Metaverse and Telementoring: From Surgery to Workshop.

BACKGROUND: The Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has favored the growth of telemedicine systems and in this context the idea of Metaverse was born and developed. A 3D reality in which people can interact with each other through digital reproductions of themselves. Metaverse has already been tested in numerous medical fields due to its ability to combine visual and auditory information with tactile sensations. The purpose of this study is to highlight its potential also in its ability to be used as a telementoring place where the skills and knowledge of surgeons from all over the world can be combined. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The first HPB Surgery Workshop was held at the "Metaverse Surgical Hospital, USA". During the workshop, surgeons located in various parts of the world reported on hepatic, pancreatic and biliary tract surgery and remotely supported the execution of a robotic liver resection. RESULTS: The Metaverse gave the opportunity for surgeons to meet and discuss HPB pathologies and its surgical strategies and for surgeons in training to interface with experts by participating in a moment of advanced training. CONCLUSION: In the Metaverse, telementoring can be used at very low cost to improve clinical and surgical practice.

Minimally invasive vs. open segmental resection of the splenic flexure for cancer: a nationwide study of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology-Colorectal Cancer Network (SICO-CNN).

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the efficacy of minimally invasive (MI) segmental resection of splenic flexure cancer (SFC) is not available, mostly due to the rarity of this tumor. This study aimed to determine the survival outcomes of MI and open treatment, and to investigate whether MI is noninferior to open procedure regarding short-term outcomes. METHODS: This nationwide retrospective cohort study included all consecutive SFC segmental resections performed in 30 referral centers between 2006 and 2016. The primary endpoint assessing efficacy was the overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints included cancer-specific mortality (CSM), recurrence rate (RR), short-term clinical outcomes (a composite of Clavien-Dindo > 2 complications and 30-day mortality), and pathological outcomes (a composite of lymph nodes removed ≧12, and proximal and distal free resection margins length ≧ 5 cm). For these composites, a 6% noninferiority margin was chosen based on clinical relevance estimate. RESULTS: A total of 606 patients underwent either an open (208, 34.3%) or a MI (398, 65.7%) SFC segmental resection. At univariable analysis, OS and CSM were improved in the MI group (log-rank test p = 0.004 and Gray's tests p = 0.004, respectively), while recurrences were comparable (Gray's tests p = 0.434). Cox multivariable analysis did not support that OS and CSM were better in the MI group (p = 0.109 and p = 0.163, respectively). Successful pathological outcome, observed in 53.2% of open and 58.3% of MI resections, supported noninferiority (difference 5.1%; 1-sided 95%CI - 4.7% to ∞). Successful short-term clinical outcome was documented in 93.3% of Open and 93.0% of MI procedures, and supported noninferiority as well (difference - 0.3%; 1-sided 95%CI - 5.0% to ∞). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with SFC, the minimally invasive approach met the criterion for noninferiority for postoperative complications and pathological outcomes, and was found to provide results of OS, CSM, and RR comparable to those of open resection.

Inferior mesenteric artery ligation level in rectal cancer surgery: still no answer-a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to summarize the current scientific evidence regarding the impact of the level of inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) ligation on post-operative and oncological outcomes in rectal cancer surgery. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the literature up to 06 September 2022. Included were RCTs that compared patients who underwent high (HL) vs. anterior (LL) IMA ligation for resection of rectal cancer. The literature search was performed on Medline/PubMed, Scopus, and the Web of Science without any language restrictions. The primary endpoint was overall anastomotic leakage (AL). Secondary endpoints were oncological outcomes, intraoperative complications, urogenital functional outcomes, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Eleven RCTs (1331 patients) were included. The overall rate of AL was lower in the LL group, but the difference was not statistically significant (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.96). The overall number of harvested lymph nodes was higher in the LL group, but the difference was not statistically significant (MD 0.93, 95% CI - 2.21 to 0.34). The number of lymph nodes harvested was assessed in 256 patients, and all had a laparoscopic procedure. The number of lymph nodes was higher when LL was associated with lymphadenectomy of the vascular root than when IMA was ligated at its origin, but there the difference was not statistically significant (MD - 0.37, 95% CI - 1.00 to 0.26). Overall survival at 5 years was slightly better in the LL group, but the difference was not statistically significant (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.05). Disease-free survival at 5 years was higher in the LL group, but the difference was not statistically significant (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.04). CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence to support HL or LL according to results in terms of AL or oncologic outcome. Moreover, there is not enough evidence to determine the impact of the level of IMA ligation on functional outcomes. The level of IMA ligation should be chosen case by case based on expected functional and oncological outcomes.

