Universal screening or a universal risk assessment combined with risk-based screening for multidrug-resistant microorganisms upon admission: Comparing strategies.

OBJECTIVE: Timely identification of patients who carry multidrug-resistant microorganisms (MDRO) is needed to prevent nosocomial spread to other patients and to the hospital environment. We aimed to compare the yield of a universal screening strategy upon admission to the currently installed universal risk assessment combined with risk-based screening upon admission. METHODS: This observational study was conducted within a prospective cohort study. From January 1, 2018, until September 1, 2019, patients admitted to our hospital were asked to participate. Nasal and perianal samples were taken upon admission and checked for the presence of MDRO. The results of the universal risk assessment and risk-based screening were collected retrospectively from electronic health records. RESULTS: In total, 1017 patients with 1069 separate hospital admissions participated in the study. Universal screening identified 38 (3.6%) unknown MDRO carriers upon admission (37 individual patients), all carrying extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales. For 946 of 1069 (88.5%) patients, both the universal risk assessment and universal screening were performed. For 19 (2.0%) admissions, ≥1 risk factor was identified. The universal risk assessment identified one (0.1%) unknown carrier, compared to 37 out of 946 carriers for the universal screening (P<0.001). Of the 37 carriers identified through the universal screening, 35 (94.6%) reported no risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that in our low endemic setting, a universal screening strategy identified significantly more MDRO carriers than the currently implemented universal risk-assessment. When implementing a universal risk-assessment, risk factors should be carefully selected to be able to identify ESBL-E carriers. While the universal screening identified more MDRO carriers, further research is needed to determine the cost-effectiveness of this strategy.

Single-use duodenoscopes compared with reusable duodenoscopes in patients carrying multidrug-resistant microorganisms: a break-even cost analysis.

Background and study aims Single-use duodenoscopes can prevent transmission of microorganisms through contaminated reusable duodenoscopes. Concerns regarding their economic and environmental impact impede the transition to single-use duodenoscopes. This study investigated the costs associated with two scenarios in which single-use duodenoscopes are used in patients carrying multidrug-resistant microorganisms (MDROs). Methods Break-even costs for single-use duodenoscopes were calculated for two scenarios in which patients were screened for MDRO carriage before undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Only direct costs related to the endoscopy were taken into consideration. In Scenario 1, patients were screened through microbiological culturing with a lag time in receiving the test result. In Scenario 2, screening was performed using GeneXpert analysis providing a rapid read-out. Calculations were performed using data from a Dutch tertiary care center and also with US healthcare data. Results In the Dutch situation, single-use duodenoscopes needed to be priced at a maximum of €â€Š140 to €â€Š250 to break-even. In the US analyses, break-even costs varied widely, depending on the duodenoscope-associated infection costs used, ERCP volume, and infection risk. The break-even costs in Scenario 1 ranged between $78.21 and $2,747.54 and in Scenario 2, between $248.89 and $2,209.23. Conclusions This study showed that a crossover scenario in which single-use duodenoscopes are only used in patients carrying MDROs could be an economically viable alternative to a complete transition to single-use duodenoscopes. In the Dutch setting, single-use duodenoscopes need to be priced much lower than in the United States to reach a per-procedure cost that is comparable with a scenario using reusable duodenoscopes exclusively.

Cost-effectiveness of Early Surgery Versus Endoscopy-first Approach for Painful Chronic Pancreatitis in the ESCAPE Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Economic evaluation of early surgery compared to the endoscopy-first approach in CP. BACKGROUND: In patients with painful CP and a dilated main pancreatic duct, early surgery, as compared with an endoscopy-first approach, leads to more pain reduction with fewer interventions. However, it is unknown if early surgery is more cost-effective than the endoscopy-first approach. METHODS: The multicenter Dutch ESCAPE trial randomized patients with CP and a dilated main pancreatic duct between early surgery (surgery within 6 weeks) or the endoscopy-first approach in 30 centers (April 2011-September 2016). Healthcare utilization was prospectively recorded up to 18 months after randomization. Unit costs of resources were determined, and cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses were performed from societal and healthcare perspectives. Primary outcomes were the costs per unit decrease on the Izbicki pain score and per gained quality-adjusted life-year. RESULTS: In total, 88 patients were included in the analysis, with 44 patients randomized to each group. Total costs were lower in the early surgery group but did not reach statistical significance (mean difference €-4,815 (95% bias-corrected and accelerated confidence interval €-13,113 to €3411; P = 0.25). Early surgery had a probability percentage of 88.4% of being more cost-effective than the endoscopy-first approach at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €0 per day per unit decrease on the Izbicki pain score. The probability percentage per additional gained quality-adjusted life-year was 75.7% at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €50,000. CONCLUSION: In patients with painful CP and a dilated main pancreatic duct, early surgery was more cost-effective than the endoscopy-first approach.

