Unplanned surgery after colorectal resection: laparoscopy at the index surgery is a protective factor against mortality.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess risk factors of mortality after unplanned surgery following colorectal resection. METHODS: All the consecutive patients who underwent colorectal resection between 2011 and 2020 in a French national cohort were retrospectively included. Perioperative data of the index colorectal resection (indication, surgical approach, pathological analysis, postoperative morbidity), and characteristics of unplanned surgery (indication, time to complication, time to surgical redo) were assessed in order to identify predictive factors of mortality. RESULTS: Among 547 included patients, 54 patients died (10%; 32 men; mean age = 68 ± 18 years, range 34-94 years). Patients who died were significantly older (75 ± 11 vs 66 ± 12 years, p = 0.002), frailer (ASA score 3-4 = 65 vs 25%, p = 0.0001), initially operated through open approach (78 vs 41%, p = 0.0001), and without any anastomosis (17 vs 5%, p = 0.003) than those alive. The presence of colorectal cancer, the time to postoperative complication and the time to unplanned surgery were not significantly associated to the postoperative mortality. After multivariate analysis, 5 independent predictive factors of mortality were identified: old age (OR 1.038; IC 95% 1.006-1.072; p = 0.02), ASA score = 3 (OR 5.9, CI95% 1.2-28.5, p = 0.03), ASA score = 4 (OR 9.6; IC95% 1.5-63; p = 0.02), open approach for the index surgery (OR 2.7; IC95% 1.3-5.7; p = 0.01), and delayed management (OR 2.6; IC95% 1.3-5.3; p = 0.009). CONCLUSION: After unplanned surgery following colorectal surgery, one out of 10 patients dies. The laparoscopic approach during the index surgery is associated with a good prognosis in the case of unplanned surgery.

SAGES SAFE CHOLE program changes surgeons practice in France-results of the FCVD implementation of SAFE CHOLE in France.

BACKGROUND: With the Society of Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons supervision, the Safe Cholecystectomy Task Force (SAFE CHOLE) was translated into French by the the Federation of Visceral and Digestive Surgery (FCVD) and adopted to run on its national e-learning platform for surgical continuing medical education (CME). The objective of this study was to assess the impact of the SAFE CHOLE (SF) program on the knowledge and practice of French surgeons performing cholecystectomy and participating in the FCVD lead CME activity. METHODS: To obtain CME certification, each participant must fill out three FCVD validated questionnaires regarding (1) the participants' routine practice for cholecystectomy, (2) the participants' knowledge and practice after successful completion of the program, and (3) the educational value of the SC program. RESULTS: From 2021 to 2022, 481 surgeons completed the program. The overall satisfaction rate for the program was 81%, and 53% of the surgeons were practicing routine cholangiography before the SC program. Eighty percent declared having acquired new knowledge. Fifty-six percent reported a change in their practice of cholecystectomy. Of those, 46% started routinely using the critical view of safety, 12% used a time-out prior transection of vital structures, and 11% adopted routine intraoperative cholangiography. Sixty-seven percent reported performing a sub-total cholecystectomy in case the CVS was unobtainable. If faced with BDI, 45% would transfer to a higher level of care, 33% would seek help from a colleague, and 10% would proceed with a repair. Ninety percent recommended adoption of SC by all general surgeons and 98% reported improvement of patient safety. CONCLUSIONS: Large-scale implementation of the SC program in France is feasible within a broad group of diverse specialty surgeons and appears to have a significant impact on their practice. These data should encourage other surgeons and health systems to engage in this program.

Upfront Laparoscopic Management of Common Bile Duct Stones: What Are the Risk Factors of Failure?

