Repeated pancreatic resection for pancreatic metastases from renal cell Carcinoma: A Spanish multicenter study (PANMEKID).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Recurrent isolated pancreatic metastasis from Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) after pancreatic resection is rare. The purpose of our study is to describe a series of cases of relapse of pancreatic metastasis from renal cancer in the pancreatic remnant and its surgical treatment with a repeated pancreatic resection, and to analyse the results of both overall and disease-free survival. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective study of patients undergoing pancreatic resection for RCC pancreatic metastases, from January 2010 to May 2020. Patients were grouped into two groups depending on whether they received a single pancreatic resection (SPS) or iterative pancreatic resection. Data on short and long-term outcome after pancreatic resection were collected. RESULTS: The study included 131 pancreatic resections performed in 116 patients. Thus, iterative pancreatic surgery (IPS) was performed in 15 patients. The mean length of time between the first pancreatic surgery and the second was 48.9 months (95 % CI: 22.2-56.9). There were no differences in the rate of postoperative complications. The DFS rates at 1, 3 and 5 years were 86 %, 78 % and 78 % vs 75 %, 50 % and 37 % in the IPS and SPS group respectively (p = 0.179). OS rates at 1, 3, 5 and 7 years were 100 %, 100 %, 100 % and 75 % in the IPS group vs 95 %, 85 %, 80 % and 68 % in the SPS group (p = 0.895). CONCLUSION: Repeated pancreatic resection in case of relapse of pancreatic metastasis of RCC in the pancreatic remnant is justified, since it achieves OS results similar to those obtained after the first resection.

Pancreatic metastases from renal cell carcinoma. Postoperative outcome after surgical treatment in a Spanish multicenter study (PANMEKID).

BACKGROUND: Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) occasionally spreads to the pancreas. The purpose of our study is to evaluate the short and long-term results of a multicenter series in order to determine the effect of surgical treatment on the prognosis of these patients. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective study of patients undergoing surgery for RCC pancreatic metastases, from January 2010 to May 2020. Variables related to the primary tumor, demographics, clinical characteristics of metastasis, location in the pancreas, type of pancreatic resection performed and data on short and long-term evolution after pancreatic resection were collected. RESULTS: The study included 116 patients. The mean time between nephrectomy and pancreatic metastases' resection was 87.35 months (ICR: 1.51-332.55). Distal pancreatectomy was the most performed technique employed (50 %). Postoperative morbidity was observed in 60.9 % of cases (Clavien-Dindo greater than IIIa in 14 %). The median follow-up time was 43 months (13-78). Overall survival (OS) rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 96 %, 88 %, and 83 %, respectively. The disease-free survival (DFS) rate at 1, 3, and 5 years was 73 %, 49 %, and 35 %, respectively. Significant prognostic factors of relapse were a disease free interval of less than 10 years (2.05 [1.13-3.72], p 0.02) and a history of previous extrapancreatic metastasis (2.44 [1.22-4.86], p 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Pancreatic resection if metastatic RCC is found in the pancreas is warranted to achieve higher overall survival and disease-free survival, even if extrapancreatic metastases were previously removed. The existence of intrapancreatic multifocal compromise does not always warrant the performance of a total pancreatectomy in order to improve survival.

Quality Standards for Surgery of Colorectal Peritoneal Metastasis After Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The standardization of surgical outcomes throughout surgical procedures is mandatory. Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS + HIPEC) should provide proficient oncological and surgical outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: The aim of this study was to identify clinically relevant quality indicators and their quality standard, and to determine their acceptable quality limit. A systematic review on cytoreductive results from 2000 to 2018 was performed focusing on clinical guidelines, consensus conferences, and publications. After the selection of quality indicators, a systematic review of indexed references was performed in order to calculate the quality standard for each indicator. STUDY SELECTION: Unicentric/multicentric series, comparative studies, and clinical trials. Studies were to include outcomes after cytoreduction of colorectal origin and series with more than 50 patients. Quality indicators with at least 10 series were mandatory and objective measurements were also mandatory for inclusion. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Quality indicators selected were 1- to 5-year survival, overall disease-free survival, 1- to 5-year disease-free survival, complete surgical resection, duration of surgery, length of stay, overall morbimortality, major morbidity, re-intervention, postoperative hemorrhage, intestinal fistula, anastomotic leakage, wound infection, postoperative medical complications, overall recurrence, and failure to rescue. RESULTS: The most relevant quality indicators and critical quality limits were overall disease-free survival and 5-year overall disease-free survival (14 months and <10 months, and 14% and <4%, respectively), completeness of surgical resection (89% and <80%, respectively), overall mortality (3% and >8%, respectively), overall morbidity (47% and >63%, respectively), failure to rescue (12% and <30%, respectively), reintervention (13 and <22%, respectively), anastomotic leakage (6% and <13%, respectively), and overall recurrence (60% and <74%, respectively). CONCLUSION: This is the first study to assess quality standards in CRS + HIPEC for colorectal peritoneal metastases. The current data are of particular relevance for future studies to control the variability of this surgery.

