International survey on opinions and use of robot-assisted and laparoscopic minimally invasive pancreatic surgery: 5-year follow up.

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the value of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS) has been increasing but it is unclear how this has influenced the view of pancreatic surgeons on MIPS. METHODS: An anonymous survey was sent to members of eight international Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Associations. Outcomes were compared with the 2016 international survey. RESULTS: Overall, 315 surgeons from 47 countries participated. The median volume of pancreatic resections per center was 70 (IQR 40-120). Most surgeons considered minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) superior to open (ODP) (94.6%) and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) superior to minimally invasive (MIPD) (67.9%). Since 2016, there has been an increase in the number of surgeons performing both MIDP (79%-85.7%, p = 0.024) and MIPD (29%-45.7%, p < 0.001), and an increase in the use of the robot-assisted approach for both MIDP (16%-45.6%, p < 0.001) and MIPD (23%-47.9%, p < 0.001). The use of laparoscopy remained stable for MIDP (91% vs. 88.1%, p = 0.245) and decreased for MIPD (51%-36.8%, p = 0.024). CONCLUSION: This survey showed considerable changes of MIPS since 2016 with most surgeons considering MIDP superior to ODP and an increased use of robot-assisted MIPS. Surgeons prefer OPD and therefore the value of MIPD remains to be determined in randomized trials.

An International Expert Delphi Consensus on Defining Textbook Outcome in Liver Surgery (TOLS).

OBJECTIVE: To reach global expert consensus on the definition of TOLS in minimally invasive and open liver resection among renowned international expert liver surgeons using a modified Delphi method. BACKGROUND: Textbook outcome is a novel composite measure combining the most desirable postoperative outcomes into one single measure and representing the ideal postoperative course. Despite a recently developed international definition of Textbook Outcome in Liver Surgery (TOLS), a standardized and expert consensus-based definition is lacking. METHODS: This international, consensus-based, qualitative study used a Delphi process to achieve consensus on the definition of TOLS. The survey comprised 6 surgical domains with a total of 26 questions on individual surgical outcome variables. The process included 4 rounds of online questionnaires. Consensus was achieved when a threshold of at least 80% agreement was reached. The results from the Delphi rounds were used to establish an international definition of TOLS. RESULTS: In total, 44 expert liver surgeons from 22 countries and all 3 major international hepato-pancreato-biliary associations completed round 1. Forty-two (96%), 41 (98%), and 41 (98%) of the experts participated in round 2, 3, and 4, respectively. The TOLS definition derived from the consensus process included the absence of intraoperative grade ≥2 incidents, postoperative bile leakage grade B/C, postoperative liver failure grade B/C, 90-day major postoperative complications, 90-day readmission due to surgery-related major complications, 90-day/in-hospital mortality, and the presence of R0 resection margin. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study providing an international expert consensus-based definition of TOLS for minimally invasive and open liver resections by the use of a formal Delphi consensus approach. TOLS may be useful in assessing patient-level hospital performance and carrying out international comparisons between centers with different clinical practices to further improve patient outcomes.

Educational Scoring System in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Is It the Right Time to Standardize?

Background and Objectives: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is one of the most performed surgeries worldwide. Procedure difficulty and patient outcomes depend on several factors which are not considered in the current literature, including the learning curve, generating confusing and subjective results. This study aims to create a scoring system to calculate the learning curve of LC based on hepatobiliopancreatic (HPB) experts' opinions during an educational course. Materials and Methods: A questionnaire was submitted to the panel of experts attending the HPB course at Research Institute against Digestive Cancer-IRCAD (Strasbourg, France) from 27-29 October 2022. Experts scored the proposed variables according to their degree of importance in the learning curve using a Likert scale from 1 (not useful) to 5 (very useful). Variables were included in the composite scoring system only if more than 75% of experts ranked its relevance in the learning curve assessment ≥4. A positive or negative value was assigned to each variable based on its effect on the learning curve. Results: Fifteen experts from six different countries attended the IRCAD HPB course and filled out the questionnaire. Ten variables were finally included in the learning curve scoring system (i.e., patient body weight/BMI, patient previous open surgery, emergency setting, increased inflammatory levels, presence of anatomical bile duct variation(s), and appropriate critical view of safety (CVS) identification), which were all assigned positive values. Minor or major intraoperative injuries to the biliary tract, development of postoperative complications related to biliary injuries, and mortality were assigned negative values. Conclusions: This is the first scoring system on the learning curve of LC based on variables selected through the experts' opinions. Although the score needs to be validated through future studies, it could be a useful tool to assess its efficacy within educational programs and surgical courses.

