Development and Validation of HAS (Hajibandeh Index, ASA Status, Sarcopenia) - A Novel Model for Predicting Mortality After Emergency Laparotomy.

OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate a predictive model to predict the risk of postoperative mortality after emergency laparotomy taking into account the following variables: age, age ≥ 80, ASA status, clinical frailty score, sarcopenia, Hajibandeh Index (HI), bowel resection, and intraperitoneal contamination. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The discriminative powers of the currently available predictive tools range between adequate and strong; none has demonstrated excellent discrimination yet. METHODS: The TRIPOD and STROCSS statement standards were followed to protocol and conduct a retrospective cohort study of adult patients who underwent emergency laparotomy due to non-traumatic acute abdominal pathology between 2017 and 2022. Multivariable binary logistic regression analysis was used to develop and validate the model via two protocols (Protocol A and B). The model performance was evaluated in terms of discrimination (ROC curve analysis), calibration (calibration diagram and Hosmer-Lemeshow test), and classification (classification table). RESULTS: One thousand forty-three patients were included (statistical power = 94%). Multivariable analysis kept HI (Protocol-A: P =0.0004; Protocol-B: P =0.0017), ASA status (Protocol-A: P =0.0068; Protocol-B: P =0.0007), and sarcopenia (Protocol-A: P <0.0001; Protocol-B: P <0.0001) as final predictors of 30-day postoperative mortality in both protocols; hence the model was called HAS (HI, ASA status, sarcopenia). The HAS demonstrated excellent discrimination (AUC: 0.96, P <0.0001), excellent calibration ( P <0.0001), and excellent classification (95%) via both protocols. CONCLUSIONS: The HAS is the first model demonstrating excellent discrimination, calibration, and classification in predicting the risk of 30-day mortality following emergency laparotomy. The HAS model seems promising and is worth attention for external validation using the calculator provided. HAS mortality risk calculator https://app.airrange.io/#/element/xr3b_E6yLor9R2c8KXViSAeOSK .

Pancreatic resection for metastasis from renal cell carcinoma: A single institution experience and meta-analysis of survival outcomes.

AIMS: To evaluate short-term clinical and long-term survival outcomes of pancreatic resection for pancreatic metastasis from renal cell carcinoma (RCC). METHODS: A retrospective evaluation of patients undergoing pancreatic resection for metastasis from RCC over a 12-years period was conducted. Furthermore, a systematic search of electronic data sources and bibliographic reference lists were conducted to identify studies investigating the same clinical question. Short-term clinical and long-term survival outcomes were evaluated. Kaplan-Meier survival plots were constructed for survival outcomes. Cox-proportional regression analysis was performed to determine factors associated with survival. Finally, meta-analysis of survival outcomes was conducted using random-effects modelling. RESULTS: Eighteen patients underwent pancreatic resections for RCC pancreatic metastasis within the study period. The mean age of the included patients was 63.8 ± 8.0 years. There were 10(55.6 %) male and 8(44.4 %) female patients. Pancreatectomy was associated with 4(25.0 %) Clavien-Dindo (C-D) I, 5(31.3 %) C-D II, and 7(43.7 %) C-D III complications, 7(38.8 %) pancreatic fistula, 3(16.7 %) post-pancreatectomy acute pancreatitis, 1(5.6 %) delayed gastric emptying, and 1(5.6 %) chyle leak. The mean length of hospital stay was 18 ± 16.3 days. The median survival was 64 months (95 % CI 60-78). The 3-and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 83.3 % and 55.5 %, respectively. The 3-and 5-year survival rates were 100 % and 55.6 %, respectively. The pooled analyses of 553 patients demonstrated 3-and 5-year survival rates of 77.6 % and 60.7 %, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Pancreatectomy for RCC metastasis is associated with acceptable short-term clinical and promising long-term survival outcomes. Considering the rarity of the entity, escalation of level of evidence in this context is challenging.

Meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing aggressive versus non-aggressive intravenous fluid therapy in acute pancreatitis: an insight into the existence of type 2 error.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: We aimed to evaluate comparative outcomes of aggressive versus non-aggressive intravenous fluid (IVF) therapy in patients with acute pancreatitis. METHODS: A systematic search of electronic data sources and bibliographic reference lists were conducted. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting outcomes of aggressive versus non-aggressive IVF therapy in acute pancreatitis were included and their risk of bias were assessed. Effect sizes were determined for overall mortality, systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), sepsis, respiratory failure, pancreatic necrosis, severe pancreatitis, clinical improvement, AKI, and length of stay using random-effects modeling. Trial sequential analysis was conducted to determine risk of types 1 or 2 errors. RESULTS: We included 10 RCTs reporting 993 patients with acute pancreatitis who received aggressive (n = 475) or non-aggressive (n = 518) IVF therapy. Aggressive IVF therapy was associated with significantly higher rate of sepsis (OR: 2.68, P = 0.0005) and longer length of stay (MD: 0.94, P < 0.00001) compared with the non-aggressive approach. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality (RD: 0.02, P = 0.31), SIRS (OR: 0.93, P = 0.89), respiratory failure (OR: 2.81, P = 0.07), pancreatic necrosis (OR: 1.98, P = 0.06), severe pancreatitis (OR: 1.31, P = 0.38), clinical improvement (OR: 1.12, P = 0.83) or AKI (OR: 1.06, P = 0.91) between the two groups. Sub-group analysis demonstrated higher morbidity and mortality associated with the aggressive approach in more severe disease. Trial sequential analysis detected risk of type 2 error. CONCLUSIONS: Aggressive IVF therapy may be associated with higher morbidity in patients with acute pancreatitis compared with the non-aggressive approach, particularly in patients with more severe disease. It may also prolong length of hospital stay. The available evidence is subject to type 2 error indicating the need for adequately powered RCTs.

Clinical outcomes after transplantation of domino grafts or standard deceased donor livers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Domino liver transplantation (DLT) utilizes otherwise discarded livers as donor grafts for another recipients. It is unclear whether DLT has less favorable outcomes compared to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). We aimed to assess the outcomes of DLT compared to DDLT. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science database were searched to identify studies comparing outcomes after DLT with DDLT. Data were pooled using random-effects modeling, evaluating odds ratios (OR) or mean difference (MD) for outcomes including waiting list time, severe hemorrhage, intensive care unit (ICU), length hospital stay (LOS), rejection, renal, vascular, and biliary events, and recipient survival at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years. RESULTS: Five studies were identified including 945 patients (DLT = 409, DDLT = 536). The DLT recipients were older compared to the DDLT group (P = 0.04), and both cohorts were comparable regarding lab MELD, hepatocellular carcinoma, and waitlist time. There were no differences in vascular (OR: 1.60, P = 0.39), renal (OR: 0.62, P = 0.24), biliary (OR: 1.51, P = 0.21), severe hemorrhage (OR: 1.09, P = 0.86), rejection (OR: 0.78, P = 0.51), ICU stay (MD: 0.50, P = 0.21), or LOS (MD: 1.68, P = 0.46) between DLT and DDLT. DLT and DDLT were associated with comparable 1-year (78.9% vs 80.4%; OR: 1.03, P = 0.89), 3-year (56.2% vs 54.1%; OR: 1.35, P = 0.07), and 10-year survival (6.5% vs 8.5%; OR: 0.8, P = 0.67) rates. DLT was associated with higher 5-year survival (41.6% vs 36.4%; OR: 1.70; P = 0.003) compared to DDLT, which was not confirmed at sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis of the best available evidence (Level 2a) demonstrated that DLT and DDLT have comparable outcomes. As indications for liver transplantation expand, future high-quality research is encouraged to increase the DLT numbers in clinical practice, serving the growing waiting list candidates, with the caveat of uncertain de novo disease transmission risks.

Effect of surgeon's seniority and subspeciality interest on mortality after emergency laparotomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIM: To evaluate effect of surgeon's seniority (trainee surgeon vs. consultant surgeon) and surgeon's subspeciality interest on postoperative mortality in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy (EL). METHOD: A systematic review was conducted and reported according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews and the PRISMA statement standards, respectively. We evaluated all studies comparing the risk of postoperative mortality in patients undergoing EL between (a) trainee surgeon and consultant surgeon, and (b) surgeon without and with subspeciality interest related to pathology. Random effects modelling was applied for the analyses. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE system. RESULTS: Analysis of 256 844 patients from 13 studies showed no difference in the risk of postoperative mortality between trainee-led and consultant-led EL (OR: 0.76, p = 0.12). However, EL performed by a surgeon without subspeciality interest related to the pathology was associated with a higher risk of postoperative mortality compared with a surgeon with subspeciality interest (OR: 1.38, p < 0.00001). In lower gastrointestinal (GI) pathologies, EL done by upper GI surgeons resulted in higher risk of mortality compared with lower GI surgeons (OR: 1.43, p < 0.00001). In upper GI pathologies, EL done by lower GI surgeons resulted in higher risk of mortality compared with upper GI surgeons (OR: 1.29, p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: While confounding by indication cannot be excluded, level 2 evidence with moderate certainty suggests that trainee-led EL may not increase the risk of postoperative mortality but EL by a surgeon with subspeciality interest related to the pathology may reduce the risk of mortality.