Multi-visceral resection for left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a multicenter retrospective analysis from European countries.

BACKGROUND: Due to delayed diagnosis and a lower surgical indication rate, left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is often associated with a poor prognosis in comparison to pancreatic head tumors. Multi-visceral resections (MVR) associated with distal pancreatectomy could be proposed for patients presenting with locally infiltrating disease. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed a multi-centric cohort of left-sided PDAC patients operated on from 2009 to 2020. Thirteen European high-volume HPB centers participated in this study. We analyzed patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy (DP) associated with MVR and compared them to standard DP patients. RESULTS: Among 258 patients treated curatively for PDAC of the body and tail, 28 patients successfully underwent MVR. A longer operative time was observed in the MVR group (295 min +/- 74 vs. 250 min +/- 96, p= 0.248). The post-operative complication rate was comparable between the two groups (46.4% in the MVR group vs. 62.2% in the control group, p= 0.108). The incidence of positive margin (R1) was similar between the two groups (28.6% vs. 26.6%; p=0.827). After a median follow-up of 25 (9-111) months, overall survival was comparable between the two groups (p= 0.519). CONCLUSIONS: Multi-visceral resection in left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is safe and feasible and should be considered in selected cases as it seems to provide acceptable surgical and oncological outcomes.

Robotic versus laparoscopic left colectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to review the new evidence to understand whether the robotic approach could find some clear indication also in left colectomy. METHODS: A systematic review of studies published from 2004 to 2022 in the Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus databases and comparing laparoscopic (LLC) and robotic left colectomy (RLC) was performed. All comparative studies evaluating robotic left colectomy (RLC) versus laparoscopic (LLC) left colectomy with at least 20 patients in the robotic arm were included. Abstract, editorials, and reviews were excluded. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies was used to assess the methodological quality. The random-effect model was used to calculate pooled effect estimates. RESULTS: Among the 139 articles identified, 11 were eligible, with a total of 52,589 patients (RLC, n = 13,506 versus LLC, n = 39,083). The rate of conversion to open surgery was lower for robotic procedures (RR 0.5, 0.5-0.6; p < 0.001). Operative time was longer for the robotic procedures in the pooled analysis (WMD 39.1, 17.3-60.9, p = 0.002). Overall complications (RR 0.9, 0.8-0.9, p < 0.001), anastomotic leaks (RR 0.7, 0.7-0.8; p < 0.001), and superficial wound infection (RR 3.1, 2.8-3.4; p < 0.001) were less common after RLC. There were no significant differences in mortality (RR 1.1; 0.8-1.6, p = 0.124). There were no differences between RLC and LLC with regards to postoperative variables in the subgroup analysis on malignancies. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic left colectomy requires less conversion to open surgery than the standard laparoscopic approach. Postoperative morbidity rates seemed to be lower during RLC, but this was not confirmed in the procedures performed for malignancies.

Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer (RALAR study): A nationwide retrospective study of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology Colorectal Cancer Network Collaborative Group.

AIM: Anastomotic leakage after restorative surgery for rectal cancer shows high morbidity and related mortality. Identification of risk factors could change operative planning, with indications for stoma construction. This retrospective multicentre study aims to assess the anastomotic leak rate, identify the independent risk factors and develop a clinical prediction model to calculate the probability of leakage. METHODS: The study used data from 24 Italian referral centres of the Colorectal Cancer Network of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology. Patients were classified into two groups, AL (anastomotic leak) or NoAL (no anastomotic leak). The effect of patient-, disease-, treatment- and postoperative outcome-related factors on anastomotic leak after univariable and multivariable analysis was measured. RESULTS: A total of 5398 patients were included, 552 in group AL and 4846 in group NoAL. The overall incidence of leaks was 10.2%, with a mean time interval of 6.8 days. The 30-day leak-related mortality was 2.6%. Sex, body mass index, tumour location, type of approach, number of cartridges employed, weight loss, clinical T stage and combined multiorgan resection were identified as independent risk factors. The stoma did not reduce the leak rate but significantly decreased leak severity and reoperation rate. A nomogram with a risk score (RALAR score) was developed to predict anastomotic leak risk at the end of resection. CONCLUSIONS: While a defunctioning stoma did not affect the leak risk, it significantly reduced its severity. Surgeons should recognize independent risk factors for leaks at the end of rectal resection and could calculate a risk score to select high-risk patients eligible for protective stoma construction.

