The road to tailored adjuvant chemotherapy for all four non-pancreatic periampullary cancers: An international multimethod cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Despite differences in tumour behaviour and characteristics between duodenal adenocarcinoma (DAC), the intestinal (AmpIT) and pancreatobiliary (AmpPB) subtype of ampullary adenocarcinoma and distal cholangiocarcinoma (dCCA), the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) on these cancers, as well as the optimal ACT regimen, has not been comprehensively assessed. This study aims to assess the influence of tailored ACT on DAC, dCCA, AmpIT, and AmpPB. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients after pancreatoduodenectomy for non-pancreatic periampullary adenocarcinoma were identified and collected from 36 tertiary centres between 2010 - 2021. Per non-pancreatic periampullary tumour type, the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy and the main relevant regimens of adjuvant chemotherapy were compared. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: The study included a total of 2866 patients with DAC (n = 330), AmpIT (n = 765), AmpPB (n = 819), and dCCA (n = 952). Among them, 1329 received ACT, and 1537 did not. ACT was associated with significant improvement in OS for AmpPB (P = 0.004) and dCCA (P < 0.001). Moreover, for patients with dCCA, capecitabine mono ACT provided the greatest OS benefit compared to gemcitabine (P = 0.004) and gemcitabine - cisplatin (P = 0.001). For patients with AmpPB, no superior ACT regime was found (P > 0.226). ACT was not associated with improved OS for DAC and AmpIT (P = 0.113 and P = 0.445, respectively). DISCUSSION: Patients with resected AmpPB and dCCA appear to benefit from ACT. While the optimal ACT for AmpPB remains undetermined, it appears that dCCA shows the most favourable response to capecitabine monotherapy. Tailored adjuvant treatments are essential for enhancing prognosis across all four non-pancreatic periampullary adenocarcinomas.

The Five Periampullary Cancers, not Just Different Siblings but Different Families: An International Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer arising in the periampullary region can be anatomically classified in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), distal cholangiocarcinoma (dCCA), duodenal adenocarcinoma (DAC), and ampullary carcinoma. Based on histopathology, ampullary carcinoma is currently subdivided in intestinal (AmpIT), pancreatobiliary (AmpPB), and mixed subtypes. Despite close anatomical resemblance, it is unclear how ampullary subtypes relate to the remaining periampullary cancers in tumor characteristics and behavior. METHODS: This international cohort study included patients after curative intent resection for periampullary cancer retrieved from 44 centers (from Europe, United States, Asia, Australia, and Canada) between 2010 and 2021. Preoperative CA19-9, pathology outcomes and 8-year overall survival were compared between DAC, AmpIT, AmpPB, dCCA, and PDAC. RESULTS: Overall, 3809 patients were analyzed, including 348 DAC, 774 AmpIT, 848 AmpPB, 1,036 dCCA, and 803 PDAC. The highest 8-year overall survival was found in patients with AmpIT and DAC (49.8% and 47.9%), followed by AmpPB (34.9%, P < 0.001), dCCA (26.4%, P = 0.020), and finally PDAC (12.9%, P < 0.001). A better survival was correlated with lower CA19-9 levels but not with tumor size, as DAC lesions showed the largest size. CONCLUSIONS: Despite close anatomic relations of the five periampullary cancers, this study revealed differences in preoperative blood markers, pathology, and long-term survival. More tumor characteristics are shared between DAC and AmpIT and between AmpPB and dCCA than between the two ampullary subtypes. Instead of using collective definitions for "periampullary cancers" or anatomical classification, this study emphasizes the importance of individual evaluation of each histopathological subtype with the ampullary subtypes as individual entities in future studies.

Development and Characterization of Human Primary Cholangiocarcinoma Cell Lines.

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is the second most common primary liver tumor and is associated with late diagnosis, limited treatment options, and a 5-year survival rate of around 30%. CCA cell lines were first established in 1971, and since then, only 70 to 80 CCA cell lines have been established. These cell lines have been essential in basic and translational research to understand and identify novel mechanistic pathways, biomarkers, and disease-specific genes. Each CCA cell line has unique characteristics, reflecting a specific genotype, sex-related properties, and patient-related signatures, making them scientifically and commercially valuable. CCA cell lines are crucial in the use of novel technologies, such as three-dimensional organoid models, which help to model the tumor microenvironment and cell-to-cell crosstalk between tumor-neighboring cells. This review highlights crucial information on CCA cell lines, including: i) type of CCA (eg, intra- or extrahepatic), ii) isolation source (eg, primary tumor or xenograft), iii) chemical digestion method (eg, trypsin or collagenase), iv) cell-sorting method (colony isolation or removal of fibroblasts), v) maintenance-medium choice (eg, RPMI or Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium), vi) cell morphology (eg, spindle or polygonal shape), and vii) doubling time of cells.

