Predicting the Risk of Morbidity by GLIM-Based Nutritional Assessment and Body Composition Analysis in Oncologic Abdominal Surgery in the Context of Enhanced Recovery Programs : The PHase Angle Value in Abdominal Surgery (PHAVAS) Study.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative nutritional status and body structure affect short-term prognosis in patients undergoing major oncologic surgery. Bioimpedance vectorial analysis (BIVA) is a reliable tool to assess body composition. Low BIVA-derived phase angle (PA) indicates a decline of cell membrane integrity and function. The aim was to study the association between perioperative PA variations and postoperative morbidity following major oncologic upper-GI surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 2019 and 2022 we prospectively performed BIVA in patients undergoing surgical resection for pancreatic, hepatic, and gastric malignancies on the day before surgery and on postoperative day (POD) 1. Malnutrition was defined as per the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition criteria. The PA variation (ΔPA) between POD1 and preoperatively was considered as a marker for morbidity. Uni and multivariable logistic regression models were applied. RESULTS: Overall, 542 patients with a mean age of 64.6 years were analyzed, 279 (51.5%) underwent pancreatic, 201 (37.1%) underwent hepatobiliary, and 62 (11.4%) underwent gastric resections. The prevalence of preoperative malnutrition was 16.6%. The overall morbidity rate was 53.3%, 59% in those with ΔPA < -0.5 versus 46% when ΔPA ≥ -0.5. Age [odds ratio (OR) 1.11; 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.00; 1.22)], pancreatic resections [OR 2.27; 95% CI (1.24; 4.18)], estimated blood loss (OR 1.20; 95% CI (1.03; 1.39)], malnutrition [OR 1.77; 95% CI (1.27; 2.45)], and ΔPA [OR 1.59; 95% CI (1.54; 1.65)] were independently associated with postoperative complications in the multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with preoperative malnutrition were significantly more likely to develop postoperative morbidity. Moreover, a decrease in PA on POD1 was independently associated with a 13% increase in the absolute risk of complications. Whether proactive interventions may reduce the downward shift of PA and the complication rate need further investigation.

Quantitative assessment of the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on pancreatic surgery: an Italian multicenter analysis of 1423 cases from 10 tertiary referral centers.

Few evidences are present on the consequences of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on pancreatic surgery. Aim of this study is to evaluate how COVID-19 influenced the diagnostic and therapeutic pathways of surgical pancreatic diseases. A comparative analysis of surgical volumes and clinical, surgical and perioperative outcomes in ten Italian referral centers was conducted between the first semester 2020 and 2019. One thousand four hundred and twenty-three consecutive patients were included in the analysis: 638 from 2020 and 785 from 2019. Surgical volume in 2020 decreased by 18.7% (p < 0.0001). Benign/precursors diseases (- 43.4%; p < 0.0001) and neuroendocrine tumors (- 33.6%; p = 0.008) were the less treated diseases. No difference was reported in terms of discussed cases at the multidisciplinary tumor board (p = 0.43), mean time between diagnosis and neoadjuvant treatment (p = 0.91), indication to surgery and surgical resection (p = 0.35). Laparoscopic and robot-assisted procedures dropped by 45.4% and 61.9%, respectively, during the lockdown weeks of 2020. No difference was documented for post-operative intensive care unit accesses (p = 0.23) and post-operative mortality (p = 0.06). The surgical volume decrease in 2020 will potentially lead, in the near future, to the diagnosis of a higher rate of advanced stage diseases. However, the reassessment of the Italian Health Service kept guarantying an adequate level of care in tertiary referral centers. Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT04380766.

Resectability of Pancreatic Cancer Is in the Eye of the Observer: A Multicenter, Blinded, Prospective Assessment of Interobserver Agreement on NCCN Resectability Status Criteria.