BACKGROUND: Treatment of common bile duct stones (CBDS) includes laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with either laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) or perioperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The main objective of this study was to identify predictive factors for the failure of upfront and exclusive surgical treatment by LCBDE. METHODS: This is a single-center, retrospective study on patients with CBDS and operated for LC between 2007 and 2019. The use of intra- or postoperative endoscopy for CBD clearance within 6 months after surgery was considered as failure of LCBDE. Predictors for the failure of LCBDE were investigated and outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Among 222 operated patients, LCBDE was successfully performed in 173 patients (78%) and 49 (22%) required ERCP with sphincterotomy (intraoperative (n=29) or postoperative (n=20)). Independent risk factors for surgical failure were male sex (OR: 2.525 (1.111-5.738); p=0.027), anesthesia induction time ≥ 4 p.m. (OR: 4.858 (1.731-13.631); p=0.003), pediculitis (OR: 4.147 (1.177-14.606); p=0.027), and thin CDB < 4mm (OR: 11.951 (3.562-40.097), p< 0.0001). Age, ASA score, cystic anatomy, presence of cholecystitis, and the surgeon's experience were not identified as predictors for surgical failure. A general anesthesia number >1 (6% vs. 33%; p < 0.0001), length of initial stay (6 [1-42] vs. 8 [2-27], p=0.012), total length of hospitalization (6 [1-45] vs. 9 [2-27]; p=0.010), and the rate of emergency readmissions (3.5% vs. 12.2%; p=0.027) were significantly higher in the LCBDE failure group. CONCLUSIONS: Upfront LCBDE for CBDS was associated with improved outcomes compared to intra-/postoperative ERCP recourse. Male sex, pediculitis, thin CBD, and surgery later than 4 p.m were associated with LCBDE failure and the need for endoscopic treatment. REGISTRATION NUMBER AND AGENCY: The present retrospective study was approved by our local ethics committee and was declared on ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT04467710).

Short-term Outcomes After Spleen-preserving Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy With or Without Preservation of Splenic Vessels: A Pan-European Retrospective Study in High-volume Centers.

OBJECTIVE: To compare short-term clinical outcomes after Kimura and Warshaw MIDP. BACKGROUND: Spleen preservation during distal pancreatectomy can be achieved by either preservation (Kimura) or resection (Warshaw) of the splenic vessels. Multicenter studies reporting outcomes of Kimura and Warshaw spleen-preserving MIDP are scarce. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective study including consecutive MIDP procedures intended to be spleen-preserving from 29 high-volume centers (≥15 distal pancreatectomies annually) in 8 European countries. Primary outcomes were secondary splenectomy for ischemia and major (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III) complications. Sensitivity analysis assessed the impact of excluding ("rescue") Warshaw procedures which were performed in centers that typically (>75%) performed Kimura MIDP. RESULTS: Overall, 1095 patients after MIDP were included with successful splenic preservation in 878 patients (80%), including 634 Kimura and 244 Warshaw procedures. Rates of clinically relevant splenic ischemia (0.6% vs 1.6%, P = 0.127) and major complications (11.5% vs 14.4%, P = 0.308) did not differ significantly between Kimura and Warshaw MIDP, respectively. Mortality rates were higher after Warshaw MIDP (0.0% vs 1.2%, P = 0.023), and decreased in the sensitivity analysis (0.0% vs 0.6%, P = 0.052). Kimura MIDP was associated with longer operative time (202 vs 184 minutes, P = 0.033) and less blood loss (100 vs 150 mL, P < 0.001) as compared to Warshaw MIDP. Unplanned splenectomy was associated with a higher conversion rate (20.7% vs 5.0%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Kimura and Warshaw spleen-preserving MIDP provide equivalent short-term outcomes with low rates of secondary splenectomy and postoperative morbidity. Further analyses of long-term outcomes are needed.

Outcomes After Minimally Invasive Versus Open Total Pancreatectomy: A Pan-European Propensity Score Matched Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess postoperative 90-day outcomes after minimally invasive (laparoscopic/robot-assisted) total pancreatectomy (MITP) in selected patients versus open total pancreatectomy (OTP) among European centers. BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive pancreatic surgery is becoming increasingly popular but data on MITP are scarce and multicenter studies comparing outcomes versus OTP are lacking. It therefore remains unclear if MITP is a valid alternative. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective propensity-score matched study including consecutive adult patients undergoing MITP or OTP for all indications at 16 European centers in 7 countries (2008-2017). Patients after MITP were matched (1:1, caliper 0.02) to OTP controls. Missing data were imputed. The primary outcome was 90-day major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo ≥3a). Secondary outcomes included 90-day mortality, length of hospital stay, and survival. RESULTS: Of 361 patients (99MITP/262 OTP), 70 MITP procedures (50 laparoscopic, 15 robotic, 5 hybrid) could be matched to 70 OTP controls. After matching, MITP was associated with a lower rate of major morbidity (17% MITP vs. 31% OTP, P = 0.022). The 90-day mortality (1.4% MITP vs. 7.1% OTP, P = 0.209) and median hospital stay (17 [IQR 11-24] MITP vs. 12 [10-23] days OTP, P = 0.876) did not differ significantly. Among 81 patients with PDAC, overall survival was 3.7 (IQR 1.7-N/A) versus 0.9 (IQR 0.5-N/ A) years, for MITP versus OTP, which was nonsignificant after stratification by T-stage. CONCLUSION: This international propensity score matched study showed that MITP may be a valuable alternative to OTP in selected patients, given the associated lower rate of major morbidity.