Assessment of postmanual cleaning adenosine triphosphate tests to prevent the use of contaminated duodenoscopes and linear echoendoscopes: the DETECT study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: We investigated whether the use of postmanual cleaning adenosine triphosphate (ATP) tests lowers the number of duodenoscopes and linear echoendoscopes (DLEs) contaminated with gut flora. METHODS: In this single-center before-and-after study, DLEs were ATP tested after cleaning. During the control period, participants were blinded to ATP results: ATP-positive DLEs were not recleaned. During the intervention period, ATP-positive DLEs were recleaned. DLEs underwent microbiologic sampling after high-level disinfection (HLD) with participants blinded to culture results. RESULTS: Using 15 endoscopes of 5 different DLE types, we included 909 procedures (52% duodenoscopes, 48% linear echoendoscopes). During the intervention period, the absolute rate of contamination with gut flora was higher (16% vs 21%). The main analysis showed that contamination was less likely to occur in the intervention period (odds ratio, .32; 95% credible interval [CI], .12-.85). A secondary analysis showed that this effect was based on 1 particular duodenoscope type (estimated probability, 39% [95% CI, 18%-64%] vs 9% [95% CI, 2%-21%]), whereas no effect was seen in the other 4 DLE types. In detail, of the 4 duodenoscopes of this type, 2 had lower contamination rates (69% vs 39% and 36% vs 10%). During the control period, both these duodenoscopes had multiple episodes with ongoing contamination with the same microorganism that ended weeks before the start of the intervention period (ie, they were not terminated by ATP testing). CONCLUSIONS: Postmanual cleaning ATP tests do not reduce post-HLD gut flora contamination rates of DLEs. Hence, postcleaning ATP tests are not suited as a means for quality control of endoscope reprocessing.

Do pathologists agree with each other on the histological assessment of pT1b oesophageal adenocarcinoma?

Background: In early (T1) oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC), the histological profile of an endoscopic resection specimen plays a pivotal role in the prediction of lymph node metastasis and the potential need for oesophagectomy with lymphadenectomy. Objective: To evaluate the inter-observer agreement of the histological assessment of submucosal (pT1b) OAC. Methods: Surgical and endoscopic resection specimens with pT1b OAC were independently reviewed by three gastrointestinal pathologists. Agreement was determined by intraclass correlation coefficient for continuous variables, and Fleiss' kappa (κ) for categorical variables. Bland-Altman plots of the submucosal invasion depth were made. Results: Eighty-five resection specimens with pT1b OAC were evaluated. The agreement was good for differentiation grade (κ=0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68-0.87), excellent for lymphovascular invasion (κ=0.88, 95% CI 0.76-1.00) and moderate for submucosal invasion depth using the Paris and Pragmatic classifications (κ=0.60, 95% CI 0.49-0.72 and κ=0.42, 95% CI 0.33-0.51, respectively). Systematic mean differences between pathologists were detected for the measurement of submucosal invasion depth, ranging from 297 µm to 602 µm. Conclusions: A substantial discordance was found between pathologists for the measurement of submucosal invasion depth in pT1b OAC. Differences may lead to an over- or underestimation of the lymph node metastasis risk, with grave implications for the treatment strategy. Review by a second gastrointestinal pathologist is recommended to improve differentiating between a favourable and an unfavourable histological profile.