Safety and feasibility of colonoscopy in nonagenarians: A systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis.

AIM: The aim of this work was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of performing colonoscopy in patients aged 90 years or over. METHOD: In compliance with PRISMA statement standards, a systematic review of studies reporting the outcomes of colonoscopy in patients aged ≥90 years was conducted. A proportional meta-analysis model was constructed to quantify the risk of outcomes and a direct comparison meta-analysis model was constructed to compare outcomes between nonagenarians and patients aged between 50 and 89 years via random-effects models. RESULTS: Seven studies enrolling 1304 patients (1342 colonoscopies) were included. Analyses showed that complications related to bowel preparation occurred in 0.7% (95% CI 0.1%-1.6%), procedural complications in 0.6% (0.00%-1.7%), 30-day complications in 1.5% (0.6%-2.7%), procedural mortality in 0.3% (0.0%-1.1%) and 30-day mortality in 1.1% (0.3%-2.2%). Adequate bowel preparation and colonoscopy completion were achieved in 81.3% (73.8%-87.9%) and 92.1% (86.7%-96.3%), respectively. No difference was found in bowel preparation-related complications [risk difference (RD) 0.00, p = 0.78], procedural complications (RD 0.00, p = 0.60), 30-day complications (RD 0.01, p = 0.20), procedural mortality (RD 0.00, p = 1.00) or 30-day mortality (RD 0.01, p = 0.34) between nonagenarians and patients aged between 50 and 89 years. The colorectal cancer detection rate was 14.3% (9.8%-19.5%), resulting in therapeutic intervention in 65.9% (54.5%-76.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Although the evidence is limited to a selected group of nonagenarians, it may be fair to conclude that if a colonoscopy is indicated in a nonagenarian with good performance status (based on initial less-invasive investigations), the level 2 evidence supports its safety and feasibility. Age on its own should not be a reason for failing to offer colonoscopy to a nonagenarian.

Safety of robotic cholecystectomy as index training procedure: the UK experience.

AIMS: To evaluate the safety profile of robotic cholecystectomy performed within the United Kingdom (UK) Robotic Hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) training programme. METHODS: A retrospective evaluation of prospectively collected data from eleven centres participating in the UK Robotic HPB training programme was conducted. All adult patients undergoing robotic cholecystectomy for symptomatic gallstone disease or gallbladder polyp were considered. Bile duct injury, conversion to open procedure, conversion to subtotal cholecystectomy, length of hospital stay, 30-day re-admission, and post-operative complications were the evaluated outcome parameters. RESULTS: A total of 600 patients were included. The median age was 53 (IQR 65-41) years and the majority (72.7%; 436/600) were female. The main indications for robotic cholecystectomy were biliary colic (55.5%, 333/600), cholecystitis (18.8%, 113/600), gallbladder polyps (7.7%, 46/600), and pancreatitis (6.2%, 37/600). The median length of stay was 0 (IQR 0-1) days. Of the included patients, 88.5% (531/600) were discharged on the day of procedure with 30-day re-admission rate of 5.5% (33/600). There were no bile duct injuries and the rate of conversion to open was 0.8% (5/600) with subtotal cholecystectomy rate of 0.8% (5/600). CONCLUSION: The current study confirms that robotic cholecystectomy can be safely implemented to routine practice with a low risk of bile duct injury, low bile leak rate, low conversion to open surgery, and low need for subtotal cholecystectomy.