Benchmarking of robotic and laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy by using two different methods.

BACKGROUND: Benchmarking is an important tool for quality comparison and improvement. However, no benchmark values are available for minimally invasive spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy, either laparoscopically or robotically assisted. The aim of this study was to establish benchmarks for these techniques using two different methods. METHODS: Data from patients undergoing laparoscopically or robotically assisted spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy were extracted from a multicentre database (2006-2019). Benchmarks for 10 outcomes were calculated using the Achievable Benchmark of Care (ABC) and best-patient-in-best-centre methods. RESULTS: Overall, 951 laparoscopically assisted (77.3 per cent) and 279 robotically assisted (22.7 per cent) procedures were included. Using the ABC method, the benchmarks for laparoscopically assisted and robotically assisted spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy respectively were: 150 and 207 min for duration of operation, 55 and 100 ml for blood loss, 3.5 and 1.7 per cent for conversion, 0 and 1.7 per cent for failure to preserve the spleen, 27.3 and 34.0 per cent for overall morbidity, 5.1 and 3.3 per cent for major morbidity, 3.6 and 7.1 per cent for pancreatic fistula grade B/C, 5 and 6 days for duration of hospital stay, 2.9 and 5.4 per cent for readmissions, and 0 and 0 per cent for 90-day mortality. Best-patient-in-best-centre methodology revealed milder benchmark cut-offs for laparoscopically and robotically assisted procedures, with operating times of 254 and 262.5 min, blood loss of 150 and 195 ml, conversion rates of 5.8 and 8.2 per cent, rates of failure to salvage spleen of 29.9 and 27.3 per cent, overall morbidity rates of 62.7 and 55.7 per cent, major morbidity rates of 20.4 and 14 per cent, POPF B/C rates of 23.8 and 24.2 per cent, duration of hospital stay of 8 and 8 days, readmission rates of 20 and 15.1 per cent, and 90-day mortality rates of 0 and 0 per cent respectively. CONCLUSION: Two benchmark methods for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy produced different values, and should be interpreted and applied differently.

Survival after Multimodal Treatment Including Surgery for Metastatic Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review.

(1) Background: The management of metastatic esophageal cancer is more often limited to palliative chemotherapy. Limited data are available regarding the role of surgery that remains controversial. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the survival outcome of surgically treated metastatic esophageal cancer patients. (2) Methods: The present systematic review is designed using the PRISMA guidelines and has been registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019140306). Two reviewers independently searched and identified studies dealing with surgery for stage IV esophageal cancer in the Medline and Google Scholar databases between January 2008 and December 2019. (3) Results: Seven retrospective nonrandomized studies, totaling 1756 patients with stage IV esophageal cancer who underwent curative surgery, were included. Our analysis demonstrates a three-year overall survival rate of 23% (CI 95% 17-31) among patients undergoing surgery. Because only two comparative studies were identified, data compilation and relative risk evaluation through meta-analysis were not possible. (4) Conclusions: Multimodality treatment, including surgery in curative intent, seems associated with a significant chance of three-year overall survival. A prospective evaluation of this approach and validation of adequate selection criteria are needed.