Patients with deleterious germline mutations: A heterogeneous population for pancreatic cancer screening?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Modest data exist on the benefits of screening and surveillance for pancreatic cancer (PC) in high-risk individuals. Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN) are known precursors to PC. We hypothesized that patients with high-risk deleterious germline mutations have a higher prevalence of IPMN. METHODS: All patients undergoing prospective screening at a single institution from 2013 to 2019 were reviewed. RESULTS: Of 1166 patients screened, 358 (31%) possessed germline mutations and/or family history of PC (mutations n = 201/358, 56%, family history n = 226/358, 63%) (median follow-up 2.7 years). IPMN was found in 127 patients (35.5%). The prevalence of IPMN in mutation carriers (18%) was higher than in the general population (p < 0.01). Germline mutation was an independent predictor of IPMN (odds ratio [OR] = 3.2; p < 0.01), while family history was not (p = 0.22). IPMN prevalence was distributed unevenly between mutation types (67%-Peutz-Jeghers; 43%-HNPCC, 24%-BRCA2; 17%-ATM; 9%-BRCA1; 0%-CDKN2A and PALB2). CONCLUSION: In this series, 18% of mutation carriers harbored IPMN, higher than the general population. Germline mutation, but not a family history of PC, was independently associated with IPMN. This prevalence varied across mutation subtypes, suggesting not all mutation carriers develop precancerous lesions. Genetic testing for patients with a positive family history may improve screening modalities for this high-risk population.

Piperacillin-Tazobactam Compared With Cefoxitin as Antimicrobial Prophylaxis for Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Despite improvements in perioperative mortality, the incidence of postoperative surgical site infection (SSI) remains high after pancreatoduodenectomy. The effect of broad-spectrum antimicrobial surgical prophylaxis in reducing SSI is poorly understood. Objective: To define the effect of broad-spectrum perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis on postoperative SSI incidence compared with standard care antibiotics. Design, Setting, and Participants: Pragmatic, open-label, multicenter, randomized phase 3 clinical trial at 26 hospitals across the US and Canada. Participants were enrolled between November 2017 and August 2021, with follow-up through December 2021. Adults undergoing open pancreatoduodenectomy for any indication were eligible. Individuals were excluded if they had allergies to study medications, active infections, chronic steroid use, significant kidney dysfunction, or were pregnant or breastfeeding. Participants were block randomized in a 1:1 ratio and stratified by the presence of a preoperative biliary stent. Participants, investigators, and statisticians analyzing trial data were unblinded to treatment assignment. Intervention: The intervention group received piperacillin-tazobactam (3.375 or 4 g intravenously) as perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis, while the control group received cefoxitin (2 g intravenously; standard care). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was development of postoperative SSI within 30 days. Secondary end points included 30-day mortality, development of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula, and sepsis. All data were collected as part of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Results: The trial was terminated at an interim analysis on the basis of a predefined stopping rule. Of 778 participants (378 in the piperacillin-tazobactam group [median age, 66.8 y; 233 {61.6%} men] and 400 in the cefoxitin group [median age, 68.0 y; 223 {55.8%} men]), the percentage with SSI at 30 days was lower in the perioperative piperacillin-tazobactam vs cefoxitin group (19.8% vs 32.8%; absolute difference, -13.0% [95% CI, -19.1% to -6.9%]; P < .001). Participants treated with piperacillin-tazobactam, vs cefoxitin, had lower rates of postoperative sepsis (4.2% vs 7.5%; difference, -3.3% [95% CI, -6.6% to 0.0%]; P = .02) and clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (12.7% vs 19.0%; difference, -6.3% [95% CI, -11.4% to -1.2%]; P = .03). Mortality rates at 30 days were 1.3% (5/378) among participants treated with piperacillin-tazobactam and 2.5% (10/400) among those receiving cefoxitin (difference, -1.2% [95% CI, -3.1% to 0.7%]; P = .32). Conclusions and Relevance: In participants undergoing open pancreatoduodenectomy, use of piperacillin-tazobactam as perioperative prophylaxis reduced postoperative SSI, pancreatic fistula, and multiple downstream sequelae of SSI. The findings support the use of piperacillin-tazobactam as standard care for open pancreatoduodenectomy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03269994.