Prognostic significance of socioeconomic deprivation in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy: A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Deprivation is a complex, multifaceted concept and not synonymous with poverty. The aim of this study was to assess the prognostic influence of the multiple deprivation index on emergency laparotomy (EL) outcome. METHODS: STROCSS statement standards were followed to conduct a retrospective cohort study. Consecutive 1723 adult patients [median age (range): 66 (18-98), 762 M, and 961 F] undergoing EL over eight years (2014-22) at two hospitals [a tertiary teaching center and district general hospital (DGH)] were studied. Deprivation scores and ranks were derived from patients' postcodes using the Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation and ranks categorized into quartiles. Primary outcome measure was a 30-day operative mortality (OM). RESULTS: OM risk was higher in the most deprived quartile (Q1) compared with the least deprived quartile (Q4) (13.2% vs. 7.9% and p = 0.008). Deprivation was an independent predictor of OM on both univariate (unadjusted OR: 1.75, 95% CI 1.17-2.61, and p = 0.006) and multivariable logistic regression analyses (OR: 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.06, and p = 0.023; adjusted for age ≥80 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, need for bowel resection, and peritoneal contamination). Deprivation had poor discriminatory value in predicting OM (AUC: 0.56 and 95% CI 0.54-0.59). Subgroup analysis showed that although the risk of OM was lower in the tertiary center compared with the DGH (7.9% vs. 14.5% and p < 0.001), the predictive significance of deprivation was similar in both hospitals (AUC: 0.54 vs. 0.56 and p = 0.674). CONCLUSION: Deprivation is an independent but modest predictor of OM after EL. The potential prognostic value of incorporating deprivation into preoperative risk assessment algorithms deserves further evaluation.

Purse-string skin closure versus linear skin closure in people undergoing stoma reversal.

BACKGROUND: Stoma reversal is associated with a relatively high risk of surgical site infection (SSI), occurring in up to 40% of cases. This may be explained by the presence of microorganisms around the stoma site, and possible contamination with the intestinal contents during the open-end manipulation of the bowel, making the stoma closure site a clean-contaminated wound. The conventional technique for stoma reversal is linear skin closure (LSC). The purse-string skin closure (PSSC) technique (circumferential skin approximation) creates a small opening in the centre of the wound, enabling free drainage of contaminants and serous fluid. This could decrease the risk of SSI compared with LSC. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of purse-string skin closure compared with linear skin closure in people undergoing stoma reversal. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases, and three trials registers on 21 December 2022. We also checked references, searched for citations, and contacted study authors to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PSSC and LSC techniques in people undergoing closure of stoma (loop ileostomy, end ileostomy, loop colostomy, or end colostomy) created for any indication. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected eligible studies, extracted data, evaluated the methodological quality of the included studies, and conducted the analyses. The most clinically relevant outcomes were SSI, participant satisfaction, incisional hernia, and operative time. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, each with its corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). We used the GRADE approach to rate the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: Nine RCTs involving 757 participants were eligible for inclusion. Eight studies recruited only adults (aged 18 years and older), and one study included people aged 12 years and older. The participants underwent elective reversal of either ileostomy (82%) or colostomy (18%). We considered all studies at high risk of performance and detection bias (lack of blinding) and four studies at unclear risk of selection bias related to random sequence generation. PSSC compared with LSC likely reduces the risk of SSI (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.29; I2 = 0%; 9 studies, 757 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The anticipated absolute risk of SSI is 52 per 1000 people who have PSSC and 243 per 1000 people who have LSC. The likelihood of being very satisfied or satisfied with stoma closure may be higher amongst people who have PSSC compared with people who have LSC (100% vs 89%; OR 20.11, 95% CI 1.09 to 369.88; 2 studies, 122 participants; low-certainty evidence). The results of the analysis suggest that PSSC compared with LSC may have little or no effect on the risk of incisional hernia (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.07 to 3.70; I2 = 49%; 4 studies, 297 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and operative time (MD -2.67 minutes, 95% CI -8.56 to 3.22; I2 = 65%; 6 studies, 460 participants; very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: PSSC compared with LSC likely reduces the risk of SSI in people undergoing reversal of stoma. People who have PSSC may be more satisfied with the result compared with people who have LSC. There may be little or no difference between the skin closure techniques in terms of incisional hernia and operative time, though the evidence for these two outcomes is very uncertain.