Personalized pre-habilitation reduces anastomotic complications compared to up front surgery before ileocolic resection in high-risk patients with Crohn's disease: A single center retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of a personalized prehabilitation (PP) before ileocolic resection (ICR) on the postoperative anastomotic complications in patients with Crohn's Disease (CD) with high risk of post-operative complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All high-risk patients who required ICR with primary anastomosis for CD between January 2010 and March 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. PP included nutritional support, antibiotic therapy or drainage of an abscess, stopping or decreasing corticosteroid treatments. Patients were considered as high risk for complications when they had at least one or more of these 3 risk factors (RF) (hypoalbuminemia <30 g/L or weight loss of >10% over the last 6 months, treatment with corticosteroids before surgery (within 4 weeks before surgery), or presence of preoperative intra-abdominal sepsis (abscess or enteral fistula)) according to ECCO guidelines 2020. RESULTS: Ninety high-risk patients were included in our cohort and the anastomotic complication rate was 11.1%. Sixty-four (71.1%) had preoperative prehabilitation (median duration of 37 days), and the mean albumin level (34 g/L vs 37 g/L; p < 0.001) and the number of RF (1.21 vs 1.06; p = 0.001) were improved by PP during the preoperative period. The rate of anastomotic complications at 90 days from surgery (6.25% vs 23.1%; p = 0.031) as well as the re-operation rate (3.1% vs 19.2%; p = 0.019) were lower after PP. No difference was found on the rate of readmission and the length of stay in this subgroup analysis. Biological treatment administration within 3 months before surgery was not a risk factor for postoperative complication. CONCLUSION: PP reduces the number of preoperative risk factors before ICR in high-risk patients with CD and allows primary anastomosis with a lower complication rate than in upfront operated patients.

Benchmarking of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy: European multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: Benchmarking is the process to used assess the best achievable results and compare outcomes with that standard. This study aimed to assess best achievable outcomes in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (MIDPS). METHODS: This retrospective study included consecutive patients undergoing MIDPS for any indication, between 2003 and 2019, in 31 European centres. Benchmarks of the main clinical outcomes were calculated according to the Achievable Benchmark of Care (ABC™) method. After identifying independent risk factors for severe morbidity and conversion, risk-adjusted ABCs were calculated for each subgroup of patients at risk. RESULTS: A total of 1595 patients were included. The ABC was 2.5 per cent for conversion and 8.4 per cent for severe morbidity. ABC values were 160 min for duration of operation time, 8.3 per cent for POPF, 1.8 per cent for reoperation, and 0 per cent for mortality. Multivariable analysis showed that conversion was associated with male sex (OR 1.48), BMI exceeding 30 kg/m2 (OR 2.42), multivisceral resection (OR 3.04), and laparoscopy (OR 2.24). Increased risk of severe morbidity was associated with ASA fitness grade above II (OR 1.60), multivisceral resection (OR 1.88), and robotic approach (OR 1.87). CONCLUSION: The benchmark values obtained using the ABC method represent optimal outcomes from best achievable care, including low complication rates and zero mortality. These benchmarks should be used to set standards to improve patient outcomes.

Transcutaneous ventriculo-peritoneal shunt catheter extrusion with silent bowel perforation following digestive surgery: a case report.

This case report provides an account of transcutaneous ventriculo-peritoneal (VP) shunt extrusion with silent bowel perforation occurring 2 years post digestive surgery. A 22-year-old man treated since childhood for post-infectious hydrocephalus was referred to our neurosurgery department for an inflammatory wound to the right hypochondrium caused by an abandoned calcified VP shunt. This VP shunt was surgically removed without complications. The perforated bowel required no direct repair. Progress is favorable at 1 year follow-up.

Detection of soluble biomarkers of pancreatic cancer in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration samples.

BACKGROUND: Biomarkers are urgently needed for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is the cornerstone for diagnosing PDAC. We developed a method for discovery of PDAC biomarkers using the discarded EUS-FNA liquid. METHODS: This retrospective study included 58 patients with suspected pancreatic lesions who underwent EUS-FNA. Protein extracts from EUS-FNA liquid were analyzed by mass spectrometry. Proteomic and clinical data were modeled by supervised statistical learning to identify protein markers and clinical variables that distinguish PDAC. RESULTS: Statistical modeling revealed a protein signature for PDAC screening that achieved high sensitivity and specificity (0.92, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.79-0.98, and 0.85, 95 %CI 0.67-0.93, respectively). We also developed a protein signature score (PSS) to guide PDAC diagnosis. In combination with patient age, the PSS achieved 100 % certainty in correctly identifying PDAC patients > 54 years. In addition, 3 /4 inconclusive EUS-FNA biopsies were correctly identified using PSS. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-FNA-derived fluid is a rich source of PDAC proteins with biomarker potential. The PSS requires further validation and verification of the feasibility of measuring these proteins in patient sera.

Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (DIPLOMA): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Recently, the first randomized trials comparing minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) for non-malignant and malignant disease showed a 2-day reduction in time to functional recovery after MIDP. However, for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), concerns have been raised regarding the oncologic safety (i.e., radical resection, lymph node retrieval, and survival) of MIDP, as compared to ODP. Therefore, a randomized controlled trial comparing MIDP and ODP in PDAC regarding oncological safety is warranted. We hypothesize that the microscopically radical resection (R0) rate is non-inferior for MIDP, as compared to ODP. METHODS/DESIGN: DIPLOMA is an international randomized controlled, patient- and pathologist-blinded, non-inferiority trial performed in 38 pancreatic centers in Europe and the USA. A total of 258 patients with an indication for elective distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy because of proven or highly suspected PDAC of the pancreatic body or tail will be randomly allocated to MIDP (laparoscopic or robot-assisted) or ODP in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome is the microscopically radical resection margin (R0, distance tumor to pancreatic transection and posterior margin ≥ 1 mm), which is assessed using a standardized histopathology assessment protocol. The sample size is calculated with the following assumptions: 5% one-sided significance level (α), 80% power (1-ß), expected R0 rate in the open group of 58%, expected R0 resection rate in the minimally invasive group of 67%, and a non-inferiority margin of 7%. Secondary outcomes include time to functional recovery, operative outcomes (e.g., blood loss, operative time, and conversion to open surgery), other histopathology findings (e.g., lymph node retrieval, perineural- and lymphovascular invasion), postoperative outcomes (e.g., clinically relevant complications, hospital stay, and administration of adjuvant treatment), time and site of disease recurrence, survival, quality of life, and costs. Follow-up will be performed at the outpatient clinic after 6, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months postoperatively. DISCUSSION: The DIPLOMA trial is designed to investigate the non-inferiority of MIDP versus ODP regarding the microscopically radical resection rate of PDAC in an international setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN44897265 . Prospectively registered on 16 April 2018.

Registrar performance in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy and effects on postoperative outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is nowadays an established standard procedure for non-locally advanced pancreatic lesions without celio-mesenteric vascular invasion. However, little is known about how the involvement of junior surgeons in MIDP affects postoperative outcomes. We performed a retrospective case series study in order to determine whether registrar involvement in MIDP is associated with adverse outcomes. METHODS: Data were analyzed from a prospectively created database of consecutive patients undergoing MIDP. Only data from 91 patients who underwent MIDP for non-PDAC lesions were included. Patients were divided in 3 groups: Consultant P1 (first 20 MIDP, n=20), Consultant P2 (after 20 MIDP, n=44), and Registrar group (n=27). Conversion rates and 90-day postoperative outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Conversion rates were 5%, 0%, and 14% in Consultant P1 and P2 and Registrar groups, respectively (P1 vs. P2, p = 0.312 and P1 vs. Registrar, p=0.376). Only Comprehensive Complication Index was higher in Registrar group compared to Consultant P1 group (13 vs. 3.7; p = 0.041). Comparison between Consultant P2 and Registrar groups resulted in a significant higher conversion rate (0 vs. 14%, p = 0.029), increased blood loss (77 vs. 263 ml, p = 0.018), and longer surgery duration (156 vs. 212 min, p=0.001) for registrars MIDP. However, no differences were found in clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) (16 vs. 7.5%, p=0.282), Clavien-Dindo severe complication ≥3 score (11 vs. 4%, p=0.396), or length of hospital stay (9 vs. 9 days; p=0.614) between the consultant and registrar cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: With all the limitations of a retrospective study with a small sample size, junior surgeons' involvement in MIDP for non-PDAC lesions resulted in higher conversion rate, blood loss and duration of surgery without statistically significant difference on clinical outcomes compared to a consultant.

Outcomes of elective left colectomy in renal-transplanted patients: a single-center case-control study (LECoRT study).

PURPOSE: Renal-transplanted patients are reported to have a high anastomotic leakage (AL) rate after colorectal surgery. We aimed to define AL-related morbidity and mortality rates after elective left colectomy in renal-transplanted patients. METHODS: Data were prospectively collected between 2010 and 2015 from patients who underwent elective left colectomy with supra-peritoneal anastomosis in a single French referral hospital. We compared AL rate, and morbidity and mortality rates between renal-transplanted patients and controls. RESULTS: We identified 120 patients who underwent elective left colectomy during the study period. We retrospectively divided this cohort into 20 (17%) kidney-transplanted recipients (KTR-group) and the remaining 100 patients comprised the control group (C-group). There were no significant differences in sex, age, ASA score, body mass index, history of abdominal surgery and benign/malignant disease ratio between the KTR-group and the C-group. The AL rate was approximately four times higher in the KTR-group versus the C-group (25% vs 7%, p = 0.028). Intra-abdominal septic complications (p = 0.0005) and reoperation rates (p = 0.025) were also higher in the KTR-group. The laparoscopic approach was performed less in the KTR-group (35% versus 93%, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Renal transplantation was identified as a risk factor of AL following elective left colectomy, as well as increased intra-abdominal septic morbidity and higher reoperation rate. Further multicentric studies are required to identify potential independent risk factors of AL after colorectal surgery in these frail populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The present study was declared on ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT04495023).