Biliary Stricture After Necrotizing Pancreatitis: An Underappreciated Challenge.

OBJECTIVE: Biliary stricture in necrotizing pancreatitis (NP) has not been systematically categorized; therefore, we sought to define the incidence and natural history of biliary stricture caused by NP. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Benign biliary stricture occurs secondary to bile duct injury, anastomotic narrowing, or chronic inflammation and fibrosis. The profound locoregional inflammatory response of NP creates challenging biliary strictures. METHODS: NP patients treated between 2005 and 2019 were reviewed. Biliary stricture was identified on cholangiography as narrowing of the extrahepatic biliary tree to <75% of the diameter of the unaffected duct. Biliary stricture risk factors and outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: Among 743 NP patients, 64 died, 13 were lost to follow-up; therefore, a total of 666 patients were included in the final cohort. Biliary stricture developed in 108 (16%) patients. Mean follow up was 3.5 ±â€Š3.3 years. Median time from NP onset to biliary stricture diagnosis was 4.2 months (interquartile range, 1.8 to 10.9). Presentation was commonly clinical or biochemical jaundice, n = 30 (28%) each. Risk factors for stricture development were splanchnic vein thrombosis and pancreatic head parenchymal necrosis. Median time to stricture resolution was 6.0 months after onset (2.8 to 9.8). A mean of 3.3 ±â€Š2.3 procedures were performed. Surgical intervention was required in 22 (20%) patients. Endoscopic treatment failed in 17% (17/99) of patients and was not associated with stricture length. Operative treatment of biliary stricture was more likely in patients with infected necrosis or NP disease duration ≥6 months. CONCLUSION: Biliary stricture occurs frequently after NP and is associated with splanchnic vein thrombosis and pancreatic head necrosis. Surgical correction was performed in 20%.

Colon Involvement in Necrotizing Pancreatitis: Incidence, Risk Factors, and Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of colon involvement in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis. SUMMARY/BACKGROUND DATA: Necrotizing pancreatitis is characterized by a profound inflammatory response with local and systemic implications. Mesocolic involvement can compromise colonic blood supply leading to ischemic complications; however, few data exist regarding this problem. We hypothesized that the development of colon involvement in necrotizing pancreatitis (NP) negatively affects morbidity and mortality. METHODS: Six hundred forty-seven NP patients treated between 2005 and 2017 were retrospectively reviewed to identify patients with colon complications, including ischemia, perforation, fistula, stricture/obstruction, and fulminant Clostridium difficile colitis. Clinical characteristics were analyzed to identify risk factors and effect of colon involvement on morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: Colon involvement was seen in 11% (69/647) of NP patients. Ischemia was the most common pathology (n = 29) followed by perforation (n = 18), fistula (n = 12), inflammatory stricture (n = 7), and fulminant C difficile colitis (n = 3). Statistically significant risk factors for developing colon pathology include tobacco use (odds ratio (OR), 2.0; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.2-3.4, P = 0.009), coronary artery disease (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1-3.7; P = 0.04), and respiratory failure (OR, 4.7; 95% CI, 1.1-26.3; P = 0.049). When compared with patients without colon involvement, NP patients with colon involvement had significantly increased overall morbidity (86% vs 96%, P = 0.03) and mortality (8% vs 19%, P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Colon involvement in necrotizing pancreatitis is common; clinical deterioration should prompt its evaluation. Risk factors include tobacco use, coronary artery disease, and respiratory failure. Colon involvement in necrotizing pancreatitis is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality.