Sarcopenia versus clinical frailty scale in predicting the risk of postoperative mortality after emergency laparotomy: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare predictive significance of sarcopenia and clinical frailty scale (CFS) in terms of postoperative mortality in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy METHODS: In compliance with STROCSS statement standards, a retrospective cohort study with prospective data collection approach was conducted. The study period was between January 2017 and January 2022. All adult patients with non-traumatic acute abdominal pathology who underwent emergency laparotomy in our centre were included. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality and secondary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and 90-day mortality. The predictive value of sarcopenia and CFS were compared using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and multivariable binary logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1043 eligible patients were included. The risk of 30-day mortality, in-hospital mortality, and 90-day mortality were 8%, 10%, and 11%, respectively. ROC curve analysis suggested that sarcopenia is a significantly stronger predictor of 30-day mortality (AUC: 0.87 vs. 0.70, P<0.0001), in-hospital mortality (AUC: 0.79 vs. 0.67, P=0.0011), and 90-day mortality (AUC: 0.79 vs. 0.67, P=0.0009) compared with CFS. Moreover, multivariable binary logistic regression analysis identified sarcopenia as an independent predictor of mortality [coefficient: 4.333, OR: 76.16 (95% CI 37.06-156.52), P<0.0001] but not the CFS [coefficient: 0.096, OR: 1.10 (95% CI 0.88-1.38), P=0.4047]. CONCLUSIONS: Sarcopenia is a stronger predictor of postoperative mortality compared with CFS in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. It cancels out the predictive value of clinical frailty scale in multivariable analyses; hence among the two variables, sarcopenia deserves to be included in preoperative predictive tools.

Meta-analysis of laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy: An insight into confounding by indication.

AIMS: To evaluate comparative outcomes of laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP) and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (LDPS). METHODS: A systematic search of multiple electronic data sources and bibliographic reference lists were conducted. Comparative studies reporting outcomes of LSPDP and LDPS were considered followed by evaluation of the associated risk of bias according to ROBINS-I tool. Perioperative complications, clinically important postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), infectious complications, blood loss, conversion to open, operative time and duration of hospital stay were the investigated outcome parameters. RESULTS: Nineteen studies were identified enrolling 3739 patients of whom 1860 patients underwent LSPDP and the remaining 1879 patients had LDPS. The patients in the LSPDP and LDPS groups were of comparable age (p = 0.73), gender (p = 0.59), and BMI (p = 0.07). However, the patient in the LDPS group had larger tumour size (p = 0.0004) and more malignant lesions (p = 0.02). LSPDP was associated with significantly lower POPF (OR:0.65, p = 0.02), blood loss (MD:-28.30, p = 0.001), and conversion to open (OR:0.48, p < 0.0001) compared to LDPS. Moreover, it was associated with significantly shorter procedure time (MD: -22.06, p = 0.0009) and length of hospital stay (MD: -0.75, p = 0.005). However, no significant differences were identified in overall perioperative (OR:0.89, p = 0.25) or infectious (OR:0.67, p = 0.05) complications between two groups. CONCLUSIONS: LSPDP seems to be associated with lower POPF, bleeding and conversion to open compared to LDPS in patients with small-sized benign tumours. Moreover, it may be quicker and reduce hospital stay. Nevertheless, such advantages are of doubtful merit about large-sized or malignant tumours. The available evidence is subject to confounding by indication.

Meta-analysis of survival after pulmonary resection for isolated metachronous pancreatic cancer metastasis: a promising, albeit infrequent, approach.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate survival outcomes of pulmonary resection for isolated metachronous pancreatic cancer metastasis. METHODS: A systematic search of electronic data sources and reference lists were conducted. Proportion meta-analysis model was constructed to quantify 1- to 5-year survival after pulmonary resection for isolated metachronous pancreatic cancer metastasis. Random-effects modelling was applied to calculate pooled outcome data. RESULTS: Twenty-four retrospective studies were included reporting a total of 168 patients who underwent pulmonary resection for isolated pancreatic cancer metastasis. The nature of the index pancreatic surgery included 65% pancreaticoduodenectomies, 17.5% distal pancreatectomies, 0.5% total pancreatectomy, and 17% unspecified. Adjuvant chemotherapy was given to 88% of the patients. The median disease-free interval was 35 (8-96) months. The type of pulmonary resection included 54% wedge resections, 26% lobectomies, 4% segmentectomies, 1% pneumonectomies, and 15% unspecified. Pulmonary resection was associated with 1-year survival of 91.1% (95% CI 86.6%-95.5%), 2-year survival of 77.5% (95% CI 68.9%-86.0%), 3-year survival of 65.0% (95% CI 50.7%-79.3%), 4-year survival of 52.0% (95% CI 37.2%-66.9%), and 5-year survival of 37.0% (95% CI 25.0%-49.1%). CONCLUSION: Pulmonary resection for isolated pancreatic cancer metastasis is associated with acceptable overall patient survival. We recommend selective pulmonary resection for isolated pulmonary metastasis from pancreatic cancer. Our findings may encourage conduction of better-quality studies in this context to help establishment of definitive treatment strategies.