Sphincter-saving surgery for ultra-low rectal carcinoma initially indicated for abdominoperineal resection: Is it safe on a long-term follow-up?

BACKGROUND: Rate of abdominoperineal resection (APR) varies from countries and surgeons. Surgical impact of preoperative treatment for ultra-low rectal carcinoma (ULRC) initially indicated for APR is debated. We report the 10-year oncological results from a prospective controlled trial (GRECCAR 1) which evaluate the sphincter saving surgery (SSR). METHODS: ULRC indicated for APR were included (n = 207). Randomization was between high-dose radiation (HDR, 45 + 18 Gy) and radiochemotherapy (RCT, 45 Gy + 5FU infusion). Surgical decision was based on tumour volume regression at surgery. SSR technique was standardized as mucosectomy (M) or partial (PISR)/complete (CISR) intersphincteric resection. RESULTS: Overall SSR rate was 85% (72% ISR), postoperative morbidity 27%, with no mortality. There were no significant differences between the HDR and RCT groups: 10-year overall survival (OS10) 70.1% versus 69.4%, respectively, 10.2% local recurrence (9.2%/14.5%) and 27.6% metastases (32.4%/27.7%). OS and disease-free survival were significantly longer for SSR (72.2% and 60.1%, respectively) versus APR (54.7% and 38.3%). No difference in OS10 between surgical approaches (M 78.9%, PISR 75.5%, CISR 65.5%) or tumour location (low 64.8%, ultralow 76.7%). CONCLUSION: GRECCAR 1 demonstrates the feasibility of safely changing an initial APR indication into an SSR procedure according to the preoperative treatment tumour response. Long-term oncologic follow-up validates this attitude.

Neck transection level and postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy: A retrospective cohort study of 195 patients.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the level of neck transection on clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) after standard pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) with pancreaticojejunostomy. METHOD: A total of 195 patients with an early postoperative CT scan were retrospectively analyzed and divided into 2 groups (CR-POPF and No CR-POPF) in order to seek potential risk factors for CR-POPF. We focused our analysis on the relationship between CR-POPF and the level of neck transection, defined by measuring the distance between the left side of the portal vein and the remnant pancreatic stump on the postoperative CT scan. RESULT: CR-POPF occurred in 58 out of 195 PD (29.7%); grade B (17%) and grade C (12.7%). The Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3 morbidity rate was 33% (65/195) and the mortality rate was 2.5% (5/195). Multivariate analysis indicated that a 'right-sided' level of neck transection (P = 0.007), a firm pancreatic texture (P = 0.001), and a PD for non-pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma histology (P = 0.032) were independent risk factors for CR-POPF. A full neck resection with systematic transection ≥7 mm at the left side of the portal vein seems to prevent CR-POPF harboring a protective effect (OR 0.056; 95% CI 0.003 to 0.978; P = 0.039). CONCLUSION: Here we further consolidate the concept describing the pancreatic neck as a vascular watershed, showing that a long remnant pancreatic neck could be an independent risk factor for CR-POPF after PD (NCT03850236). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND AGENCY: The present study was approved by our local ethics committee and was declared on ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT03850236).

Multimodal treatment including surgery for esophageal adenocarcinoma with liver oligo-metastases: a pathological complete response but early brain metastasis.

Survival of patients with stage IV esophageal adenocarcinoma is exceedingly poor, with less than 5% surviving 5 years. Current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend only palliative and supportive measures for patients with metastatic esophageal cancer. Treatment for stage IV disease is chemotherapy in selected patients, while the role of radiation therapy and surgical resection remain controversial. We report herein a young patient with esophageal adenocarcinoma and synchronous liver metastasis who underwent induction chemotherapy with encouraging downstaging, then two-field esophageal resection with left liver lobectomy. Despite a complete response of esophageal and residual liver lesions, early progression with isolated brain metastasis occurred 2 months after discharge. Our case highlights that despite progress in perioperative chemotherapy, the role of surgery remains uncertain for patients with esophageal cancer and synchronous M1 disease who exhibit excellent response to neoadjuvant treatment.