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.

Routine prophylactic abdominal drainage versus no-drain strategy after distal pancreatectomy: A multicenter propensity score matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: /Objectives Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains the most common complication after distal pancreatectomy (DP). Traditionally, surgical drains are placed routinely after DP, but some question its efficacy and postulate that the use of drains may convert a self-limiting postoperative collection into a POPF. This study aimed to compare outcomes between three institutions with varying drainage strategies. METHODS: The study is a retrospective propensity score-matched analysis of intraoperative prophylactic drain placement during DP (2010-2019). The primary outcome is major morbidity. Propensity score matching was used to obtain comparable groups. RESULTS: Overall, 963 patients after DP were included. One center did not place a surgical drain routinely, but decided to place a drain when unsatisfactory pancreatic closure occurred. Prophylactic abdominal drains were placed in 805 patients (84%) of which 74 could be matched to 74 patients without a drain. The rate of major morbidity (8% vs 19%, p = 0.054) and radiological interventions (5% vs 12%, p = 0.147) were non-significantly lower in the no-drain group as compared to the prophylactic drain group, respectively. The rates of POPF (4% vs 16%, p = 0.014) were lower in the no-drain group. CONCLUSION: In this international retrospective multicenter study, a selective no-drain strategy after DP was not associated with higher rates major morbidity or radiological interventions as compared to routine prophylactic abdominal drainage. Although the rate of POPF was lower in the no-drain group, randomized trials should confirm the safety and outcome of a no-drain strategy after DP.

Strategic response to bleeding in laparoscopic hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery: an intraoperative checklist.

BACKGROUND: The aim is to develop and test the utility of an event-initiated, team-based check list to optimize the response to bleeding during laparoscopic HPB surgery. METHODS: To build a checklist for managing bleeding events, we conducted a systematic review. Using nominal group technique (NGT), a checklist consisting of four domains was developed. Following team-based training of anesthesia and surgical staff, the checklist was implemented. HPB cases before and after implementation of the checklist were compared for adverse outcomes, bleeding complications, and transfusions. RESULTS: NGT identified four domains: Communicate Control, Expose, and Repair under which the checklist was organized. Supplemental Video for a detailed review of how each domain was applied to a specific case example. We compared 169 HPB cases before to 53 cases after implementation. We found a significant decrease in mean EBL (from 518 ± 852.8 to 151.5 ± 221.7 ml (P = 0.001)) for cases performed after implementation of the checklist and a trends toward less volume of pRBC transfused (2.7 ± 2.5 vs 2.3 ± 1.7 units/per patient, P = 0.611) and transfusion rates (22% vs 11%, P = 0.703). CONCLUSION: An event-initiated, team-based response to an adverse bleeding event during laparoscopic HPB surgery correlates with positive effects on bleeding management, and transfusion rates.

International Delphi Expert Consensus on Safe Return to Surgical and Endoscopic Practice: From the Coronavirus Global Surgical Collaborative.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work is to formulate recommendations based on global expert consensus to guide the surgical community on the safe resumption of surgical and endoscopic activities. BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused marked disruptions in the delivery of surgical care worldwide. A thoughtful, structured approach to resuming surgical services is necessary as the impact of COVID-19 becomes better controlled. The Coronavirus Global Surgical Collaborative sought to formulate, through rigorous scientific methodology, consensus-based recommendations in collaboration with a multidisciplinary group of international experts and policymakers. METHODS: Recommendations were developed following a Delphi process. Domain topics were formulated and subsequently subdivided into questions pertinent to different aspects of surgical care in the COVID-19 crisis. Forty-four experts from 15 countries across 4 continents drafted statements based on the specific questions. Anonymous Delphi voting on the statements was performed in 2 rounds, as well as in a telepresence meeting. RESULTS: One hundred statements were formulated across 10 domains. The statements addressed terminology, impact on procedural services, patient/staff safety, managing a backlog of surgeries, methods to restart and sustain surgical services, education, and research. Eighty-three of the statements were approved during the first round of Delphi voting, and 11 during the second round. A final telepresence meeting and discussion yielded acceptance of 5 other statements. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi process resulted in 99 recommendations. These consensus statements provide expert guidance, based on scientific methodology, for the safe resumption of surgical activities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Laparoscopic Pancreatic Head Preserving Total Duodenectomy: The Parenchymal Sparing Alternative to a Whipple.

