Usefulness of intraoperative bile culture in patients with acute calculous cholecystitis with previous biliary events: does the postoperative management change?

PURPOSE: The aim of our study was to determine the usefulness of intraoperative gallbladder cultures in the postoperative course in surgically treated patients with acute calculous cholecystitis and previous biliary events (ACC-PBE). METHODS: Retrospective unicenter study on surgically treated ACC-patients between January 2014 and December 2018. Clinical benefit was defined as a > 20% change in postoperative antibiotic treatment. Secondary endpoints: postoperative morbidity and length-of-stay (LOS) in ACC-PBE patients with positive intraoperative biliary culture (IBC). Statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05. RESULTS: Out of the initial 711 patients, 203 met the study's inclusion criteria, with 139 of them having IBC results (72 positive, 67 negative). Our analysis revealed no significant difference in the incidence of positive-IBC between patients with ACC-PBE. Among this group, only 6% changed postoperative antibiotic treatment based on IBC results. There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative complications (p: 0.21) or LOS (p: 0.23) in the ACC-PBE group. In multivariate analysis, age > 70 years old (p: 0.00; HR 3.1, 95% IC [1.6-6.4]), prior ERCP (p: 0.02; HR 5.9, 95% IC [1.25-27.5]) and prior antibiotic treatment (p: 0.01; HR 3.6, 95% IC [1.32-9.86]) were identified as independent factors that influenced PBC. CONCLUSIONS: IBC in operated ACC-PBE do not alter postoperative management. While positive-IBC was associated with age, prior ERCP, and prior antibiotic treatment, these findings did not have a significant impact on postoperative morbidity or LOS.

Pancreatectomía corporocaudal laparoscópica y robótica, de elección y de futuro / Laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy: The choice and the future

Introducción La pancreatectomía distal (PD) mínimamente invasiva (MIS) está actualmente bien establecida, ya sea mediante técnica laparoscópica (PDL) o robótica (PDR).MétodosDe 83 PD realizadas entre enero del 2018 y marzo del 2022, se realizaron 57 casos (68,7%) mediante MIS, 35 PDL y 22 PDR (da Vinci Xi). Se evalúa la experiencia de ambos procedimientos y el valor del abordaje robótico. Se analizan en detalle los casos de conversión.ResultadosEl tiempo quirúrgico medio en las PDL y PDR fue de 201,2 (DE 47,8) y 247,54 (DE 35,8) min, (p=0,486). No se observaron diferencias en estancia hospitalaria ni en tasa de conversión, 6 (5-34) vs. 5,6 (5-22) días y 4 (11,4%) vs. 3 (13,6%) casos, respectivamente, (p=0.126). La tasa de reingresos fue de 3/35 (11,4%) y 6/22 (27,3%) casos, PDL vs. PDR respectivamente, (p=0.126).No existieron diferencias en morbilidad (Dindo-Clavien ≥ III) entre ambos grupos. La mortalidad fue de un caso en el grupo robótico (un paciente con conversión precoz por afectación vascular). La tasa de resecciones R0 fue mayor en el grupo robótico (77,1% vs. 90,9%) alcanzando la significación estadística, p=0,04.ConclusionesLa PDMIS es un procedimiento seguro y factible en pacientes seleccionados. Una planificación quirúrgica y la implementación escalonada basada en la experiencia previa ayudan a afrontar procedimientos técnicamente exigentes. Se sugiere que la PDR podría ser el abordaje de elección en la pancreatectomía corporocaudal, no siendo inferior a la PDL. (AU)

Introduction Distal pancreatectomy (DP) is currently well established as a minimally invasive surgery (MIS) procedure, using either a laparoscopic (LDP) or robotic (RDP) approach.MethodsOut of 83 DP performed between January 2018 and March 2022, 57 cases (68.7%) were performed using MIS: 35 LDP and 22 RDP (da Vinci Xi). We have assessed the experience with the 2techniques and analyzed the value of the robotic approach. Cases of conversion have been examined in detail.ResultsThe mean operative times for LDP and RDP were 201.2 (SD 47.8) and 247.54 (SD 35.8)min, respectively (p=0,486). No differences were observed in length of hospital stay or conversion rate: 6 (5–34) vs. 5.6 (5–22) days, and 4 (11.4%) vs. 3 (13.6%) cases, respectively (p=0.126). The readmission rate was 3/35 patients (11.4%) treated with LDP and 6/22 (27.3%) cases of RDP (p=0.126).There were no differences in morbidity (Dindo-Clavien≥III) between the 2groups. Mortality was one case in the robotic group (a patient with early conversion due to vascular involvement). The rate of R0 resection was greater and statistically significant in the RDP group (77.1% vs. 90.9%) (P=,04).ConclusionsMinimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is a safe and feasible procedure in selected patients. Surgical planning and stepwise implementation based on prior experience help surgeons successfully perform technically demanding procedures. RDP could be the approach of choice in distal pancreatectomy, and it is not inferior to LDP. (AU)