Meta-analysis of fenestrating versus reconstituting subtotal cholecystectomy in the management of difficult gallbladder.

AIMS: To evaluate comparative outcomes of fenestrating and reconstituting subtotal cholecystectomy (STC) in patients with difficult gallbladder. METHODS: A systematic search of electronic data sources and bibliographic reference lists were conducted. All comparative studies reporting outcomes of laparoscopic fenestrating and reconstituting STC were included and their risk of bias were assessed using ROBINS-I tool. RESULTS: Seven comparative studies were included enrolling 590 patients undergoing laparoscopic STC using either fenestrating (n = 353) or reconstituting (n = 237) approaches. Although fenestrating STC was associated with a significantly higher rate of bile leak (OR: 2.47, p = 0.007) compared to reconstituting STC, both approaches were comparable in terms of resolution of bile leak without (RD: -0.02, p = 0.86) or with (OR: 1.84, p = 0.40) postoperative ERCP. Moreover, there was no significant difference in development of bile duct injury (RD: -0.02, p = 0.16), need for postoperative ERCP (OR: 1.36, p = 0.49), wound infection (RD: 0.03, p = 0.27), re-operation (OR: 0.95, p = 0.95), gallbladder remnant cholecystitis (OR: 0.21, p = 0.09) or need for completion cholecystectomy (RD: 0.01, p = 0.59) between two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Fenestrating STC is associated with a higher risk of bile leak than the reconstructing technique. This issue can be mitigated by routine use of drains, delayed drain removal, and in selected cases endoscopic therapy. We encourage the fenestrating approach considering trends in improved short- and long-term outcomes.

Can preoperative Carbohydrate Antigen 19-9 predict metastatic pancreatic cancer? Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the relationship between preoperative Carbohydrate Antigen19-9(CA19-9)and pancreatic cancer occult metastasis. METHODS: Systematic search of MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Web of Science and bibliographic reference lists were conducted. All comparative observational studies investigating the predictive ability of preoperative CA 19-9 in patients with pancreatic cancer were considered. Mean CA-19-9 value in the pancreatic cancer patients with and without metastasis were evaluated. Best cut-off value of CA 19-9 for metastasis was determined using ROC analysis. RESULTS: Ten comparative observational studies reporting a total of 1431 pancreatic cancer patients with (n = 496) and without (n = 935) metastasis were included. Subsequent meta-analysis demonstrated that mean preoperative CA 19-9 level was significantly higher in patients with metastases compared to those without (MD: 904.4; 95 % CI, 642.08-1166.74, P < 0.0001). The between-study heterogeneity was significant (I2: 99 %, P < 0.00001). ROC analysis yielded a cut-off CA 19-9 level of 336 with a sensitivity and specificity for predicting metastasis of 90 % and 80 %, respectively (AUC = 0.90). CONCLUSIONS: CA 19-9 level is significantly higher in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. A preoperative CA 19-9 value of 336 should be considered as an acceptable cut-off value to design prospective studies.

The risk of recurrent pancreatitis after first episode of acute pancreatitis in relation to etiology and severity of disease: A systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The study aims to determine and quantify the stratified risk of recurrent pancreatitis (RP) after the first episode of acute pancreatitis in relation to etiology and severity of disease. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis in compliance with PRISMA statement standards was conducted. A search of electronic information sources was conducted to identify all studies investigating the risk of RP after the first episode of acute pancreatitis. Proportion meta-analysis models using random effects were constructed to calculate the weighted summary risks of RP. Meta-regression was performed to evaluate the effect of different variables on the pooled outcomes. RESULTS: Analysis of 57,815 patients from 42 studies showed that the risk of RP after first episode was 19.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 17.5-22.1%). The risk of RP was 11.9% (10.2-13.5%) after gallstone pancreatitis, 28.7% (23.5-33.9%) after alcohol-induced pancreatitis, 30.3% (15.5-45.0%) after hyperlipidemia-induced pancreatitis, 38.1% (28.9-47.3%) after autoimmune pancreatitis, 15.1% (11.6-18.6%) after idiopathic pancreatitis, 22.0% (16.9-27.1%) after mild pancreatitis, 23.9% (12.9-34.8%) after moderate pancreatitis, 21.6% (14.6-28.7%) after severe pancreatitis, and 6.6% (4.1-9.2%) after cholecystectomy following gallstone pancreatitis. Meta-regression confirmed that the results were not affected by the year of study (P = 0.541), sample size (P = 0.064), length of follow-up (P = 0.348), and age of patients (P = 0.138) in the included studies. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of RP after the first episode of acute pancreatitis seems to be affected by the etiology of pancreatitis but not the severity of disease. The risks seem to be higher in patients with autoimmune pancreatitis, hyperlipidemia-induced pancreatitis, and alcohol-induced pancreatitis and lower in patients with gallstone pancreatitis and idiopathic pancreatitis.