BACKGROUND: When endoscopic options fail, laparoscopic pancreatic head-preserving duodenectomy (LPHPD) for benign duodenal lesions is a parenchymal sparing and safe alternative to a pancreaticoduodenectomy.1-3 LPHPD may be the optimal "amount" of surgery, because such lesions are at risk for undertreatment (partial endoscopic resection associated with recurrence) or overtreatment (Whipple associated with morbidity and loss of pancreatic parenchyma).4,5 PATIENT: A 80-year-old, healthy female patient was diagnosed endoscopically with two, flat, symptomatic adenomas (7-cm D2; 2-cm D3). She had no family history of polyposis. Germline testing, tumor markers, and colonoscopy did not show any abnormality. TECHNIQUE: With the patient in French position, a wide laparoscopic Kocherization was performed past IVC and aorta. Following prepyloric gastric transection, the entire duodenum was carefully dissected off the pancreas. After transection of the proximal jejunum, the reconstruction begins. A two-layer, duct-to-mucosa, ampullary-jejunal anastomosis and a type II Billroth gastrojejunostomy were performed. CONCLUSIONS: LPHPD avoids under- or overtreatment of benign duodenal lesions unamenable to an endoscopic approach. If the stepwise approach described in this video is followed, LPHPD represents a safe and parenchymal-sparing alternative to pancreaticoduodenectomy for benign duodenal lesions with reduced morbidity.

The Miami International Evidence-based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop and externally validate the first evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreas resection (MIPR) before and during the International Evidence-based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR) meeting in Miami (March 2019). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: MIPR has seen rapid development in the past decade. Promising outcomes have been reported by early adopters from high-volume centers. Subsequently, multicenter series as well as randomized controlled trials were reported; however, guidelines for clinical practice were lacking. METHODS: The Scottisch Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology was used, incorporating these 4 items: systematic reviews using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to answer clinical questions, whenever possible in PICO style, the GRADE approach for assessment of the quality of evidence, the Delphi method for establishing consensus on the developed recommendations, and the AGREE-II instrument for the assessment of guideline quality and external validation. The current guidelines are cosponsored by the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Asian-Pacific Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery, Pancreas Club, the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgery, the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, and the Society of Surgical Oncology. RESULTS: After screening 16,069 titles, 694 studies were reviewed, and 291 were included. The final 28 recommendations covered 6 topics; laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy, central pancreatectomy, pancreatoduodenectomy, as well as patient selection, training, learning curve, and minimal annual center volume required to obtain optimal outcomes and patient safety. CONCLUSION: The IG-MIPR using SIGN methodology give guidance to surgeons, hospital administrators, patients, and medical societies on the use and outcome of MIPR as well as the approach to be taken regarding this challenging type of surgery.

Technique and audited outcomes of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy combining the clockwise approach, progressive stepwise compression technique, and staple line reinforcement.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) has proven advantages over its open counterpart and is becoming more frequently performed around the world. It still remains a difficult operation due to the retroperitoneal location of the pancreas and limited experience and training with the procedure. In addition, complications such as bleeding or postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remain a problem. A standardized approach to LDP with stepwise graded compression technique for pancreatic transection has been utilized at a single center, and we sought to describe the technique and determine the outcomes. METHODS: A review of all patients undergoing LDP by a clockwise approach including the graded compression technique from August 1, 2008 to December 31, 2017 was performed. An external audit was performed by the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group. RESULTS: Overall, 260 patients with a mean age and a BMI of 62.3 and 28, respectively, underwent LDP using this technique. Mean operative time and blood loss were 183 min and 248 mL, respectively,. Hand-assisted method and conversion to open were both 5%. Major morbidity and mortality were 9.2% and 0.4%, respectively,. POPF was noted in 8.1%. The technical steps include (1) mobilization of the splenic flexure of the colon and exposure of the pancreas, (2) dissection along the inferior edge of the pancreas and choosing the site for pancreatic division, (3) pancreatic parenchymal division using a progressive stepwise compression technique with staple line reinforcement, (4) ligation of the splenic vein and artery, (5) dissection along the superior edge of the pancreas and residual posterior attachments, and (6) mobilization of the spleen and specimen removal. CONCLUSION: LDP with a clockwise approach for dissection, combined with the progressive stepwise compression technique for pancreatic transection, resulted in excellent outcomes including a very low POPF rate.