Current Status of the Self-Expandable Metal Stent as a Bridge to Surgery Versus Emergency Surgery in Colorectal Cancer: Results from an Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Literature.

Background: The current use of endoscopic stenting as a bridge to surgery is not always accepted in standard clinical practice to treat neoplastic colonic obstructions. Objectives: The role of colonic self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) positioning as a bridge to resective surgery versus emergency surgery (ES) for malignant obstruction, using all new data and available variables, was studied and we focused on short- and long-term results. Materials and Methods: A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed. PubMed, SCOPUS and Web of Science databases were included. The search comprised only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the interventions that included SEMS positioning versus ES. The primary outcomes were the rates of overall postoperative mortality, clinical and technical success. The secondary outcomes were the short- and long-term results. Results: A total of 12 studies were eligible for further analyses. A laparoscopic colectomy was the most common operation performed in the SEMS group, whereas the traditional open approach was commonly used in the ES group. Intraoperative colonic lavage was seldomly performed during ES. There were no differences in mortality rates between the two groups (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.04; I2 = 0%). In the SEMS group, the rate of successful primary anastomosis was significantly higher in of SEMS (69.75%) than in the ES (55.07%) (RR 1.26, 95% 245 CI 1.01 to 1.57; I2 = 86%). Conversely, the upfront Hartmann procedure was performed more frequently in the ES (39.1%) as compared to the SEMS group (23.4%) (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.85; I2 = 23%). The overall postoperative complications rate was significantly lower in the SEMS group (32.74%) than in the ES group (48.25%) (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.91; I2 = 65%). Conclusions: In the presence of malignant colorectal obstruction, SEMS is safe and associated with the same mortality and significantly lower morbidity than the ES group. The rate of successful primary anastomosis was significantly higher than the ES group. Nevertheless, recurrence and survival outcomes are not significantly different between the two groups. The analysis of short- and long-term results can suggest the use of SEMS as a bridge to resective surgery when it is performed by an endoscopist with adequate expertise in both colonoscopy and fluoroscopic techniques and who performed commonly colonic stenting.

Correction to: Standard (8 weeks) vs long (12 weeks) timing to minimally-invasive surgery after NeoAdjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: a multicenter randomized controlled parallel group trial (TiMiSNAR).

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors reported that the family name of the author, Ludovica Baldari, was misspelled.

Standard (8 weeks) vs long (12 weeks) timing to minimally-invasive surgery after NeoAdjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: a multicenter randomized controlled parallel group trial (TiMiSNAR).

BACKGROUND: The optimal timing of surgery in relation to chemoradiation is still controversial. Retrospective analysis has demonstrated in the recent decades that the regression of adenocarcinoma can be slow and not complete until after several months. More recently, increasing pathologic Complete Response rates have been demonstrated to be correlated with longer time interval. The purpose of the trial is to demonstrate if delayed timing of surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy actually affects pathologic Complete Response and reflects on disease-free survival and overall survival rather than standard timing. METHODS: The trial is a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled, unblinded, parallel-group trial comparing standard and delayed surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for the curative treatment of rectal cancer. Three-hundred and forty patients will be randomized on an equal basis to either robotic-assisted/standard laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery after 8 weeks or robotic-assisted/standard laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery after 12 weeks. DISCUSSION: To date, it is well-know that pathologic Complete Response is associated with excellent prognosis and an overall survival of 90%. In the Lyon trial the rate of pCR or near pathologic Complete Response increased from 10.3 to 26% and in retrospective studies the increase rate was about 23-30%. These results may be explained on the relationship between radiation therapy and tumor regression: DNA damage occurs during irradiation, but cellular lysis occurs within the next weeks. Study results, whether confirmed that performing surgery after 12 weeks from neoadjuvant treatment is advantageous from a technical and oncological point of view, may change the current pathway of the treatment in those patient suffering from rectal cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT3465982.