The Influence of Intraoperative Blood Loss on Fistula Development Following Pancreatoduodenectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the role of intraoperative estimated blood loss (EBL) on development of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). BACKGROUND: Minimizing EBL has been shown to decrease transfusions and provide better perioperative outcomes in PD. EBL is also felt to be influential on CR-POPF development. METHODS: This study consists of 5534 PDs from a 17-institution collaborative (2003-2018). EBL was progressively categorized (≤150mL; 151-400mL; 401-1,000 mL; > 1,000 mL). Impact of additive EBL was assessed using 20 3- factor fistula risk score (FRS) scenarios reflective of endogenous CR-POPF risk. RESULTS: CR-POPF developed in 13.6% of patients (N = 753) and median EBL was 400 mL (interquartile range 250-600 mL). CR-POPF and Grade C POPF were associated with elevated EBL (median 350 vs 400 mL, P = 0.002; 372 vs 500 mL, P < 0.001, respectively). Progressive EBL cohorts displayed incremental CR-POPF rates (8.5%, 13.4%, 15.2%, 16.9%; P < 0.001). EBL >400mL was associated with increased CR-POPF occurrence in 13/20 endogenous risk scenarios. Moreover, 8 of 10 scenarios predicated on a soft gland demonstrated increased CR-POPF incidence. Hypothetical projections demonstrate significant reductions in CR-POPF can be obtained with 1-, 2-, and 3-point decreases in FRS points attributed to EBL risk (12.2%, 17.4%, and 20.0%; P < 0.001). This is especially pronounced in high-risk (FRS7-10) patients, who demonstrate up to a 31% reduction (P < 0.001). Surgeons in the lowest-quartile of median EBL demonstrated CR-POPF rates less than half those in the upper-quartile (7.9% vs 18.8%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: EBL independently contributes significant biological risk to CR-POPF. Substantial reductions in CR-POPF occurrence are projected and obtainable by minimizing EBL. Decreased individual surgeon EBL is associated with improvements in CR-POPF.

The Fistula Risk Score Catalog: Toward Precision Medicine for Pancreatic Fistula After Pancreatoduodenectomy.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to present a full spectrum of individual patient presentations of pancreatic fistula risk, and to define the utility of mitigation strategies amongst some of the most prevalent, and vulnerable scenarios surgeons encounter. BACKGROUND: The FRS has been utilized to identify technical strategies associated with reduced CR-POPF incidence across various risk strata. However, risk-stratification using the FRS has never been investigated with greater granularity. By deriving all possible combinations of FRS elements, individualized risk assessment could be utilized for precision medicine purposes. METHODS: FRS profiles and outcomes of 5533 PDs were accrued from 17 international institutions (2003-2019). The FRS was used to derive 80 unique combinations of patient "scenarios." Risk-matched analyses were conducted using a Bonferroni adjustment to identify scenarios with increased vulnerability for CR-POPF occurrence. Subsequently, these scenarios were analyzed using multivariable regression to explore optimal mitigation approaches. RESULTS: The overall CR-POPF rate was 13.6%. All 80 possible scenarios were encountered, with the most frequent being scenario #1 (8.1%) - the only negligible-risk scenario (CR-POPF rate = 0.7%). The moderate-risk zone had the most scenarios (50), patients (N = 3246), CR-POPFs (65.2%), and greatest non-zero discrepancy in CR-POPF rates between scenarios (18-fold). In the risk-matched analysis, 2 scenarios (#59 and 60) displayed increased vulnerability for CR-POPF relative to the moderate-risk zone (both P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis revealed factors associated with CR-POPF in these scenarios: pancreaticogastrostomy reconstruction [odds ratio (OR) 4.67], omission of drain placement (OR 5.51), and prophylactic octreotide (OR 3.09). When comparing the utilization of best practice strategies to patients who did not have these conjointly utilized, there was a significant decrease in CR-POPF (10.7% vs 35.5%, P < 0.001; OR 0.20, 95% confidence interval 0.12-0.33). CONCLUSION: Through this data, a comprehensive fistula risk catalog has been created and the most clinically-impactful scenarios have been discerned. Focusing on individual scenarios provides a practical way to approach precision medicine, allowing for more directed and efficient management of CR-POPF.