Laparoscopic repeat surgery for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: Results of the analyses of a cohort study of 117 patients from a multicenter experience.

BACKGROUND: Short and long-term outcomes after repeat anti-reflux surgery (RARS) are still debated and generally not considered as satisfying as after primary anti-reflux surgery (PARS). The aim of this study was to evaluate functional outcomes after RARS and risk factors associated to intra-operative and post-operative complications. METHODS: This is a multicenter retrospective survey from four European laparoscopic centers. Patients who underwent elective RARS from January 2005 to October 2017 for dysphagia or for persistent reflux disease refractory to medical treatment were analyzed. Data on demographic characteristics, including type and timing of previous operations as well as intra-operative details (surgical technique, type of RARS, conversion to open surgery, prosthetic material placement) were collected. Patients who underwent operations in the emergency setting, interventions mixed with bariatric procedures and PARS performed in other surgical departments were not included in this study. Primary endpoint of this study was to evaluate risk factors associated with intraoperative and postoperative complications. Secondary endpoint was to evaluate clinical outcomes and to identify any possible correlation with clinical and surgical parameters. RESULTS: Among 1662 patients who underwent PARS, failure occurred in 174 (10.5%) patients. Repeat surgery was performed in 117 (7%) patients, after a mean time of 80 months (range 4-315). RARS was carried out laparoscopically in 88% of cases. Prosthetic mesh to reinforce hiatoplasty was used in 22.2% of patients. Intra-operative upper gastro-intestinal tract's injuries occurred in 6 (5.1%) patients. Perioperative mortality was nil and 13 (11.1%) patients experienced postoperative complications. Mean length of hospital stay was 9.6 ± 6.4 days. Based on a multivariable analysis, age >70 years (OR 1.074, C.I.95% 1.018-1.133, p = 0.008) and body mass index (BMI) < 23 (OR 0.172, C.I.95% 0.052-0.568, p = 0.004) were independently associated to postoperative complications. After a mean follow-up time of 36 months (range 6-107), 24 (20.5%) patients presented recurrent symptoms. Based on a multivariable analysis, early onset of dysphagia (OR 3.539, C.I.95% 1.254-9.990, p = 0.017), open approach (OR 4.505, C.I.95% 1.314-15.442, p = 0.016) and the use of prosthetic material (OR 2.790, C.I.95% 0.930-8.776, p = 0.047) were significantly associated to good clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Repeat anti-reflux surgery is a safe and feasible procedure in high-volume centers, with acceptable perioperative outcomes. Long-term results are favorable with a success rate of almost 80%. Advanced age (>70 years) and low BMI (<23 kg/m2) were factor predicting perioperative complications. The use of prosthesis for hiatoplasty was associated to better functional outcomes.

Outcome after pancreatectomy for neuroendocrine neoplams according to the WHO 2017 grading system: A retrospective multicentric analysis of 138 consecutive patients.

AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the new World Health Organization (WHO) 2017 grading system and the others clinicopathological factors in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (panNET) operated patients. METHODS: Histological staging was based on the WHO 2017 grading system. Outcome after surgery and predictors of overall survival (OS) and disease free survival (DFS) were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 138 patients underwent surgical resection with a severe morbidity and mortality rates of 14.5% and 0.7% respectively. Five years OS differed according to WHO 2017: 95% among 58 patients with NETG1, 82% in 68 patients with NETG2, 35% in 7 patients with NETG3 and 0% in 5 patients with NECG3 (P<0.0001). Independent predictors of worse OS were age>60 y.o (P=0.014), synchronous metastasis (P=0.005) and WHO 2017 with significant differences between NETG1 versus NETG2 (P=0.005), NETG3 (P<0.001) and NECG3 (P<0.001). Independent predictors of worse DFS were symptomatic NET (P=0.038), pN+ status (P=0.027) and WHO 2017 with significant differences between NETG1 versus NETG3 (P=0.014) and NECG3 (P=0.009). CONCLUSION: The WHO 2017 grading system is a useful tool for patient prognosis after panNET resection and the tailoring of therapeutic strategy. Surgery could provide good results in NETG3 patients.