Análisis retrospectivo de los resultados a largo plazo de la estrategia inversa en pacientes con cáncer colorrectal y enfermedad hepática metastásica sincrónica avanzada / Long-term results of liver-first approach strategy in patients with advanced synchronous liver metastases from colorectal cancer

Introducción: La estrategia inversa (EI) es un esquema indicado en pacientes con cáncer colorrectal (CCR) y metástasis hepáticas sincrónicas (MHS) avanzadas. Incluye quimioterapia neoadyuvante, seguido de resección hepática y, por último, resección del CCR. Material: Estudio descriptivo retrospectivo sobre una base de datos prospectiva de hepatectomías por metástasis hepáticas de CCR en 2 centros entre 2007 y 2019. Se incluyeron 88 pacientes con CCR y MHS. La enfermedad hepática fue bilobar en un 65,9%, el número y el tamaño medio de las lesiones fue de 5,5 y 42,7mm, respectivamente. La respuesta radiológica al tratamiento se evaluó mediante criterios RECIST. La supervivencia libre de progresión (SLP) y la supervivencia global (SG) media se estimaron mediante el método de Kaplan-Meier y regresión de Cox.Resultados: De los 88 pacientes, 75 completaron la EI (85,2%). La respuesta radiológica fue parcial en el 75,7% y la estabilización en el 22,8%. La tasa de morbilidad (Clavien-Dindo ≥IIIA) tras la cirugía hepática y colorrectal fue del 29,4 y 9,3%, respectivamente. No hubo mortalidad a los 90 días. La tasa de recurrencia fue del 76%. Se diagnosticaron 106 recurrencias en 56 pacientes. De estos, se realizó tratamiento quirúrgico asociado a quimioterapia en 34 (32,1%). La SLP fue de 8,5 meses y la SG a 5 años fue del 53%. Conclusiones: En pacientes con CCR y MHS la EI permite el control inicial de la enfermedad metastásica, seleccionar pacientes respondedores a la neoadyuvancia y optimizar las posibilidades de resección completa, influyendo en la supervivencia a largo plazo. (AU)

Background: The “liver-first” approach (LFA) is a strategy indicated for advanced synchronous liver metastases (ASLM) from colorectal cancer (CRC). Includes neoadjuvant chemotherapy, resection of the ASLM followed by CRC resection.Methods: Retrospective descriptive analysis from a prospective database of hepatectomies from liver metastases (LM) from CRC in two centers. Between 2007-2019, 88 patients with CRC-ASLM were included in a LFA scheme. Bilobar (LM) was present in 65.9%, the mean number of lesions was 5.5 and mean size 42.7mm. Response to treatment was assessed by RECIST criteria. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Results: Seventy-five of 88 patients (85.2%) completed the LFA. RECIST evaluation showed partial response in 75.7% and stable disease in 22.8%. Severe morbidity rate (Clavien–Dindo ≥ IIIA) after liver and colorectal surgery was present in 29.4% and 9.3%, respectively. There was no 90-day postoperative mortality in both liver and colorectal surgeries. Recurrence rate was 76%, being the liver the most frequent site, followed by the pulmonary. From the total number of recurrences (106) in 56 patients, surgical with chemotherapy rescue treatment was accomplished in 34 of them (32.1%). The mean PFS was 8.5 and 5-year OS was 53%. Conclusions: In patients with CRC-ASLM the LFA allows control of the liver disease beforehand and an assessment of the tumor response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, optimising the chance of potentially curative liver resection, which influences long-term survival. (AU)

Laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy: the choice and the future.

INTRODUCTION: Distal pancreatectomy (DP) is currently well established as a minimally invasive surgery (MIS) procedure, using either a laparoscopic (LDP) or robotic (RDP) approach. METHODS: Out of 83 DP performed between January 2018 and March 2022, 57 cases (68.7%) were performed using MIS: 35 LDP and 22 RDP (da Vinci Xi). We have assessed the experience with the two techniques and analyzed the value of the robotic approach. Cases of conversion have been examined in detail. RESULTS: The mean operative times for LDP and RDP were 201.2 (SD 47.8) and 247.54 (SD 35.8) minutes, respectively (P = NS). No differences were observed in length of hospital stay or conversion rate: 6 (5-34) vs. 5.6 (5-22) days, and 4 (11.4%) vs. 3 (13.6%) cases, respectively (P = NS). The readmission rate was 3/35 patients (11.4%) treated with LDP and 6/22 (27.3%) cases of RDP (P = NS). There were no differences in morbidity (Dindo-Clavien ≥ III) between the two groups. Mortality was one case in the robotic group (a patient with early conversion due to vascular involvement). The rate of R0 resection was greater and statistically significant in the RDP group (77.1% vs. 90.9%) (P = .04). CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is a safe and feasible procedure in selected patients. Surgical planning and stepwise implementation based on prior experience help surgeons successfully perform technically demanding procedures. RDP could be the approach of choice in distal pancreatectomy, and it is not inferior to LDP.