Upfront debulking surgery versus interval debulking surgery for advanced tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma and diffuse peritoneal metastases treated with peritonectomy procedures plus HIPEC.

BACKGROUND: Whether patients with advanced tubo-ovarian high-grade serous cancer (HGSC) fare better after upfront debulking surgery (UDS) or neoadjuvant chemotherapy with interval debulking surgery (NACT-IDS) remains controversial. METHODS: We studied patients with HGSC who underwent UDS or NACT-IDS between July 2000 and December 2015, with peritonectomy procedures combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). Clinical reports were included peritoneal cancer index (PCI), NACT responses, surgical complexity score (SCS), completeness of cytoreduction (CC), complete follow-up with timing, site, and treatment of recurrence. Outcome measures were morbidity, progression-free survival (PFS), PFS2, and overall survival during a mean 5-year follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 34 patients (23.6%) underwent UDS and 110 (76.4%) NACT-IDS both combined with HIPEC. At a median 66.3-month follow-up, patients who underwent UDS or NACT-IDS had similar outcomes. NACT subgroup responses correlated with PCI, SCS, morbidity, and CC. Patients who underwent UDS had lower recurrence rates than those who responded partly or poorly to NACT (PFS, P < .04; PFS2, P < .01). Despite HIPEC, the peritoneal disease recurred in 42.5% of the overall patients. CONCLUSION: In patients with primary HGSC who undergo UDS or NACT-IDS, despite similar outcomes, peritonectomy procedures combined with HIPEC seem unable to prevent peritoneal recurrence.

The use of intra-abdominal drain in minimally invasive right colectomy: a propensity score matched analysis on postoperative outcomes.

PURPOSE: No evidences supporting or not the use of intra-abdominal drain (AD) in minimally invasive right colectomies have been published. This study aims to assess the outcomes on its use after robotic or laparoscopic right colectomies. METHODS: This is a multicenter propensity score matched study including patients who underwent minimally invasive right colectomy with (AD group) or without (no-AD group) the use of AD between February 1, 2007, and January 31, 2018. AD patients were matched to no-AD patients in a 1:1 ratio. Main outcomes were postoperative morbidity and mortality and anastomotic leak. RESULTS: A total of 653 patients were included. Of 149 (22.8%) no-AD patients, 124 could be matched. The rate of postoperative complications (AD n = 26, 21% vs. no-AD n = 26, 21%; p = 1.000), mortality (AD n = 2, 1.6% vs. no-AD n = 1, 0.8%; p = 1.000), anastomotic leak (AD n = 2, 1.6% vs. no-AD n = 5, 4.0%; p = 0.453), and wound infection (AD n = 9, 7.3% vs. no-AD n = 6, 4.8%; p = 0.581) did not significantly differ between the groups. Time to oral feeding was significantly shorter in the no-AD group [2 (1-3) vs. 3 (2-3), p = 0.0001]. The median length of hospital stay was 8 (IQR 7-9) in the AD group while it was 6 (IQR 5-9) in the no-AD group (p = 0.010). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the use of AD after minimally invasive right colectomies has no influence on postoperative morbidity and mortality rates.

Is a drain necessary after anterior resection of the rectum? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The anastomotic leak rate in colorectal surgery is highest in patients receiving anterior rectal resections. The placement of prophylactic pelvic drains remains a routine option for preventing postoperative leaks, despite increasing evidence suggesting no clinical benefit. The present study seeks to identify a consensus on the use of prophylactic drains in anterior rectal resections. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted of MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases to identify clinical trials comparing the use of drainage to non-drainage in cases of colorectal anastomosis. RESULTS: Three randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and two controlled clinical trials (CCTs) were identified that met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 1702 patients with rectal cancer who underwent anterior resection: 1206 with a pelvic drain and 496 without a pelvic drain. Meta-analysis showed that the use of a drain did not significantly improve the outcomes of anastomotic leaks; the overall reoperation rate during the 30-day postoperative period and the postoperative mortality were statistically lower in the drained group (OR 2.82, 95% CI 1.33 to 5.97; I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: The use of prophylactic pelvic drainage after anterior rectal resections does not provide significant benefits with respect to anastomotic leaks and overall complication rates. However, an approximately threefold reduction of the postoperative mortality of the drained patients was observed. Given the limitations of the present study, these findings warrant the use of a drain after anterior rectal resection. Nevertheless, due to the low quality of the available data, further multicenter trials with uniform inclusion criteria are needed to evaluate drain usage in the anterior rectal resection.

Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis: a multicenter comparative analysis on short-term outcomes.

BACKGROUND: In literature, most of the comparative studies of robotic (RRC) versus laparoscopic (LRC) right colectomy are biased by the type of the anastomotic technique adopted. With this study, we aim to understand whether there is a role for robotics in performing right colectomies, comparing RRC versus LRC, both performed with intracorporeal anastomosis. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, all consecutive patients who underwent minimally invasive right colectomy (robotic or laparoscopic) with intracorporeal anastomosis in three Italian high-volume centers between February 1, 2007 and December 31, 2017 were included. Patients were grouped according to the method of surgery: RRC or LRC. RESULTS: A total of 389 patients were included in the study (305 RRC vs. 84 LRC). Patients' baseline characteristics were comparable between the groups. Operative time was significantly longer in RRC (250 min, IQR 209-305) group than LRC group (160 min, IQR 130-200) (p < 0.001). The median number of lymph nodes harvested was 22 (IQR 18-29) in RRC group while it was 19 (IQR 15-27) in LRC one (p = 0.028). No significant differences between the groups were seen in terms of time-to-first flatus, postoperative complications and length of hospital stay. Re-admission rate was significantly higher in LRC (n = 3, 3.6%) group than in RRC group (n = 1, 0.3%) (p = 0.033). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, RRC and LRC are comparable in terms of functional postoperative outcomes and length of hospital stay. RRC requires longer operative time, but the number of lymph nodes harvested may be higher.

Cytoreduction plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal carcinomatosis in colorectal cancer patients: a single-center cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we report our experience of cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) from colorectal cancer (CRC), focusing on the factors affecting survival. METHODS: All patients with surgically treated PC from colorectal cancer and with no involvement of other organs referred to our institute from March 2005 to December 2017 were included in the analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients underwent CRS-HIPEC, and all had a completeness of cytoreduction score of 0 (CC0). The median operating time was 645 min (interquartile range [IQR] 565-710). Five patients (13.1%) had Clavien-Dindo grade > 2 postoperative complications. Median overall survival (OS) was 60 months. In the Cox regression for OS, calculated on the CRS-HIPEC group, the peritoneal cancer index (PCI) > 6 (hazard ratio [HR] 4.48, IQR 1.68-11.9, P = 0.003) and significant nodal involvement (N2) (HR 3.89, IQR 1.50-10.1, P = 0.005) were independent prognostic factors. Median disease-free survival (DFS) was 16 months. Only N2 (HR 2.44, IQR 1.11-5.36, P = 0.027) was a significantly negative prognostic factor for DFS in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: CRS-HIPEC can substantially improve survival. However, patients with high PCI (PCI > 6) and significant nodal involvement (N2) may not benefit from the procedure.

Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: In the right colon surgery, there is a growing literature comparing the safety of robotic right colectomy (RRC) to that of laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC). With this paper we aim to systematically revise and meta-analyze the latest comparative studies on these two minimally invasive procedures. METHODS: A systematic review of studies published from 2000 to 2017 in the PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases was performed. Primary endpoints were postoperative morbidity and mortality. Secondary endpoints were blood loss, conversion to open surgery, harvested lymph node anastomotic leak, postoperative hemorrhage, abdominal abscess, postoperative ileus, time to first flatus, non-surgical complications, wound infections, hospital stay, and incisional hernia and costs. A subgroup analysis was performed on those series presenting only extracorporeal anastomosis in both arms. RESULTS: After screening 355 articles, 11 articles with a total of 8257 patients were eligible for inclusion. Operative time was found to be significantly shorter for the laparoscopic procedures in the pooled analysis (SMD - 0.99 95% CI - 1.4 to - 0.6, p < 0.001). Conversion to open surgery was more common during laparoscopic procedures than during the robotic ones (RR 1.7; 95% CI 1.1-2.6, p = 0.02). No significant differences in mortality (RR 0.47; 95% CI 0.18-1.23, p = 0.124) and postoperative complications (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.9-1.2, p = 0.5) were found between LRC versus RRC. The pooled mean time to first flatus was higher in the laparoscopic group (SMD 0.85 days; 95% CI 0.16-1.54, p = 0.016). Hospital costs were significantly higher in RRCs (SMD - 0.52; 95% CI - 0.52 to - 0.04, p = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: RRC can be regarded as a feasible and safe technique. Its superiority in terms of postoperative recovery must be confirmed by further large prospective series comparing RRC and LRC performed with the same anastomotic technique. RRC seemed to be associated with higher costs than LRC.