Objectives: To determine the reproducibility of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) resectability status classification for pancreatic cancer. Background: The NCCN classification defines 3 resectability classes (resectable, borderline resectable, locally advanced), according to vascular invasion. It is used to recommend different approaches and stratify patients during clinical trials. Methods: Prospective, multicenter, observational study (trial ID: NCT03673423). Main outcome measure was the interobserver agreement of tumor assignment to different resectability classes and quantification of vascular invasion degrees. Agreement was measured by Fleiss' k (k = 1 perfect agreement; k = 0 agreement by chance). Sixty-nine computed tomography (CT) scans of pathologically confirmed pancreatic adenocarcinoma were independently reviewed in a blinded fashion by 22 observers from 11 hospitals (11 surgeons and 11 radiologists). Rating differences between surgeons or radiologists and between hospitals with different volumes (≥60 or <60 resections/year) were assessed. Results: Complete agreement among 22 observers was recorded in 5 CT scans (7.2%), whereas 25 CT scans (36.2%) were variously assigned to all 3 resectability classes. Interobserver agreement varied from fair to moderate (Fleiss' k range: 0.282-0.555), with the lowest agreement for borderline resectable tumors. Assessing vascular contact ≤180° had the lowest agreement for all vessels (k range: 0.196-0.362). The highest concordance was recorded for venous invasion >180° (k range: 0.619-0.756). Neither reviewers' specialty nor hospital volume influenced the agreement. Conclusions: There is high variability in the assignment to resectability categories, which may compromise the reliability of treatments recommendations and the evidence of trials stratifying patients in resectability classes. Criteria should be revised to allow a reproducible classification.

Overuse of surgery in patients with pancreatic cancer. A nationwide analysis in Italy.

BACKGROUND: According to current guidelines, pancreatic cancer patients should be strictly selected for surgery, either palliative or resective. METHODS: Population-based study, including all patients undergoing surgery for pancreatic cancer in Italy between 2010 and 2012. Hospitals were divided into five volume groups (quintiles), to search for differences among volume categories. RESULTS: There were 544 hospitals performing 10 936 pancreatic cancer operations. The probability of undergoing palliative/explorative surgery was inversely related to volume, being 24.4% in very high-volume hospitals and 62.5% in very low-volume centres (adjusted OR 5.175). Contrarily, the resection rate in patients without metastases decreased from 86.9% to 46.1% (adjusted OR 7.429). As for resections, the mortality of non-resective surgery was inversely related to volume (p < 0.001). Surprisingly, mortality of non-resective surgery was higher than that for resections (8.2% vs. 6.7%; p < 0.01). Approximately 9% of all resections were performed on patients with distant metastases, irrespective of hospital volume group. The excess cost for the National Health System from surgery overuse was estimated at 12.5 million euro. DISCUSSION: Discrepancies between guidelines on pancreatic cancer treatment and surgical practice were observed. An overuse of surgery was detected, with serious clinical and economic consequences.

Laparoscopic resection in rectal cancer patients: outcome and cost-benefit analysis.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to evaluate the impact of laparoscopic rectal resection on short-term postoperative morbidity and costs. METHODS: A total of 168 patients with rectal cancer were randomly assigned to laparoscopic (n = 83) or open (n = 85) resection. Outcome parameters were: postoperative morbidity, length of hospital stay, quality of life, long-term survival, and local recurrences. The mean follow-up period was 53.6 months. Cost-benefit analysis was based on hospital costs. RESULTS: Operative time was 53 minutes longer in the laparoscopic group (P < 0.0001). Postoperative morbidity rate was 28.9 percent in the laparoscopic vs. 40 percent in the open group (P = 0.18). The mean length of hospital stay was 10 (4.9) days in the laparoscopic group and 13.6 (10) days in the open group (P = 0.004). Local recurrence rate and five-year survival were similar in both groups; however, the limited number of patients does not allow firm conclusions. Quality of life was better in the laparoscopic group only in the first year after surgery (P < 0.0001). The additional charge in the laparoscopic group was $1,748 per patient randomized ($1,194 the result of surgical instruments and $554 the result of longer operative time). The saving in the laparoscopic group was $1,396 per patient randomized ($647 the result of shorter length of hospital stay and $749 the result of the lower cost of postoperative complications). The net balance resulted in $351 extra cost per patient randomly allocated to the laparoscopic group. CONCLUSIONS: Short-term postoperative morbidity was similar in the two groups. Laparoscopic resection reduced length of hospital stay, improved first-year quality of life, and slightly increased hospital costs.