Friend or foe? Feeding tube placement at the time of pancreatoduodenectomy: propensity score case-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: The role of concomitant gastrostomy or jejunostomy feeding tube (FT) placement during pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and its impact on patient outcomes remain controversial. METHODS: NSQIP database was surveyed for patients undergoing PD between 2014 and 2017. FT placement was identified using CPT codes. Propensity scores were used to match the two groups (1:1) on baseline characteristics and intraoperative variables including pancreas specific ones (duct size, gland texture, underlying disease, wound class, use of wound protector, drain placement, type of pancreatic reconstruction and vascular reconstruction). Outcomes were compared. Finally, a subset analyses for patients with delayed gastric emptying (DGE) or postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) were performed. RESULTS: Out of 15,224 PD, 1,104 (7.5%) had FT. POPF and DGE rates were 17% and 18%, respectively, for the entire cohort. Feeding jejunostomy was the most placed FT (88.2%). Patients with FT placement were more likely to be older (mean, 65.8 vs. 64.6 y), smokers (22.6% vs. 17.8%) who had preoperative weight loss (22.5% vs. 15.3%), ASA class ≥ 3 (80.8% vs. 77.5%), preoperative transfusion (1.5% vs. 0.84%), chemotherapy (22.8% vs. 17.5%), and radiation (14.5% vs. 6.8%, p < 0.05). The matched cohort included 880 patients in each group with completely balanced preoperative and intraoperative characteristics. In the matched cohort, patients with FT placement had higher overall morbidity (52.2% vs. 44.3%, p = 0.001), major morbidity (28.4% vs. 22.5%, p = 0.004), organ/space infection (14.4% vs. 10.9%, p = 0.026), re-operation (8.6% vs. 5.1%, p = 0.003), DGE (26.8% vs. 16.4%, p < 0.001), and longer mean hospital length of stay (12.9 vs. 11.2 days, p = 0.001) than those without FT. There was no difference in mortality (1.7% vs. 2.2%, p = 0.488) or readmission rate (20.2% vs. 17.2%, p = 0.099). In patients with DGE and POPF, FT placement was not associated with morbidity, mortality, length of stay, or readmission rate (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Patients with FT placement during PD tend to have higher postoperative morbidity and delayed recovery.

AHPBA guidelines for managing VTE prophylaxis and anticoagulation for pancreatic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Major abdominal surgery and malignancy lead to a hypercoagulable state, with a risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) of approximately 3% after pancreatic surgery. No guidelines exist to assist surgeons in managing VTE prophylaxis or anticoagulation in patients undergoing elective pancreatic surgery for malignancy or premalignant lesions. A systematic review specific to VTE prophylaxis and anticoagulation after resectional pancreatic surgery is herein provided. METHODS: Six topic areas are reviewed: pre- and perioperative VTE prophylaxis, early postoperative VTE prophylaxis, extended outpatient VTE prophylaxis, management of chronic anticoagulation, anti-coagulation after vascular reconstruction, and treatment of VTE. A Medline and PubMED search was completed with systematic medical literature review for each topic. Level of evidence was graded and strength of recommendation ranked according to the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system for practice guidelines. RESULTS: Levels of evidence and strength of recommendations are presented. DISCUSSION: While strong data exist to guide management of chronic anticoagulation and treatment of VTE, data for anticoagulation after reconstruction is inconclusive and support for perioperative chemoprophylaxis with pancreatic surgery is similarly limited. The risk of post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage often exceeds that of thrombosis. The role of universal chemoprophylaxis must therefore be examined critically, particularly in the preoperative setting.

Outcomes in Endoscopic and Operative Transgastric Pancreatic Debridement.

OBJECTIVES: Select patients with anatomically favorable walled off pancreatic necrosis may be treated by endoscopic (Endo-TGD) or operative (OR-TGD) transgastric debridement (TGD). We compared our experience with these 2 approaches. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Select necrotizing pancreatitis (NP) patients are suitable for TGD which may be accomplished endoscopically or surgically. Limited experience exists contrasting these techniques exists. METHODS: Patients undergoing Endo-TGD and OR-TGD at a single, high-volume pancreatic center between 2008 and 2019 were identified from a prospective database. Patient characteristics, procedural details, and outcomes of these 2 groups were compared. RESULTS: Among 498 NP patients undergoing necrosis intervention, 160 (32%) had TGD: 59 Endo-TGD and 101 OR-TGD. The groups were statistically similar in age, comorbidity, pancreatitis etiology, necrosis anatomy, pancreatitis severity, and timing of TGD from pancreatitis insult. OR-TGD required 1.1 ±â€Š0.5 and Endo-TGD 3.0 ±â€Š2.0 debridements/patient. Fewer hospital readmissions and repeat necrosis interventions, and shorter total inpatient length of stay were observed in OR-TGD patients. New-onset organ failure [Endo-TGD (13%); OR-TGD (13%); P = 1.0] was similar between groups. Hospital length of stay after TGD was significantly longer in patients undergoing Endo-TGD (13.8 ±â€Š20.8 days) compared to OR-TGD (9.4 ±â€Š6.1 days; P = 0.047). Mortality was 7% in Endo-TGD and 1% in OR-TGD (P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Operative and endoscopic transgastric debridement achieve necrosis resolution with different temporal and procedural profiles. Clear multidisciplinary communication is essential to determine appropriate approach to individual necrotizing pancreatitis patients.