Effect of ghrelin administration on postoperative inflammatory response and bodyweight loss in patients with oesophageal cancer undergoing oesophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of postoperative ghrelin therapy on postoperative inflammatory response and bodyweight loss in patients undergoing an oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search using electronic information databases in accordance to PRISMA standards to identify studies comparing outcomes after oesophagectomy in patients who were and were not administered ghrelin in the postoperative period. Meta-analysis of the outcomes using random effects modelling was conducted. The Cochrane collaboration's tool and ROBINS-I tool were used for risk of bias assessment of the included studies. RESULTS: Five studies including 192 patients were selected for analysis. Ghrelin therapy was associated with a significantly shorter duration of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) (MD: - 2.72, P = 0.0001), lower CRP level on postoperative day 3 (MD: - 3.64, P < 0.0001), and less total bodyweight loss (MD: - 1.87, P = 0.14). There was no differences between the two groups in IL-6 level on postoperative day 3 (MD: - 19.65, P = 0.32), total lean body weight loss (MD: - 1.87, P = 0.14), total body fat loss (MD: 0.15, P = 0.84), pulmonary complications (OR: 0.47, P = 0.12), anastomotic leak (OR: 1.17, P = 0.78), wound complications (OR: 1.64, P = 0.63), postoperative bleeding (OR: 0.32, P = 0.33), arrhythmia (OR: 1.22, P = 0.77). CONCLUSIONS: Administration of ghrelin following oesophagoectomy may reduce duration of postoperative SIRS and bodyweight loss. Whether shorter duration of SIRS and less bodyweight loss resulted from postoperative ghrelin therapy can translate into improved morbidity or mortality outcomes remains unknown. There is a need for randomised controlled trials with robust statistical power to investigate the role of postoperative ghrelin therapy on morbidity and mortality outcomes in patients undergoing oesophagectomy.

The risk of hepatic pseudoaneurysm after liver trauma in relation to the severity of liver injury: a meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis.

AIM: To determine the risk of hepatic pseudoaneurysm after liver trauma in relation to the severity of liver injury. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis in compliance with PRISMA statement standards (Registration Number: CRD42022328834). A search of electronic information sources was conducted to identify all studies reporting the risk of hepatic pseudoaneurysm after liver trauma. The JBI assessment tool was used to assess the risk of bias of the included studies. Random-effects models were applied to calculate pooled outcome data. RESULTS: A total of 2030 patients from six studies were included. Based on the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma classification system, 21% had grade I injury; 33% grade II injury; 28% grade III injury; 12% grade IV injury and 5% grade V injury. The pooled risk of hepatic pseudoaneurysm was 1.8% (95% CI 1.1-2.5%). The risk was 0.4% (0-1.2%) in patients with grade I injury, 0.7% (0-1.7%) in patients with grade II injury; 1.5% (0.4-2.7%) in patients with grade III injury; 4.6% (1.4-7.7%) in patients with grade IV injury and 10.6% (1.8-22.9%) in patients with grade V injury. The average time between liver injury and detection of hepatic pseudoaneurysm was 6 days (95% CI 1-10) CONCLUSIONS: The risk of hepatic pseudoaneurysm after liver trauma increases as the severity of liver injury increases. Hepatic pseudoaneurysms are rare after grade I or grade II injuries, and increasingly common after grades III, IV and V injuries. We recommend routine surveillance imaging in patients with grade III to V injuries.

