Trends and disparities in access to minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (midp): an eight-year analysis from the national cancer database.

Laparoscopic and robotic approaches to distal pancreatectomy are becoming the standard of care. The aim of our study was to evaluate the trends of utilization and disparities in access to minimally invasive approaches in distal pancreatectomy. We queried the National Cancer Database (NCDB) and analyzed all the patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy from 2010 to 2017. Patients were divided into groups of those with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) and those with laparoscopic or robotic distal pancreatectomy (MIDP = minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy). Our outcome measures were trends of MIDP and disparities in access to MIDP. Cochran Armitage trend analysis and multivariate regression analysis were used to evaluate outcomes. A total of 13,537 patients with distal pancreatectomy were identified in the NCDB from 2010 to 2017. 7548 (55.8%) underwent ODP, while 5989 (44.2%) underwent MIDP. The MIDP rates increased from 25% in 2010 to 52% in 2017 (p < 0.01). On regression analysis, when controlled for age, gender, diagnosis, tumor size, grade, staging, and chemoradiotherapy, African American patients were 30% less likely to undergo MIDP than White (OR 0.7, 95% CI [0.5-0.8], p < 0.01). Similarly, Hispanic patients were 25% less likely to undergo MIDP than non-Hispanic patients OR 0.75, 95% CI [0.6-0.9], p = 0.02). Compared to Medicare/private insured patients, uninsured patients were 50% less likely to undergo MIDP (OR 0.5, 95% CI [0.4-0.7], p < 0.01). Based on the medium household income, compared to patients in the fourth quartile, patients in the third quartile OR 0.9, 95% CI [0.3-0.9], p = 0.03). Second OR 0.8, 95%CI [0.5-0.9], p < 0.01), first quartile OR 0.7, 95% CI [0.5-0.8], p < 0.01) were less likely to undergo MIPD as well. Utilization of MIDP has increased from one in every four patients in 2010 to every other patient in 2017. However, African Americans, Hispanics, the uninsured, and those from low-income quartiles are less likely to undergo MIDP. Efforts should be made to ensure access to minimally invasive approches are available to minorities.

Cyst Gastrostomy and Necrosectomy for the Management of Sterile Walled-Off Pancreatic Necrosis: a Comparison of Minimally Invasive Surgical and Endoscopic Outcomes at a High-Volume Pancreatic Center.

INTRODUCTION: Walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WON) is a sequela of acute necrotizing pancreatitis in 15-40% of cases. We sought to compare the outcomes of minimally invasive surgical and endoscopic cyst gastrostomy (CG) and necrosectomy for the management for sterile WON at a tertiary care high-volume pancreas center. METHOD: This is a retrospective review of patients who underwent minimally invasive surgical or endoscopic CG and necrosectomy for clinically sterile WON between 2008 and 2013. Peri-procedural outcomes including costs were analyzed and compared. RESULTS: Twenty patients underwent minimally invasive surgical (robotic = 14, laparoscopic = 6) CG and necrosectomy, and 20 patients underwent endoscopic treatment. The surgical cohort had a larger median cyst size and higher CCI score. For the surgical cohort, median OR time was 167.5 min, estimated blood loss was 30 ml, and 65% underwent concomitant cholecystectomy. There was no mortality in either group and no difference in complication rates (20%). The failure rate was similar (15 versus 10%, P = 0.66). Although surgery was associated with a lower re-intervention rate (0 versus 1, P = 0.008), the endotherapy group was associated with shorter total LOS (inclusive of re-interventions) (7 versus 3 days, P = 0.032). The cost of the index procedure was significantly higher for the surgery group (P = 0.014); however, when considering all readmissions and re-interventions until resolution of the WON, the total cost was similar for both groups. CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive surgical and endoscopic CG and necrosectomy are comparable treatments for sterile WON in terms of outcomes and overall cost. The surgical approach may be considered advantageous when a concomitant cholecystectomy is required.

Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES): assessment of peritoneal bacterial load after intraperitoneal antimicrobial wash and evaluation of hemodynamic changes in a porcine model.

AIMS: Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) is a promising newly developed procedure; however, it is associated with many complications. The main aim of our study is to assess whether peritoneal wash with antibiotics decreases the bacterial load contamination related to the transgastric approach. METHODS: Ten female farm pigs underwent transgastric peritoneoscopy with fallopian tubal ligation. Five pigs were randomized to antibiotic wash of the peritoneal cavity and five to placebo. All animals were given one intravenous dose of antibiotic before the procedure. Hemodynamic variables were continuously monitored throughout the procedure. The next day, peritoneal cultures were taken. The fallopian tubes were inspected to determine the success of ligation and the gastric incision sites were assessed for leakage. RESULTS: No significant difference was noted between the antibiotic peritoneal wash group and the placebo group in terms of peritoneal bacterial load with respective median colony-forming units per ml (CFU/ml) of 0 [0; 1] vs. 0 [0; 4], p = 0.637. No clinically significant hemodynamic changes were noted during the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study indicate that NOTES carries minimal risk of peritoneal bacterial contamination, regardless of the use of intraperitoneal antibiotics, and is not associated with hemodynamic compromise.