A novel biosynthetic scaffold mesh reinforcement affords the lowest hernia recurrence in the highest-risk patients.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with higher postoperative infection risk undergoing ventral hernia repair (VHR) have limited options for mesh use. Biosynthetic mesh is intended to utilize the durability of synthetic mesh combined with the biocompatibility of biologic mesh. We sought to assess the outcomes of a novel biosynthetic scaffold mesh for VHR in higher risk patients over a 12-month postoperative period. METHODS: Two cohorts of 50 consecutive patients who underwent VHR with TELA Bio OviTex biosynthetic or synthetic mesh were retrospectively compared. Endpoints included surgical site occurrence (SSO), readmission rate, and hernia recurrence following VHR at 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: OviTex mesh placement was associated with higher risk Ventral Hernia Working Group (VHWG) distribution and more contaminated CDC wound class distribution compared to synthetic mesh placement (VHWG grade 3: 68% vs. 6%, p < 0.001; CDC class > I: 70% vs. 6%, p < 0.001). Additionally, concomitant procedures were performed more often with OviTex mesh placement than synthetic mesh placement (70% vs 10%, p < 0.001). The OviTex mesh performed comparably to synthetic mesh in terms of incidences of SSO (36% vs 22%, p = 0.19), readmission rates (24% vs 14%, p = 0.31), and hernia recurrence (6% vs 12%, p = 0.74). On further evaluation, patients who developed SSO with OviTex mesh (n = 18) had a 17% hernia recurrence whereas those with synthetic mesh (n = 11) had an associated 55% hernia recurrence (p = 0.048). CONCLUSIONS: The OviTex biosynthetic mesh was used in higher risk patients and performed similarly to synthetic mesh in regards to rate of SSO, readmissions, and hernia recurrence. Furthermore, patients who developed SSO with Ovitex mesh were significantly less likely to have hernia recurrence than those with synthetic mesh. Overall, the data suggest that biosynthetic mesh is a more desirable option for definitive hernia repair in higher risk patients.

Is resident assistance equivalent to fellows during hepatectomy?

OBJECTIVE: Hepatectomy is a complex operative procedure frequently performed at academic institutions with trainee participation. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of assistant's training level on outcomes following hepatectomy. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospective, single-institution ACS-NSQIP database was performed for patients that underwent hepatectomy (2013-2016). Patients were divided by trainee assistant level: hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) fellow versus general surgery resident (PGY 4-5). Demographic, perioperative, and 30-day outcome variables were compared using Chi-Square/Fisher's exact, Mann-Whitney U test, and multivariable regression. Cases involving a senior-level general surgery resident or HPB fellow as first assistant were included (n = 352). Those with a second attending, junior-level resident, or no documented assistant were excluded (n = 39). RESULTS: Patients undergoing hepatectomy with an HPB fellow as primary assistant had more frequent preoperative biliary stenting, longer operative time, and more concomitant procedures including biliary reconstruction, resulting in a higher rate of post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) (15% vs. 8%, P = 0.044). However, trainee level did not impact PHLF on multivariable analysis (OR 0.60, 95% CI [0.29-1.25], P = 0.173). Fellows assisted with proportionally more major hepatectomies (45% vs. 31%; P = 0.010) and resections for hepatobiliary cancers (31% vs. 19%, P = 0.014). On stratified analysis of major and minor hepatectomies, outcomes were similar between trainee groups. CONCLUSION: Fellows performed higher complexity cases with longer operative time. Despite these differences, outcomes were similar regardless of assistant training level. Resident and HPB fellow participation in operations requiring liver resection provide comparable quality of care.

Use of primary surgical drains in synchronous resection for colorectal liver metastases: a NSQIP analysis of current practice paradigm.