Cost-effectiveness of Pancreatic Cancer Surveillance in High-Risk Individuals: An Economic Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to perform an economic analysis to identify the clinical and cost determinants of pancreatic cancer (PC) surveillance in high-risk individuals (HRIs). METHODS: A Markov model was created to compare the following 3 strategies: no screening, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) screening. Patients were considered HRIs according to the Cancer of the Pancreas Screening consortium recommendations. Risk for developing PC, survival, and costs data were obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results and Medicare databases. Surveillance effectiveness was obtained from a recent meta-analysis. RESULTS: Analysis of a cohort with fivefold relative risk of PC higher than the US population showed that MRI is the most cost-effective strategy. For those with the highest risk (>×20 relative risk), EUS became the dominant strategy. Our model was impacted by cost and imaging performance, but still cost-effective within the range reported in literature. Threshold analysis showed that if MRI increases greater than US $1600, EUS becomes more cost-effective. Once patients reached the age of 76 years, "no screening" was favored. Both surveillance strategies were cost-effective over a wide range of willingness to pay. CONCLUSIONS: Abdominal imaging followed by pancreatectomy is cost-effective to prevent PC in HRIs, favoring MRI in moderate risk cases but EUS in those with highest risk.

Superiority of Step-up Approach vs Open Necrosectomy in Long-term Follow-up of Patients With Necrotizing Pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In a 2010 randomized trial (the PANTER trial), a surgical step-up approach for infected necrotizing pancreatitis was found to reduce the composite endpoint of death or major complications compared with open necrosectomy; 35% of patients were successfully treated with simple catheter drainage only. There is concern, however, that minimally invasive treatment increases the need for reinterventions for residual peripancreatic necrotic collections and other complications during the long term. We therefore performed a long-term follow-up study. METHODS: We reevaluated all the 73 patients (of the 88 patients randomly assigned to groups) who were still alive after the index admission, at a mean 86 months (±11 months) of follow-up. We collected data on all clinical and health care resource utilization endpoints through this follow-up period. The primary endpoint was death or major complications (the same as for the PANTER trial). We also measured exocrine insufficiency, quality of life (using the Short Form-36 and EuroQol 5 dimensions forms), and Izbicki pain scores. RESULTS: From index admission to long-term follow-up, 19 patients (44%) died or had major complications in the step-up group compared with 33 patients (73%) in the open-necrosectomy group (P = .005). Significantly lower proportions of patients in the step-up group had incisional hernias (23% vs 53%; P = .004), pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (29% vs 56%; P = .03), or endocrine insufficiency (40% vs 64%; P = .05). There were no significant differences between groups in proportions of patients requiring additional drainage procedures (11% vs 13%; P = .99) or pancreatic surgery (11% vs 5%; P = .43), or in recurrent acute pancreatitis, chronic pancreatitis, Izbicki pain scores, or medical costs. Quality of life increased during follow-up without a significant difference between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of long-term outcomes of trial participants, we found the step-up approach for necrotizing pancreatitis to be superior to open necrosectomy, without increased risk of reinterventions.

Cost-effectiveness of routine screening for Lynch syndrome in endometrial cancer patients up to 70years of age.

PURPOSE: To assess cost-effectiveness of routine screening for Lynch Syndrome (LS) in endometrial cancer (EC) patients ≤70years of age. METHODS: Consecutive EC patients ≤70years of age were screened for LS by analysis of microsatellite instability, immunohistochemistry and MLH1 hypermethylation. Costs and health benefit in life years gained (LYG) included surveillance for LS carriers among EC patients and relatives. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) comparing LS screening among EC patients ≤70years with ≤50years and the revised Bethesda guidelines. RESULTS: Screening for LS in 179 EC patients identified 7 LS carriers; 1 was ≤50 and 6 were 51-70years. Per age category 18 and 9 relatives were identified as LS carrier. Screening resulted in 74,7 LYG (45,4 and 29,3 LYG per age category). The ICER for LS screening in EC patients ≤70 compared with ≤50years was €5,252/LYG. The revised Bethesda guidelines missed 4/7 (57%) LS carriers among EC patients. The ICER for LS screening in EC patients ≤70years of age compared with the revised Bethesda guidelines was €6,668/LYG. Both ICERs remained <€16,000/LYG in sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Routine LS screening in EC patients ≤70years is a cost-effective strategy, allowing colorectal cancer prevention in EC patients and their relatives.