Long-term results of liver-first approach strategy in patients with advanced synchronous liver metastases from colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The "liver-first" approach (LFA) is a strategy indicated for advanced synchronous liver metastases (ASLM) from colorectal cancer (CRC). Includes neoadjuvant chemotherapy, resection of the ASLM followed by CRC resection. METHODS: Retrospective descriptive analysis from a prospective database of hepatectomies from liver metastases (LM) from CRC in two centers. Between 2007-2019, 88 patients with CRC-ASLM were included in a LFA scheme. Bilobar (LM) was present in 65.9%, the mean number of lesions was 5.5 and mean size 42.7 mm. Response to treatment was assessed by RECIST criteria. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier survival curves. RESULTS: Seventy-five of 88 patients (85.2%) completed the LFA. RECIST evaluation showed partial response in 75.7% and stable disease in 22.8%. Severe morbidity rate (Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIA) after liver and colorectal surgery was present in 29.4% and 9.3%, respectively. There was no 90-day postoperative mortality in both liver and colorectal surgeries. Recurrence rate was 76%, being the liver the most frequent site, followed by the pulmonary. From the total number of recurrences (106) in 56 patients, surgical with chemotherapy rescue treatment was accomplished in 34 of them (32.1%). The mean PFS was 8.5 and 5-year OS was 53%. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CRC-ASLM the LFA allows control of the liver disease beforehand and an assessment of the tumor response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, optimising the chance of potentially curative liver resection, which influences long-term survival.

Luces y sombras de la duodenopancreatectomía cefálica laparoscópica / Highs and lows in laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy

Introducción: La duodenopancreatectomía (DPC) laparoscópica no es ampliamente aceptada y su uso es controvertido. Únicamente una correcta selección de los pacientes y un aprendizaje adecuado por grupos con experiencia en cirugía pancreática y laparoscopia podrán establecer cuál es su papel y sus hipotéticas ventajas. Métodos: De 138 cirugías pancreáticas realizadas en un periodo de dos años (2017-2019) se realizaron 23 DPC laparoscópicas, incluyendo patología benigna y maligna. Se valora la eficacia y seguridad y se compara con 31 DPC abiertas en el mismo periodo. Resultados: No hubo casos de fístula pancreática B/C, biliar, ni retraso en vaciamiento gástrico en el grupo laparoscópico, pero apareció una hemorragia que obligó a una reintervención. El índice de conversión fue del 21% (cinco casos), uno por hemorragia y el resto por no progresión. Los convertidos no mostraron diferencias frente a los que se completó por laparoscopia. No existieron diferencias entre la DPC laparoscópica y abierta en tiempo quirúrgico, complicaciones postoperatorias, índice de reintervenciones, reingresos ni mortalidad. La resección R0 en los casos tumores fue del 85% por laparoscopia y del 69% en cirugía abierta sin significación estadística. La estancia postoperatoria fue inferior en el grupo DPC laparoscópica, ocho vs. 15 días. Conclusiones: En un grupo seleccionado, la DPC laparoscópica puede realizarse de forma segura y eficaz si se realiza por grupos expertos en cirugía pancreática y en laparoscopia avanzada. Obtiene los mismos resultados que la cirugía abierta en el postoperatorio y es oncológicamente adecuada con menor estancia hospitalaria. Una selección adecuada de los pacientes, un programa establecido por pasos con una conversión laxa y precoz evita accidentes operatorios graves. (AU)

Introduction: Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is not widely accepted, and its use is controversial. Only correct patient selection and appropriate training of groups experienced in pancreatic surgery and laparoscopy will be able to establish its role and its hypothetical advantages Methods: Out of 138 pancreatic surgeries performed in a two-year period (2017-2019), 23 were laparoscopic PD. We evaluate its efficacy and safety compared to 31 open PD. Results: There were no cases of B/C pancreatic or biliary fistula, nor any cases of delayed gastric emptying in the laparoscopic group, but hemorrhage required one reoperation. The conversion rate was 21% (five cases): one due to bleeding, and the remainder for non-progression. The converted patients showed no differences compared to those completed by laparoscopy. There were no differences between laparoscopic and open PD in surgical time, postoperative complications, reintervention rate, readmissions or mortality. R0 resection in tumor cases was 85% for laparoscopy and 69% in open surgery without statistical significance. The postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscopic PD group (eight vs. 15 days). Conclusions: In a selected group, laparoscopic PD can be safely and effectively performed if carried out by groups who are experts in pancreatic surgery and advanced laparoscopy. The technique has the same postoperative results as open surgery and is oncologically adequate, with less hospital stay. Proper patient selection, a step-by-step program and a lax and early conversion prevents serious operating accidents. (AU)