BACKGROUND: There are no studies examining the use of subhepatic drains after simultaneous resection of synchronous colorectal liver metastases (sCRLM). This study aimed to (1) describe the current practices regarding primary drain placement, (2) evaluate drain efficacy in mitigating postoperative complications, and (3) determine impact of drain maintenance duration on patient outcomes. METHODS: The ACS-NSQIP targeted data from 2014 to 2017 were analyzed. Propensity score of surgical drain versus no drain cohorts was performed. Main study outcomes were mortality, major morbidity, organ/space surgical site infection (SSI), secondary drain/aspiration procedure, and any septic events. Additional univariate/multivariate logistic analyses were performed to identify associations with drain placement and duration. Major hepatectomy was defined as formal right hepatectomy and any trisectionectomy. RESULTS: 584 combined liver and colorectal resection (CRR) cases were identified. Open partial hepatectomy with colectomy was the most common procedure (70%, n = 407). Nearly 40% of patients received surgical drains (n = 226). Major hepatectomy, lower serum albumin, and no intraoperative portal vein occlusion (Pringle maneuver) were significantly associated with drain placement (p < 0.05). In the matched cohort (n = 190 in each arm), patients with surgical drains experienced higher rates of major morbidity (30% vs 12%), organ/space SSI (16% vs 6%), postoperative drain/aspiration procedures (9% vs 3%), and sepsis/septic shock (12% vs 4%) (all p < 0.05). Patients with severely prolonged drain removal, defined as after postoperative day 13 (POD13), had higher risk of postoperative morbidity compared to those with earlier drain removal (p < 0.01). 30-day mortality rate was not significantly different between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Primary surgical drains were placed in a substantial percentage of patients undergoing combined resection for sCRLM. This case-matched analysis suggested that surgical drains are associated with an increase in postoperative morbidity. Postoperative drain maintenance past 13 days is associated with worse outcomes compared to earlier removal.

Surgical Transgastric Necrosectomy for Necrotizing Pancreatitis: A Single-stage Procedure for Walled-off Pancreatic Necrosis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of surgical transgastric necrosectomy (TGN) for walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WON) in selected patients. BACKGROUND: WON is a common consequence of severe pancreatitis and typically occurs 3 to 5 weeks after the onset of acute pancreatitis. When symptomatic, it can require intervention. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients with WON undergoing surgical management at 3 high-volume pancreatic institutions was performed. Surgical indications, intervention timing, technical methodology, and patient outcomes were evaluated. Patients undergoing intervention <30 days were excluded. Differences across centers were evaluated using a P value of <0.05 as significant. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-eight total patients were analyzed (mean WON diameter = 14 cm, 64% male, mean age = 51 years) across 3 centers. The majority required inpatient admission with a median preoperative length of hospital stay of 29 days (25% required preoperative critical care support). Most (96%) patients underwent a TGN. The median duration of time between the onset of pancreatitis symptoms and operative intervention was 60 days. Thirty-nine percent of the necrosum was infected. Postoperative morbidity and mortality were 38% and 2%, respectively. The median postoperative length of hospital length of stay was 8 days, with the majority of patients discharged home. The median length of follow-up was 21 months, with 91% of patients having complete clinical resolution of symptoms at a median of 6 weeks. Readmission to hospital and/or a repeat intervention was also not infrequent (20%). CONCLUSION: Surgical TGN is an excellent 1-stage surgical option for symptomatic WON in a highly selected group of patients. Precise surgical technique and long-term outpatient follow-up are mandatory for optimal patient outcomes.

Disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome predicts failure of percutaneous therapy in necrotizing pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Minimally invasive approaches, such as percutaneous drainage (PD), are increasingly utilized as initial treatment in necrotizing pancreatitis (NP) requiring intervention. Predictors of success of PD as definitive treatment are lacking. Our aim was to assess the application, predictors of success, and natural history of PD in NP. We hypothesized that necrosis morphology patterns and disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome (DPDS) may predict the ability of PD to provide definitive therapy. METHODS: 714 NP patients were treated from 2005 to 2018. Patients achieving disease resolution with PD alone (PD) were compared to those requiring an escalation in intervention (Step). Outcomes were compared between groups using independent samples t-test, Fisher's exact test, and Pearson's correlation, as appropriate. P < 0.05 was accepted as statistically significant. RESULTS: 115 patients were initially managed with PD (42 PD, 73 Step). No difference in necrosis morphology was seen between the two groups. The PD group underwent significantly more repeat percutaneous interventions (PD, 3.2; Step, 2.0; P = 0.0006) including additional drain placement and drain upsize/reposition procedures. Patients with DPDS were more likely to require an escalation in intervention (odds ratio, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-7.6; P = 0.003). The mean number of months to NP resolution was similar (PD, 5.7; Step, 5.8; P = 0.9). Mortality was similar (PD, 7%; Step 14%, P = 0.3). CONCLUSIONS: Necrosis morphology in and of itself does not reliably predict successful definitive treatment by percutaneous drainage. However, patients with disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome were less likely to have definitive resolution with PD alone.