Cost-Effectiveness of Cetuximab for Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Costly biologicals in palliative oncology are emerging at a rapid pace. For example, in patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma addition of cetuximab to a palliative chemotherapy regimen appears to improve survival. However, it simultaneously results in higher costs. We aimed to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of adding cetuximab to first-line chemotherapeutic treatment of patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, based on data from a randomized controlled phase II trial. METHODS: A cost effectiveness analysis model was applied based on individual patient data. It included only direct medical costs from the health-care perspective. Quality-adjusted life-years and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated. Sensitivity analysis was performed by a Monte Carlo analysis. RESULTS: Adding cetuximab to a cisplatin-5-fluorouracil first-line regimen for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma resulted in an the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €252,203 per quality-adjusted life-year. Sensitivity analysis shows that there is a chance of less than 0.001 that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio will be less than a maximum willingness to pay threshold of €40,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, which is representative for the threshold used in The Netherlands and other developed countries. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of cetuximab to a cisplatin-5-fluorouracil first-line regimen for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma is not cost-effective when appraised according to currently accepted criteria. Cost-effectiveness analyses using outcome data from early clinical trials (i.c. a phase II trial) enable pharmaceutical companies and policy makers to gain early insight into whether a new drug meets the current eligibility standards for reimbursement and thereby potential admittance for use in regular clinical practice.

Cost-effectiveness of routine screening for Lynch syndrome in colorectal cancer patients up to 70 years of age.

PURPOSE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of routine Lynch syndrome (LS) screening among colorectal cancer (CRC) patients ≤70 years of age. METHODS: A population-based series of CRC patients ≤70 years of age was routinely screened for LS. We calculated life years gained (LYG) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for different age cutoffs and comparing age-targeted screening with the revised Bethesda guidelines. RESULTS: Screening 1,117 CRC patients identified 23 LS patients, of whom 7 were ≤50 years of age, 7 were 51-60, and 9 were 61-70. Additionally, 70 LS carriers were identified among relatives (14, 42, and 14 per age category). Screening amounted to 205.9 LYG or 43.6, 118.0, and 44.3 LYG per age category. ICERs were [euro ]4.226/LYG for screening CRC patients ≤60 years of age compared with those ≤50 years and [euro ]7.051/LYG for screening CRC patients ≤70 years compared with those ≤60 years. The revised Bethesda guidelines identified 70 of 93 (75%) LS carriers. The ICER for LS screening in CRC patients ≤70 years of age compared with the revised Bethesda guidelines was [euro ]7.341/LYG. All ICERs remained less than [euro ]13.000/LYG in one-way sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Routine LS screening by analysis of microsatellite instability, immunohistochemistry, and MLH1 hypermethylation in CRC patients ≤70 years of age is a cost-effective strategy with important clinical benefits for CRC patients and their relatives.Genet Med 18 10, 966-973.

Repeated participation in pancreatic cancer surveillance by high-risk individuals imposes low psychological burden.

BACKGROUND: When assessing the feasibility of surveillance for pancreatic cancer (PC), it is important to address its psychological burden. The aim of this ongoing study is to evaluate the psychological burden of annual pancreatic surveillance for individuals at high risk to develop PC. METHODS: This is a multicenter prospective study. High-risk individuals who undergo annual pancreatic surveillance with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) were invited to complete questionnaires to assess motivations for participating in surveillance, experiences with participation, perceived PC risk, topics of concern, and psychological distress. Questionnaires were sent after intake for participation (T1), after the first MRI and EUS (T2), and after the MRI and EUS 1 (T3), 2 (T4), and 3 years (T5) after first surveillance. RESULTS: In total, 140 out of 152 individuals returned one or more of the questionnaires (response 92%); 477 questionnaires were analyzed. The most frequently reported motivation for participating in surveillance was the possible early detection of (a precursor stage of) cancer (95-100%). Only a minority of respondents experienced MRI and EUS as uncomfortable (10% and 11%, respectively), and respondents dreaded their next EUS investigation less as surveillance progressed. Respondents' cancer worries decreased significantly over time, and both their anxiety and depression scores remained stable and low over the 3-year period of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The psychological burden of pancreatic surveillance is low at all assessments. Therefore, from a psychological point of view, participation of high-risk individuals in an annual pancreatic surveillance program is feasible.Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

A prospective assessment of the natural course of the exocrine pancreatic function in patients with a pancreatic head tumor.

