoperative complications were not different. No differences were detected for the length of stay, surgical site infection, or readmissions. Across studies comparing single-port robot-assisted to multi-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy, there was a higher rate of incisional hernia; however, no differences were noted when comparing single-port robot-assisted to single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical outcomes were similar for benign, elective gallbladder disease for robot-assisted compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Overall, the rates of complications were low. More high-quality studies are needed as the robot-assisted technique expands to more complex gallbladder disease, where its utility may prove increasingly beneficial. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020156945.

Oncologic Outcomes After Robotic Pancreatic Resections Are Not Inferior to Open Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Compare oncologic outcomes after open and robotic pancreatic resections for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy improves survival after resected PDAC. Complications after pancreatectomy have been shown to prohibit the administration of adjuvant chemotherapy and survival. We examined the effect of surgical approach on receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy, complications, and overall survival after pancreatectomy. METHODS: A single-institution retrospective review of all patients with PDAC who underwent robotic or open pancreatectomy from 2011 to 2016 with 24-month follow-up. RESULTS: Four hundred fifty-six patients underwent resection: 226 robotic and 230 open. No significant difference was identified in major complications or receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy between robotic and open pancreatectomy, nor was approach an independent predictor of these outcomes. Robotic pancreatectomy patients had a shorter length of stay than patients who underwent open pancreatectomy (7 days vs 9 days; P < 0.001). Additionally, wound infection rate (32.3% vs 12.4%, P < 0.0001) and transfusion (39.6% vs 12.4%, P < 0.0001) was improved in robotic pancreatectomy group with no differences in perioperative mortality. Improved median overall survival approached statistical significance for the robotic cohort (25.6 months vs 23.9 months; P = 0.055); however, on multivariable analysis the robotic approach predicted overall survival, (hazard ratio 0.77, P = 0.041). Robotic approach was an independent predictor of decreased blood loss and less transfusions than the open approach. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic pancreatectomy was not inferior compared to open pancreatectomy in a high-volume experienced center for oncologic outcomes and due to decreased blood loss and transfusion may have improved survival.

Perioperative and Long-Term Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Adoption of the robotic surgical platform for small renal cancers has rapidly expanded, but its utility compared to other approaches has not been established. The objective of this review is to assess perioperative and long-term oncologic and functional outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) compared to laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) and open partial nephrectomy (OPN). METHODS: A search in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane (2010-2019) was conducted. Of 3877 articles screened, 7 observational studies were included. RESULTS: RAPN was associated with 24-50 mL less intraoperative blood loss compared to LPN and 39-84 mL less than OPN. RAPN also demonstrated trends of other postoperative benefits, such as shorter length of stay and fewer major complications. Several studies reported better long-term functional kidney outcomes, but these findings were inconsistent. Recurrence and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were similar across groups. While RAPN had a 5-year CSS of 90.1%-97.9%, LPN and OPN had survival rates of 85.9%-86.9% and 88.5-96.3% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: RAPN may be associated with a lower estimated blood loss and comparable long-term outcomes when compared to other surgical approaches. However, additional randomized or propensity matched studies are warranted to fully assess long-term functional kidney and oncologic outcomes.