SAGES primer for taking care of yourself during and after the COVID-19 crisis.

COVID-19 is a pandemic which has affected almost every aspect of our life since starting globally in November 2019. Given the rapidity of spread and inadequate time to prepare for record numbers of sick patients, our surgical community faces an unforeseen challenge. SAGES is committed to the protection and care of patients, their surgeons and staff, and all who are served by the medical community at large. This includes physical health, mental health, and well-being of all involved. The fear of the unknown ahead can be paralyzing. International news media have chronicled the unthinkable situations that physicians and other health care providers have been thrust into as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. These situations include making life or death decisions for patients and their families regarding use of limited health care resources. It includes caring for patients with quickly deteriorating conditions and limited treatments available. Until recently, these situations seemed far from home, and now they are in our own hospitals. As the pandemic broadened its reach, the reality that we as surgeons may be joining the front line is real. It may be happening to you now; it may be on the horizon in the coming weeks. In this context, SAGES put together this document addressing concerns on clinician stressors in these times of uncertainty. We chose to focus on the emotional toll of the situation on the clinician, protecting vulnerable persons, reckoning with social isolation, and promoting wellness during this crisis. At the same time, the last part of this document deals with the "light at the end of the tunnel," discussing potential opportunities, lessons learned, and the positives that can come out of this crisis.

Preoperative imaging characteristics predict poor survival and inadequate resection for left-sided pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a multi-institutional analysis.

BACKGROUND: Optimal treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma of the neck, body and tail (PDAC-NBT) necessitates R0 surgical resection. Preoperative radiographic identification of patients likely to achieve successful oncologic resection remains difficult. This study seeks to identify preoperative imaging characteristics predictive of non-R0 resections or impaired survival for PDAC-NBT. METHODS: Patients at five high-volume centers who underwent resection for PDAC-NBT were retrospectively analyzed. The most immediate preoperative cross-sectional scan was assessed along with outcome measures of overall survival and margin status. RESULTS: 330 patients were treated between 2001 and 2016. Margin status included 247 R0 (78.2%), 67 R1 (21.2%), and 2 R2 (0.6%). A non-R0 resection predicted worse survival (p = 0.0002). On preoperative imaging, patients with tumors greater than 20 mm, tumor attenuation greater than 70 Hounsfield units, or who demonstrated pancreatic atrophy and/or calcifications also had worse survival (p = 0.010, p = 0.036, p = 0.025 respectively). Patients with tumors interfacing with the splenic artery or vein or extending posteriorly achieved fewer R0 resections (p = 0.0006, p = 0.0004, p = 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Preoperative cross-sectional imaging can identify tumor characteristics associated with poor survival and non-R0 resection. Further investigation is needed to identify the appropriate surgical and treatment modifications necessary to clinically benefit this subset of patients.

Safe implementation of minimally invasive pancreas resection: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive pancreas resection (MIPR) has been expanding in the past decade. Excellent outcomes have been reported, however, safety concerns exist. The aim of this study was to define prerequisites for performing MIPR with the objective to guide safe implementation of MIPR into clinical practice. METHODS: This systematic review was conducted as part of the 2019 Miami International Evidence-Based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR). PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched for literature concerning the implementation of MIPR between 1946 and November 2018. Quality assessment was according to The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). RESULTS: Overall, 1150 studies were screened, of which 32 studies with 8519 patients were included in this systematic review. Training programs for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy, laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy have been described with acceptable outcomes during the learning curve and improved outcomes after training. Learning curve studies have revealed an association between growing experience and improving perioperative outcomes. In addition, the association between higher center volume and lower mortality and morbidity has been reported by several studies. CONCLUSION: When embarking on MIPR, it is recommended to participate in a dedicated training program, to assure a sufficient volume, especially when implementing minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy, (20 procedures recommended annually), and prospectively collect and closely monitor outcomes for continuous quality assessment, this can be achieved through institutional databases and participation in national or international registries.