INTRODUCTION: In cancer of the pancreatic head region, exocrine insufficiency is a well-known complication, leading to steatorrhea, weight loss, and malnutrition. Its presence is frequently overlooked, however, because the primary attention is focused on cancer treatment. To date, the risk of developing exocrine insufficiency is unspecified. Therefore, we assessed this function in patients with tumors of the pancreatic head, distal common bile duct, or ampulla of Vater. METHODS: Between March 2010 and August 2012, we prospectively included patients diagnosed with cancer of the pancreatic head region at our tertiary center. To preclude the effect of a resection, we excluded operated patients. Each month, the exocrine function was determined with a fecal elastase test. Furthermore, endocrine function, steatorrhea-related symptoms, and body weight were evaluated. Patients were followed for 6 months, or until death. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were included. The tumor was located in the pancreas in 75%, in the bile duct in 16%, and in the ampullary region in 9%, with a median size of 2.5 cm. At diagnosis, the prevalence of exocrine insufficiency was 66%, which increased to 92% after a median follow-up of 2 months (interquartile range, 1 to 4 mo). DISCUSSION: Most patients with cancer of the pancreatic head region were already exocrine insufficient at diagnosis, and within several months, this function was impaired in almost all cases. Given this high prevalence, physicians should be focused on diagnosing and treating exocrine insufficiency, to optimize the nutritional status and physical condition, especially for those patients undergoing palliative chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy.

A comparative study of diagnostic scoring systems for autoimmune pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVE: Several diagnostic scoring systems for autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) have been proposed including the Asian, HISORt (Histology, Imaging, Serology, Other organ involvement and Response to therapy), and International Consensus Diagnostic Criteria (ICDC), which have been compared by a few studies. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of these criteria in patients diagnosed with AIP between May 1992 and August 2011. METHODS: Scoring systems were applied retrospectively using data obtained in the initial evaluation period, before pancreatic resection was performed. RESULTS: One hundred fourteen cases with AIP were included. Eighty-two percent met the diagnostic criteria for AIP according to either the Asian, HISORt, or ICDC criteria. Only 33% met the Asian criteria, probably mainly related to a low rate of diagnostic pancreatography. In 18%, all scoring systems failed to confirm the diagnosis, even though these patients were considered to have a firm diagnosis of AIP. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of AIP patients, the 3 major diagnostic scoring systems for AIP proved to be complementary rather than overlapping. Our data indicate that one-fifth of our AIP patients do not meet any of these scoring systems. The ICDC, Asian, and HISORt criteria should be considered as useful clinical tools but not as criterion standard for the diagnosis.

Trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis comparing surgical and endoscopic drainage in patients with obstructive chronic pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVE: Published evidence indicates that surgical drainage of the pancreatic duct was more effective than endoscopic drainage for patients with chronic pancreatitis. This analysis assessed the cost-effectiveness of surgical versus endoscopic drainage in obstructive chronic pancreatitis. DESIGN: This trial-based cost-utility analysis (ISRCTN04572410) was conducted from a UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective and during a 79-month time horizon. During the trial the details of the diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, and pancreatic insufficiency were collected. The resource use was varied in the sensitivity analysis based on a review of the literature. The health outcome was the Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY), generated using EQ-5D data collected during the trial. There were no pancreas-related deaths in the trial. All-cause mortality from the trial was incorporated into the QALY estimates in the sensitivity analysis. SETTING: Hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with obstructive chronic pancreatitis. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Costs, QALYs and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: The result of the base-case analysis was that surgical drainage dominated endoscopic drainage, being both more effective and less costly. The sensitivity analysis varied mortality and resource use and showed that the surgical option remained dominant in all scenarios. The probability of cost-effectiveness for surgical drainage was 100% for the base case and 82% in the assessed most conservative case scenario. CONCLUSIONS: In obstructive chronic pancreatitis, surgical drainage is highly cost-effective compared with endoscopic drainage from a UK NHS perspective.