Laparoendoscopic rendezvous in the treatment of cholecysto-choledocholitiasis: a single series of 200 patients.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Although the ideal management of cholecysto-choledocholitiasis is controversial, the two-stage approach, namely the common bile duct (CBD) clearance through endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy, remains the standard way of management. However, whenever feasible, the one-stage approach, using the so-called "laparoendoscopic rendezvous" (LERV) technique, offers some advantages, mainly reducing the hospital stay and the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and the efficacy of the one-stage approach, and to compare our results with data from available large studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed our series of consecutive patients with cholecysto-choledocholitiasis treated by LERV from January 2003, to October 2016. Both elective and emergency cases were included. The primary end-point was the efficacy to obtain the CBD stones clearance. Secondary end-points were morbidity and mortality, operative time, conversion rate, and in-hospital stay. RESULTS: A total of 200 patients underwent a LERV procedure for the intra-operative diagnosis by intra-operative cholangiogram of cholecysto-choledocholitiasis. In 187 patients (93.5%), it was possible to cannulate the cystic duct with the jag-wire. Success rate was 95%. Conversion rate was 3%. The mean operative time was 135 min and the mean in-hospital stay was 4 days. 29 (14.5%) were the early complications, six mild pancreatitis. Four patients required re-operation during the hospital stay. 11 patients (5.5%) developed late complications during a median follow-up of 57.7 months. CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirm that LERV technique is a safe procedure with high success rates for the treatment of cholecysto-choledocholitiasis. The major advantages include the single-stage treatment, the shorter hospital stay, and the lower incidence of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

Activity of Eribulin in a Primary Culture of Well-Differentiated/Dedifferentiated Adipocytic Sarcoma.

Eribulin mesylate is a novel, non-taxane, synthetic microtubule inhibitor showing antitumor activity in a wide range of tumors including soft tissue sarcomas (STS). Eribulin has been recently approved for the treatment of metastatic liposarcoma (LPS) patients previously treated with anthracyclines. This work investigated the mechanism of action of this innovative antitubulin agent in well-differentiated/dedifferentiated LPS (ALT/DDLPS) which represents one of the most common adipocytic sarcoma histotypes. A primary culture of ALT/DDLPS from a 54-year-old patient was established. The anticancer activity of eribulin on the patient-derived primary culture was assessed by MTT and tunel assays. Eribulin efficacy was compared to other drugs approved for the treatment of STS. Cell migration and morphology were examined after exposure to eribulin to better understand the drug mechanism of action. Finally, Western blot analysis of apoptosis and migration proteins was performed. The results showed that eribulin exerts its antiproliferative effect by the arrest of cell motility and induction of apoptosis. Our results highlighted the activity of eribulin in the treatment of ALT/DDLPS patients.

Long-lasting activity of trabectedin in refractory uterine leiomyosarcoma: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Leiomyosarcoma (LMS) is an aggressive soft tissue sarcoma derived from smooth muscle cells typically of uterine, gastrointestinal or soft tissue origin. The prognosis for this tumor is poor, with survival rates among the lowest of all soft tissue sarcomas. Surgery is the best approach for localized disease. The principal role of chemotherapy is prevalently in the treatment of metastatic disease. Trabectedin, a promising new DNA-damaging agent with a mechanism of action that differs from that of traditional alkylating agents, has been approved in Europe for the treatment of patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma after failure of anthracyclines and ifosfamide, CASE PRESENTATION: We report the case of a 53-year-old woman with metastatic well differentiated uterine leiomyosarcoma refractory to multiple treatments who underwent 22 cycles of trabectedin over 30 months, obtaining a partial response according to RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) criteria, with good tolerability, and maintaining the response for 10 months after trebectedin withdrawal. CONCLUSION: This very prolonged response, which persisted after drug discontinuation, suggests that trabectedin exerts an oncostatic effect rather than the cytotoxic one produced by other chemotherapeutic agents. Our experience also raises the question of the best way to evaluate trabectedin efficacy.