Hepatic Angiosarcoma: A Multi-institutional, International Experience with 44 Cases.

BACKGROUND: Hepatic angiosarcoma is a rare primary liver tumor. The aim of this current study was to evaluate the presentation and treatment outcomes in a modern cohort. METHODS: This was a retrospective, multi-institutional, observational study of patients with histopathologic diagnoses of primary hepatic angiosarcoma from four institutions. Clinicopathologic characteristics, treatments, and patient outcomes were examined. RESULTS: Forty-four patients with hepatic angiosarcoma were identified. Patients were predominantly Caucasian and presented at a median age of 63.7 years; 81.4% of patients had bilobar disease and 37.2% had metastatic disease at the time of presentation. Only 10 patients underwent surgical resection. Median overall survival for the entire cohort was 5.8 months (interquartile range 1.9-16.4), and 1-, 3-, and 5-year actual survival was 30.0%, 8.1%, and 5.6%, respectively. There were only two 5-year survivors, both of whom presented with localized disease and underwent curative resection. CONCLUSION: The prognosis for hepatic angiosarcoma remains quite poor. Surgical resection for localized disease results in the best outcomes. Unfortunately, current imaging modalities are often non- diagnostic, and most patients are unresectable at the time of presentation.

Characterization and Optimal Management of High-risk Pancreatic Anastomoses During Pancreatoduodenectomy.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify the optimal fistula mitigation strategy following pancreaticoduodenectomy. BACKGROUND: The utility of technical strategies to prevent clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) may vary by the circumstances of the anastomosis. The Fistula Risk Score (FRS) identifies a distinct high-risk cohort (FRS 7 to 10) that demonstrates substantially worse clinical outcomes. The value of various fistula mitigation strategies in these particular high-stakes cases has not been previously explored. METHODS: This multinational study included 5323 PDs performed by 62 surgeons at 17 institutions. Mitigation strategies, including both technique related (ie, pancreatogastrostomy reconstruction; dunking; tissue patches) and the use of adjuvant strategies (ie, intraperitoneal drains; anastomotic stents; prophylactic octreotide; tissue sealants), were evaluated using multivariable regression analysis and propensity score matching. RESULTS: A total of 522 (9.8%) PDs met high-risk FRS criteria, with an observed CR-POPF rate of 29.1%. Pancreatogastrostomy, prophylactic octreotide, and omission of externalized stents were each associated with an increased rate of CR-POPF (all P < 0.001). In a multivariable model accounting for patient, surgeon, and institutional characteristics, the use of external stents [odds ratio (OR) 0.45, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.25-0.81] and the omission of prophylactic octreotide (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30-0.78) were independently associated with decreased CR-POPF occurrence. In the propensity score matched cohort, an "optimal" mitigation strategy (ie, externalized stent and no prophylactic octreotide) was associated with a reduced rate of CR-POPF (13.2% vs 33.5%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The scenarios identified by the high-risk FRS zone represent challenging anastomoses associated with markedly elevated rates of fistula. Externalized stents and omission of prophylactic octreotide, in the setting of intraperitoneal drainage and pancreaticojejunostomy reconstruction, provides optimal outcomes.

Bile duct injury and morbidity following cholecystectomy: a need for improvement.