Highs and lows in laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is not widely accepted, and its use is controversial. Only correct patient selection and appropriate training of groups experienced in pancreatic surgery and laparoscopy will be able to establish its role and its hypothetical advantages. METHODS: Out of 138 pancreatic surgeries performed in a two-year period (2017-2019), 23 were laparoscopic PD. We evaluate its efficacy and safety compared to 31 open PD. RESULTS: There were no cases of B/C pancreatic or biliary fistula, nor any cases of delayed gastric emptying in the laparoscopic group, but hemorrhage required one reoperation. The conversion rate was 21% (five cases): one due to bleeding, and the remainder for non-progression. The converted patients showed no differences compared to those completed by laparoscopy. There were no differences between laparoscopic and open PD in surgical time, postoperative complications, reintervention rate, readmissions or mortality. R0 resection in tumor cases was 85% for laparoscopy and 69% in open surgery without statistical significance. The postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscopic PD group (eight vs. 15 days). CONCLUSIONS: In a selected group, laparoscopic PD can be safely and effectively performed if carried out by groups who are experts in pancreatic surgery and advanced laparoscopy. The technique has the same postoperative results as open surgery and is oncologically adequate, with less hospital stay. Proper patient selection, a step-by-step program and a lax and early conversion prevents serious operating accidents.

Laparoscopic Caudal Approach of the Inferior Vena Cava for Isolated Segment 1 Liver Resection.

INTRODUCTION: Isolated laparoscopic resection of the hepatic caudate lobe (segment 1) is a very challenging procedure. Very few references are available on this technique, and the aim of this paper is to show the main technical aspects of laparoscopic caudal approach for segment 1. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The subject was a 64-year-old woman with a past medical history of surgically treated breast cancer (pT1N0M0, with positive hormonal receptors). Adjuvant treatment was administered as well as radiotherapy and hormone therapy (tamoxifen). After 12 months of follow-up, an 18-mm single liver metastasis was detected in segment 1, suggestive of metastatic disease. A complementary study was conducted with magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography and positron emission tomography, and no other lesions were identified. RESULTS: Isolated laparoscopic resection of segment 1 of the liver was performed with a caudal approach of the inferior vena cava. All the steps are extensively described. The surgery time was 120 min, and blood loss was less than 100 ml. No postoperative complications were registered. The patient was discharged on the third postoperative day. CONCLUSION: Isolated laparoscopic resection of the hepatic caudate lobe with a caudal approach of the inferior vena cava is a safe technique in selected patients and should be performed in centres with experience in liver surgery and advanced laparoscopy, because of its high complexity.

Highs and lows in laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy. / Luces y sombras de la duodenopancreatectomía cefálica laparoscópica.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is not widely accepted, and its use is controversial. Only correct patient selection and appropriate training of groups experienced in pancreatic surgery and laparoscopy will be able to establish its role and its hypothetical advantages METHODS: Out of 138 pancreatic surgeries performed in a two-year period (2017-2019), 23 were laparoscopic PD. We evaluate its efficacy and safety compared to 31 open PD. RESULTS: There were no cases of B/C pancreatic or biliary fistula, nor any cases of delayed gastric emptying in the laparoscopic group, but hemorrhage required one reoperation. The conversion rate was 21% (five cases): one due to bleeding, and the remainder for non-progression. The converted patients showed no differences compared to those completed by laparoscopy. There were no differences between laparoscopic and open PD in surgical time, postoperative complications, reintervention rate, readmissions or mortality. R0 resection in tumor cases was 85% for laparoscopy and 69% in open surgery without statistical significance. The postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscopic PD group (eight vs. 15 days). CONCLUSIONS: In a selected group, laparoscopic PD can be safely and effectively performed if carried out by groups who are experts in pancreatic surgery and advanced laparoscopy. The technique has the same postoperative results as open surgery and is oncologically adequate, with less hospital stay. Proper patient selection, a step-by-step program and a lax and early conversion prevents serious operating accidents.

Ampulectomía transduodenal laparoscópica por tumor ampular / Laparoscopic transduodenal ampullectomy for ampullary tumor

No disponible

Injerto autólogo de ligamento falciforme para la reconstrucción vascular en cirugía oncológica de páncreas / Autologous falciform ligament graft for vascular reconstruction in pancreatic cancer surgery

No disponible