Early surgery versus optimal current step-up practice for chronic pancreatitis (ESCAPE): design and rationale of a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: In current practice, patients with chronic pancreatitis undergo surgical intervention in a late stage of the disease, when conservative treatment and endoscopic interventions have failed. Recent evidence suggests that surgical intervention early on in the disease benefits patients in terms of better pain control and preservation of pancreatic function. Therefore, we designed a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the benefits, risks and costs of early surgical intervention compared to the current stepwise practice for chronic pancreatitis. METHODS/DESIGN: The ESCAPE trial is a randomized controlled, parallel, superiority multicenter trial. Patients with chronic pancreatitis, a dilated pancreatic duct (≥5 mm) and moderate pain and/or frequent flare-ups will be registered and followed monthly as potential candidates for the trial. When a registered patient meets the randomization criteria (i.e. need for opioid analgesics) the patient will be randomized to either early surgical intervention (group A) or optimal current step-up practice (group B). An expert panel of chronic pancreatitis specialists will oversee the assessment of eligibility and ensure that allocation to either treatment arm is possible. Patients in group A will undergo pancreaticojejunostomy or a Frey-procedure in case of an enlarged pancreatic head (≥4 cm). Patients in group B will undergo a step-up practice of optimal medical treatment, if needed followed by endoscopic interventions, and if needed followed by surgery, according to predefined criteria. Primary outcome is pain assessed with the Izbicki pain score during a follow-up of 18 months. Secondary outcomes include complications, mortality, total direct and indirect costs, quality of life, pancreatic insufficiency, alternative pain scales, length of hospital admission, number of interventions and pancreatitis flare-ups. For the sample size calculation we defined a minimal clinically relevant difference in the primary endpoint as a difference of at least 15 points on the Izbicki pain score during follow-up. To detect this difference a total of 88 patients will be randomized (alpha 0.05, power 90%, drop-out 10%). DISCUSSION: The ESCAPE trial will investigate whether early surgery in chronic pancreatitis is beneficial in terms of pain relief, pancreatic function and quality of life, compared with current step-up practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN: ISRCTN45877994.

Preoperative assessment of tumor location and station-specific lymph node status in patients with adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction.

BACKGROUND: In esophageal cancer patients preoperative staging will determine the type of surgical procedure and use of neoadjuvant therapy. Tumor location and lymph node status play a pivotal role in this tailored strategy. The aim of the present study was to prospectively evaluate the accuracy of preoperative assessment of tumor location according to the Siewert classification and lymph node status per station with endoscopy/endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and computed tomography (CT). METHODS: In 50 esophagectomy patients with adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ), tumor location according to Siewert and N-stage per nodal station as determined preoperatively by endoscopy/EUS and CT were compared with the histopathologic findings in the resection specimen. RESULTS: Overall accuracy in predicting tumor location according to the Siewert classification was 70 % for endoscopy/EUS and 72 % for CT. Preoperative data could not be compared with the pathologic assessment in 11 patients (22 %), as large tumors obscured the landmark of the gastric folds. The overall accuracy for predicting the N-stage in 250 lymph node stations was 66 % for EUS and 68 % for CT. The accuracy was good for those stations located high in the thorax, but poor for celiac trunk nodes. CONCLUSIONS: Given the frequent discrepancy between the endoscopic and pathologic location of the GEJ and the common problem of advanced tumors obscuring the landmarks used in the assessment of the Siewert classification, its usefulness is limited. The overall accuracy for EUS and CT in predicting the N-stage per station was moderate.