BACKGROUND: Bile duct injury (BDI) remains the most dreaded complication following cholecystectomy with serious repercussions for the surgeon, patient and entire healthcare system. In the absence of registries, the true incidence of BDI in the United States remains unknown. We aim to identify the incidence of BDI requiring operative intervention and overall complications after cholecystectomy. METHODS: Utilizing the Truven Marketscan® research database, 554,806 patients who underwent cholecystectomy in calendar years 2011-2014 were identified using ICD-9 procedure and diagnosis codes. The final study population consisted of 319,184 patients with at least 1 year of continuous enrollment and who met inclusion criteria. Patients were tracked for BDI and other complications. Hospital cost information was obtained from 2015 Premier data. RESULTS: Of the 319,184 patients who were included in the study, there were a total of 741 (0.23%) BDI identified requiring operative intervention. The majority of injuries were identified at the time of the index procedure (n = 533, 72.9%), with 102 (13.8%) identified within 30-days of surgery and the remainder (n = 106, 14.3%) between 31 and 365 days. The operative cumulative complication rate within 30 days of surgery was 9.84%. The most common complications occurring at the index procedure were intestinal disorders (1.2%), infectious (1%), and shock (0.8%). The most common complications identified within 30-days of surgery included infection (1.5%), intestinal disorders (0.7%) and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) (0.7%) for cumulative rates of infection, intestinal disorders, shock, and SIRS of 2.0, 1.9, 1.0, and 0.8%, respectively. CONCLUSION: BDI rate requiring operative intervention have plateaued and remains at 0.23% despite increased experience with laparoscopy. Moreover, cholecystectomy is associated with a 9.84% 30-day morbidity rate. A clear opportunity is identified to improve the quality and safety of this operation. Continued attention to educational programs and techniques aimed at reducing patient harm and improving surgeon skill are imperative.

Correction to: Endoscopic and surgical management of nonampullary duodenal neoplasms.

This article was updated to correct the author listing for Carlos Roberto Simons-Linares.

Endoscopic and surgical management of nonampullary duodenal neoplasms.

BACKGROUND: Sporadic nonampullary duodenal neoplasms (SNADN) can have malignant potential for which endoscopic and surgical resections are offered. We report combined gastroenterologic and surgical experience for treatment of SNADN, including endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and pancreas-preserving partial duodenectomy (PPPD). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 121 consecutive patients, who underwent 30 PPPDs and 91 EMRs for mucosal and submucosal SNADN. Decision to undergo EMR or surgical resection was based on expert endoscopist and surgeon discretion including multidisciplinary tumor board review. Main outcomes were recurrence rate of neoplasia and adverse events requiring hospital admission or prolonged care. EMRs were performed with submucosal lifting followed by snare resection. PPPD included total duodenectomy, supra-ampullary PPPD for neoplasms proximal to the ampulla, and infra-ampullary PPPD for lesions distal to the ampulla. Follow-up data were available for 65% of EMR and 73% of surgical patients. RESULTS: Surgically resected neoplasia was larger with more advanced neoplasia and submucosal lesions. En bloc resection was achieved in all surgical resections and in 53% of EMRs. Post-EMR, mucosal and submucosal neoplasia recurred in 32 and 0%, respectively, including five neoplasms (26%) after an initial negative esophagogastroduodenoscopy. All recurrences were treated endoscopically. Complications occurred in 14 endoscopically and eight surgically treated patients, none requiring surgical intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Post-EMR patients had higher recurrence of mucosal neoplasia, whereas submucosal neoplasms, mainly carcinoid, did not recur. Polyp size and positive resection margin were not associated with neoplasia recurrence. Patients with SNADN could benefit from a multidisciplinary approach to stratify the optimal treatment based on local expertise.

Pancreaticoduodenectomy and Outcomes for Groove Pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The operative management of groove pancreatitis (GP) is still a matter of controversy and pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) can be a high-risk procedure for patients. The aim of this study was to report our 9-year experience of surgical resection for GP and to review relevant literature. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergoing pancreatectomy for GP from August 1, 2008, through May 31, 2017 was performed. Patients with clinical, radiologic, and final pathologic confirmation of GP were included. Literature on the current understanding of GP was reviewed. RESULTS: Eight patients from total 449 pancreatectomies met inclusion criteria. Four male and 4 female patients (mean age, 51.9 years; mean body mass index, 25.3) underwent pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy (3 by laparoscopy and 5 by open approach). Mean (range) operative time and blood loss was 343 (167-525) min and 218 (40-500) mL respectively. Pancreatic fistula and delayed gastric emptying were noted in one patient each. No major complications occurred, but minor complications occurred in 5 (62%) patients. Mean hospital stay was 6.1 (range 3-14) days. At median follow-up of 18.15 (interquartile range 7.25-33.8) months, all patients experienced a resolution of pancreatitis and improvement in symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: PD is a safe procedure for GP. Short-term surgical outcomes are acceptable and long-term outcomes are associated with improved symptom control.