Improved Outpatient Communication Decreases Unplanned Readmission in Necrotizing Pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Unplanned readmission rates in necrotizing pancreatitis (NP) are among the highest of any medical disease (72%). Recent work has identified several potentially preventable causes of unplanned readmission in NP. We hypothesized that intensive outpatient communication would identify developing problems and decrease unplanned hospital readmission. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A review of NP patients treated at a single institution between 2016 and 2019 compared patients 2 y before (NP-pre, 2016-2018) and 1 y after (NP-post, 2018-2019) the establishment of a dedicated pancreatitis nurse coordinator. Unplanned hospital readmission and emergency room visits were compared between groups. RESULTS: A total of 178 NP patients were treated-112 patients in the NP-pre group and 66 patients in the NP-post group. No differences between groups were observed in age, sex, comorbidities, pancreatitis etiology, NP severity, or mortality. A mean of 5.4 ± 0.2 outpatient communications per patient with the pancreatitis nurse coordinator was documented in the NP-post group. Unplanned readmission rates decreased significantly from 64% (NP-pre) to 45% (NP-post; P = 0.02). The frequency of readmission decreased from 1.6 readmissions per patient (NP-pre) to 0.8 readmissions per patient (NP-post; P = 0.001). Readmissions because of symptomatic necrosis, failure to thrive, nonnecrosis infection, and drain dysfunction decreased (P < 0.05). Overall disease duration was similar (NP-pre, 4.6 ± 0.3 mo; NP-post, 5.0 ± 0.3 mo; P = 0.4); however, the mean number of unplanned inpatient days decreased from 15.4 ± 2.2 d (NP-pre) to 7.8 ± 1.6 d (NP-post; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Improved outpatient communication identifies treatable problems and significantly decreases unplanned readmission in NP patients.

Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Causing Necrotizing Pancreatitis: Not as Rare as You Think?

BACKGROUND: Necrotizing pancreatitis (NP) presents a unique clinical challenge because of its complex and lengthy disease course. Pancreatic necrosis occurs in 10%-20% of acute pancreatitis cases and may result from any etiology. Scattered reports describe pancreatic tumors causing NP; however, the relationship between these disease processes is not clear. We have treated patients whose NP was caused by pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and therefore sought to clarify the clinical outcomes of these patients. METHODS: Patients treated between 2005 and 2018 for NP caused by PDAC were identified. The relationship between NP and PDAC was examined, and the clinical courses of both disease processes were evaluated. RESULTS: Among 647 patients treated for NP, seven patients (1.1%) had PDAC and NP. The mean age at NP diagnosis was 60.6 y (range, 49-66). Two patients had postprocedural pancreatitis after cancer diagnosis, and the remaining five patients had NP caused by PDAC. Median duration between diagnoses of NP and PDAC was 5.6 mo (range, 3.5-21.8). For PDAC treatment, four patients received chemotherapy alone, one received palliative radiation therapy, and one died without oncologic management. One patient underwent operative resection of PDAC. Median survival was 12.7 mo (range, 0.4-49.9). CONCLUSIONS: PDAC may be a more common cause of NP than previously considered and should be considered in patients with NP of appropriate age in whom etiology is otherwise unclear. Prompt diagnosis facilitates optimal treatment in this challenging clinical situation.

Disconnected Pancreatic Duct Syndrome: Spectrum of Operative Management.

BACKGROUND: Disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome (DPDS) is common after necrotizing pancreatitis (NP). Surgical management may be by internal drainage or left (distal) pancreatectomy. Therapeutic decision-making must consider sinistral portal hypertension, parenchymal volume of disconnected pancreas, and timing relative to definitive management of pancreatic necrosis. The aim of this study is to evaluate outcomes after operative management for DPDS. METHODS: All patients with NP undergoing an operation for DPDS were included in the study (2005-2017). Perioperative outcomes and long-term durability were evaluated. RESULTS: Among 647 patients with NP, 299 (46%) had DPDS. Operative management was required in 202/299 (68%) patients with DPDS. Median follow-up was 30 mo (2-165). Definitive operative therapy included internal drainage (n = 111) or resection (n = 91). Time from NP diagnosis to operation was 126 d (20 d to 81 mo). Overall morbidity was 46%. Postoperative length of stay was 7 d (2-97). Readmission was required in 39 patients (19%). Mortality was 2%. Repeat pancreatic intervention was required in 23 patients (11%) at a median of 15 mo (1-98). Repeat pancreatectomy was performed in nine patients and the remaining 14 patients were managed with endoscopic therapy. CONCLUSIONS: DPDS is a common and challenging consequence of NP. Appropriate operation is durable in nearly 90% of patients.