Pancreatitis of biliary origin, optimal timing of cholecystectomy (PONCHO trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: After an initial attack of biliary pancreatitis, cholecystectomy minimizes the risk of recurrent biliary pancreatitis and other gallstone-related complications. Guidelines advocate performing cholecystectomy within 2 to 4 weeks after discharge for mild biliary pancreatitis. During this waiting period, the patient is at risk of recurrent biliary events. In current clinical practice, surgeons usually postpone cholecystectomy for 6 weeks due to a perceived risk of a more difficult dissection in the early days following pancreatitis and for logistical reasons. We hypothesize that early laparoscopic cholecystectomy minimizes the risk of recurrent biliary pancreatitis or other complications of gallstone disease in patients with mild biliary pancreatitis without increasing the difficulty of dissection and the surgical complication rate compared with interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS/DESIGN: PONCHO is a randomized controlled, parallel-group, assessor-blinded, superiority multicenter trial. Patients are randomly allocated to undergo early laparoscopic cholecystectomy, within 72 hours after randomization, or interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy, 25 to 30 days after randomization. During a 30-month period, 266 patients will be enrolled from 18 hospitals of the Dutch Pancreatitis Study Group. The primary endpoint is a composite endpoint of mortality and acute re-admissions for biliary events (that is, recurrent biliary pancreatitis, acute cholecystitis, symptomatic/obstructive choledocholithiasis requiring endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography including cholangitis (with/without endoscopic sphincterotomy), and uncomplicated biliary colics) occurring within 6 months following randomization. Secondary endpoints include the individual endpoints of the composite endpoint, surgical and other complications, technical difficulty of cholecystectomy and costs. DISCUSSION: The PONCHO trial is designed to show that early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (within 72 hours) reduces the combined endpoint of mortality and re-admissions for biliary events as compared with interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy (between 25 and 30 days) after recovery of a first episode of mild biliary pancreatitis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials: ISRCTN72764151.

Epidemiology, diagnosis, and management of cystic lesions of the pancreas.

Although little is known on the true prevalence of pancreatic cysts, physicians are currently more frequently confronted with pancreatic cysts because of the increasing use of sophisticated cross-sectional abdominal imaging. Cystic lesions of the pancreas comprise of a heterogeneous group of diagnostic entities, some of which are benign such as inflammatory pseudocysts or serous cystadenomas and do not require resection when asymptomatic. Others like mucinous cysts or intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN) have a malignant potential and in these cases surgical resection is often indicated. For this reason an adequate distinction between the various cysts is crucial to optimize management strategy. Different diagnostic methods that could be of value in the differentiation include radiologic imaging techniques such as CT, MR, and endosonography. In addition, fluid aspiration for cytopathology, tumormarkers or molecular analysis is widely used. Different guidelines are available but so far no optimal diagnostic algorithm exists. We summarize the epidemiology, classification, clinical presentation, diagnostics, management, and future perspectives.

Long-term outcomes of endoscopic vs surgical drainage of the pancreatic duct in patients with chronic pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: A randomized trial that compared endoscopic and surgical drainage of the pancreatic duct in patients with advanced chronic pancreatitis reported a significant benefit of surgery after a 2-year follow-up period. We evaluated the long-term outcome of these patients after 5 years. METHODS: Between 2000 and 2004, 39 symptomatic patients were randomly assigned to groups that underwent endoscopic drainage or operative pancreaticojejunostomy. In 2009, information was collected regarding pain, quality of life, morbidity, mortality, length of hospital stay, number of procedures undergone, changes in pancreatic function, and costs. Analysis was performed according to an intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: During the 79-month follow-up period, one patient was lost and 7 died from unrelated causes. Of the patients treated by endoscopy, 68% required additional drainage compared with 5% in the surgery group (P = .001). Hospital stay and costs were comparable, but overall, patients assigned to endoscopy underwent more procedures (median, 12 vs 4; P = .001). Moreover, 47% of the patients in the endoscopy group eventually underwent surgery. Although the mean difference in Izbicki pain scores was no longer significant (39 vs 22; P = .12), surgery was still superior in terms of pain relief (80% vs 38%; P = .042). Levels of quality of life and pancreatic function were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: In the long term, symptomatic patients with advanced chronic pancreatitis who underwent surgery as the initial treatment for pancreatic duct obstruction had more relief from pain, with fewer procedures, than patients who were treated endoscopically. Importantly, almost half of the patients who were treated with endoscopy eventually underwent surgery.