Effect of intraoperative botulinum toxin injection on delayed gastric emptying and need for endoscopic pyloric intervention following esophagectomy: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of intraoperative botulinum toxin (BT) injection on delayed gastric emptying (DGE) and need for endoscopic pyloric intervention (NEPI) following esophagectomy. In compliance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses statement standards, a systematic review of studies reporting the outcomes of intraoperative BT injection in patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer was conducted. Proportion meta-analysis model was constructed to quantify the risk of the outcomes and direct comparison meta-analysis model was constructed to compare the outcomes between BT injection and no BT injection or surgical pyloroplasty. Meta-regression was modeled to evaluate the effect of variations in different covariates among the individual studies on overall summary proportions. Nine studies enrolling 1070 patients were included. Pooled analyses showed that the risks of DGE and NEPI following intraoperative BT injection were 13.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.9-18.6%) and 15.2% (95% CI: 7.9-22.5%), respectively. There was no difference between BT injection and no BT injection in terms of DGE (odds ratio [OR]: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.20-1.61, P = 0.29) and NEPI (OR: 1.73, 95% CI: 0.42-7.12, P = 0.45). Moreover, BT injection was comparable to pyloroplasty in terms of DGE (OR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.35-2.08, P = 0.73) and NEPI (OR: 8.20, 95% CI: 0.63-105.90, P = 0.11). Meta-regression suggested that male gender was negatively associated with the risk of DGE (coefficient: -0.007, P = 0.003). In conclusion, level 2 evidence suggests that intraoperative BT injection may not improve the risk of DGE and NEPI in patients undergoing esophagectomy. The risk of DGE seems to be higher in females and in early postoperative period. High quality randomized controlled trials with robust statistical power are required for definite conclusions. The results of the current study can be used for hypothesis synthesis and power analysis in future prospective trials.

The predictive significance of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in cholecystitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The aim of this review was to examine whether neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) can predict the presence of cholecystitis and distinguish between simple and severe cholecystitis. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Random effects model was used to calculate mean difference (MD) in two situations: (a) no cholecystitis versus cholecystitis and (b) simple versus severe cholecystitis. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to determine cut-off values of NLR for the above situations. RESULTS: Ten retrospective studies comprising of 2827 patients were included. Three hundred twenty-seven had no cholecystitis, 2100 had simple cholecystitis and the remaining 400 had severe cholecystitis. NLR was significantly higher in acute cholecystitis compared to "no cholecystitis" (MD = 8.05 (95% CI 7.71-8.38), p < 0.01) and in severe cholecystitis when compared with simple cholecystitis (MD = 3.14 (95% CI 1.26-5.02), p < 0.01). For patients with cholecystitis compared to those without cholecystitis, an NLR cut-off value of 2.98 was identified (AUC = 0.90). Logistic regression analysis confirmed an NLR > 2.9 was an independent predictor of cholecystitis (OR 36.0, p = 0.006). In simple versus severe cholecystitis, an NLR cut-off value of 8.5 was identified (AUC = 0.73). Binary logistic regression analysis suggested an NLR > 8.5 was not an independent predictor of severe cholecystitis (OR 6.5 p = 0.090). CONCLUSION: NLR is significantly higher in patients with cholecystitis of any severity compared to patients without cholecystitis. Moreover, NLR can predict acute cholecystitis. However, NLR cannot predict the severity of disease due to inadequately powered studies. Future research is required.

Iatrogenic gallbladder perforation during laparoscopic cholecystectomy and outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: We aimed to compare the outcomes of iatrogenic gallbladder perforation (IGP) versus no gallbladder perforation in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in compliance with PRISMA statement standards. We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Scopus, and CENTRAL to identify eligible studies. The last search was run on 17 October 2021. The outcome of interest included surgical site infection (SSI), postoperative collection, operative time, and length of hospital stay. Random effects modelling was applied to calculate pooled outcome data. The certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE system. RESULTS: Analysis of 5366 patients from 11 observational studies suggested that IGP during laparoscopic cholecystectomy does not increase the risk of SSI (OR: 1.48, 95% CI 0.57-3.86, P = 0.42) and postoperative collection (RD: 0.00, 95% CI - 0.00-0.01, P = 0.41) but may result in longer operative time (MD 10.28 min, 95% CI 7.40-13.16, P < 0.00001) and length of hospital stay (MD 0.51 days, 95% CI 0.15-0.87, P = 0.005). The results remained consistent through sensitivity analyses. The quality of available evidence was judged to be moderate, and the GRADE certainty of the evidence was judged to be high. CONCLUSIONS: The best available evidence suggests that IGP during laparoscopic cholecystectomy may not increase the risk of SSI and postoperative collection but may result in longer operative time and length of hospital stay. Whether prompt retrieval of spilled stones, adequate peritoneal irrigation, and intraoperative use of prophylactic antibiotic contribute to the above findings remains unknown.