Metástasis hepática de cáncer de mama y cáncer primario de colon sincrónicos. ¿Qué hacer? / No disponible

No disponible

[Computerized physician order entry of pharmacotherapeutic protocols in a colorectal surgery unit]. / Prescripción electrónica asistida de protocolos farmacoterapéuticos en una unidad de cirugía coloproctológica.

INTRODUCTION: Computerized physician order entry was introduced in our hospital. We present the pharmacotherapeutic protocols that we use in patient care. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Six pharmaceutical protocols were designed by consensus in a colorectal surgery unit and were applied over a 2-year period. Patients undergoing ambulatory or urgent surgery were excluded. RESULTS: We treated 772 patients. Two hundred twenty patients (28.5%) were assigned to the preoperative protocol for minor proctologic surgery. After surgery, all 220 patients were included in the postoperative protocol for minor proctologic surgery. The remaining 552 patients (71.5%) were assigned to the protocol for major colorectal surgery. The preoperative protocol for major colorectal surgery was indicated in 542 patients (98.2%) and its variant for patients allergic to beta-lactam antibiotics was used in 10 patients (1.8%). The postoperative pharmacotherapeutic protocol assigned depended on whether a central venous line (317 patients; 57.4%) or only peripheral venous access (235 patients; 42.6%) was used. CONCLUSIONS: Each clinical unit has a duty to carry out and update consensus protocols (always based on the best scientific evidence available) that can be used in the processes managed in that unit. The use of these protocols shows a high degree of acceptance among physicians and nurses, allowing clinical practice to be standardized and healthcare processes to be homogenized.

Prescripción electrónica asistida de protocolos farmacoterapéuticos en una unidad de cirugía coloproctológica / Computerized physician order entry of pharmacotherapeutic protocols in a colorectal surgery unit

Introducción. Tras la implantación en nuestro hospital de los sistemas de prescripción electrónica, presentamos los protocolos farmacoterapéuticos que empleamos en la atención de nuestros pacientes. Material y métodos. Diseño por consenso de 6 protocolos farmacoterapéuticos en una unidad de cirugía coloproctológica y aplicación de éstos durante un período de 2 años. Se excluye del estudio a los pacientes intervenidos de urgencias y a los intervenidos en el programa de cirugía sin ingreso. Resultados. Con este recurso se trató a 772 pacientes. El 28,5% se asignó al protocolo de preoperatorio en cirugía proctológica menor. Una vez intervenidos se incluyó a todos ellos en el protocolo de postoperatorio de cirugía proctológica menor. Se asignó a los 552 pacientes restantes a los protocolos de cirugía colorrectal mayor. El protocolo de preoperatorio en cirugía colorrectal mayor se indicó en 542 casos y su variante para alérgicos a los betalactámicos, en 10 casos. El protocolo postoperatorio asignado dependió de si el paciente tenía colocada una vía venosa central (57,4%) o si, por el contrario, sólo disponía de una o varias vías periféricas (42,6%). Conclusiones. Es responsabilidad de cada unidad clínica la realización y actualización, siempre con las mejores pruebas científicas disponibles, de los protocolos consensuados que se pueden aplicar a los procesos atendidos en ella. La utilización de éstos muestra un alto grado de aceptación por parte de los prescriptores y de enfermería, permitiendo estandarizar la práctica clínica y homogeneizar los procesos asistenciales (AU)

Introduction. Computerized physician order entry was introduced in our hospital. We present the pharmacotherapeutic protocols that we use in patient care. Material and methods. Six pharmaceutical protocols were designed by consensus in a colorectal surgery unit and were applied over a 2-year period. Patients undergoing ambulatory or urgent surgery were excluded. Results. We treated 772 patients. Two hundred twenty patients (28.5%) were assigned to the preoperative protocol for minor proctologic surgery. After surgery, all 220 patients were included in the postoperative protocol for minor proctologic surgery. The remaining 552 patients (71.5%) were assigned to the protocol for major colorectal surgery. The preoperative protocol for major colorectal surgery was indicated in 542 patients (98.2%) and its variant for patients allergic to beta-lactam antibiotics was used in 10 patients (1.8%). The postoperative pharmacotherapeutic protocol assigned depended on whether a central venous line (317 patients; 57.4%) or only peripheral venous access (235 patients; 42.6%) was used. Conclusions. Each clinical unit has a duty to carry out and update consensus protocols (always based on the best scientific evidence available) that can be used in the processes managed in that unit. The use of these protocols shows a high degree of acceptance among physicians and nurses, allowing clinical practice to be standardized and healthcare processes to be homogenized (AU)