Prognostic impact of positive microscopic margins (R1 resection) in patients with GIST (gastrointestinal stromal tumours): Results of a multicenter European study.

BACKGROUND: Although several prognostic factors in GIST have been well studied such as tumour size, mitotic rate, or localization, the influence of microscopic margins or R1 resection remains controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of R1 resection on the prognosis of GIST in a large multicentre retrospective series of patients. METHODS: From 2001 to 2013, 1413 patients who underwent surgery for any site of GIST were identified from 61 European centers. 1098 patients were included, excluding synchronous metastases, concurrent malignancies, R2 resection or GIST recurrence. Tumour rupture (TR) was reclassified according to the Oslo sarcoma classification. Cox proportional hazards ratio and Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were used to analyse 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS). RESULTS: Of 1098 patients, 38 (3%) underwent R1 resection with a risk of TR of 11%. The 5-year RFS was 89.6% with a median follow-up of 81 months [range: 31.2-152 months]. On univariate analysis, lower RFS was significantly associated with R1 resection [HR = 2.13; p = 0.04], high risk score according to the modified NIH classification, administration of adjuvant therapy [HR = 2.24; p < 0.001] and intraoperative complications [HR = 2.82; p < 0.001]. Only intraoperative complications [HR = 1.79; p = 0.02] and high risk according to the modified NIH classification including the updated definition of TR [HR = 3.43; p = 0.04] remained significant on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: This study shows that positive microscopic margins are not an independent predictive factor for RFS in GIST when taking into account the up-dated classification of TR. R1 resection may be considered a reasonable alternative to avoid major functional sequelae and should not lead to reoperation.

Preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT in Patients with Presumed Localized Colon Cancer: A Prospective Study with Long-Term Follow-Up.

We analyzed whether preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT adds to conventional primary staging in patients with presumed non-metastatic colonic cancer (CC). The prognostic role of 18F-FDG uptake in the primary tumor was evaluated after a mean follow-up of 15 years. Patients with a new diagnosis of presumed localized CC were prospectively enrolled and underwent presurgical 18F-FDG PET/CT. For each colon lesion, SUVmax, SUVpeak, TLG, and MTV were assessed and tested as prognostic factors. Forty-eight patients were included. Post-surgery pathology identified a total of 103 colon lesions, including 58 invasive adenocarcinomas, 4 in situ adenocarcinomas, 3 adenomas with high-grade dysplasia, and 38 adenomas with low-grade dysplasia. Per lesion sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPVs) and negative predictive values (NPVs) for colonic primary tumor detection were 78%, 97%, 98%, and 73% for conventional workup, and 94%, 87%, 92%, and 89% for 18F-FDG PET/CT. Only sensitivity was significantly different between 18F-FDG PET/CT and conventional workup. PET detected an additional ten pathological colonic lesions in seven patients. SUVmax, SUVpeak, and TLG showed significant differences between invasive adenocarcinomas, in situ adenocarcinomas, and high-grade dysplasia compared to low-grade dysplasia. There was a statistically significant difference between pT1-pT2 and pT3-pT4 adenocarcinomas. On patient-based analysis, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV for nodal staging were 22%, 84%, 44%, and 65% for CECT, and 33%, 90%, 67%, and 70% for 18F-FDG PET/CT, without a statistically significant difference. PET/CT also identified unknown metastatic spread and one synchronous lung cancer in four patients. Overall, 18F-FDG PETCT had an additional diagnostic value in 11 out of 48 patients (23%). 18F-FDG uptake of the primary tumor did not predict nodal or distant metastases. The difference in disease-free survival categorized by median SUVmax, SUVpeak, TLG, and MTV was not significant. Finally, preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT is valuable in detecting potential colon lesions not visualized by conventional workups, especially in cases of incomplete colonoscopy. It effectively highlights distant metastases but exhibits limitations for N staging. Mainly due to the relatively small sample size, the quantitative analysis of 18F-FDG uptake in the primary tumor did not reveal any association with recurrence or disease-free survival, adding no significant prognostic information.

Is Delaying a Coloanal Anastomosis the Ideal Solution for Rectal Surgery?: Analysis of a Multicentric Cohort of 564 Patients From the GRECCAR.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the specific results of delayed coloanal anastomosis (DCAA) in light of its 2 main indications. BACKGROUND: DCAA can be proposed either immediately after a low anterior resection (primary DCAA) or after the failure of a primary pelvic surgery as a salvage procedure (salvage DCAA). METHODS: All patients who underwent DCAA intervention at 30 GRECCAR-affiliated hospitals between 2010 and 2021 were retrospectively included. RESULTS: Five hundred sixty-four patients (male: 63%; median age: 62 years; interquartile range: 53-69) underwent a DCAA: 66% for primary DCAA and 34% for salvage DCAA. Overall morbidity, major morbidity, and mortality were 57%, 30%, and 1.1%, respectively, without any significant differences between primary DCAA and salvage DCAA ( P = 0.933; P = 0.238, and P = 0.410, respectively). Anastomotic leakage was more frequent after salvage DCAA (23%) than after primary DCAA (15%), ( P = 0.016).Fifty-five patients (10%) developed necrosis of the intra-abdominal colon. In multivariate analysis, intra-abdominal colon necrosis was significantly associated with male sex [odds ratio (OR) = 2.67 95% CI: 1.22-6.49; P = 0.020], body mass index >25 (OR = 2.78 95% CI: 1.37-6.00; P = 0.006), and peripheral artery disease (OR = 4.68 95% CI: 1.12-19.1; P = 0.030). The occurrence of this complication was similar between primary DCAA (11%) and salvage DCAA (8%), ( P = 0.289).Preservation of bowel continuity was reached 3 years after DCAA in 74% of the cohort (primary DCAA: 77% vs salvage DCAA: 68%, P = 0.031). Among patients with a DCAA mannered without diverting stoma, 75% (301/403) have never required a stoma at the last follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: DCAA makes it possible to definitively avoid a stoma in 75% of patients when mannered initially without a stoma and to save bowel continuity in 68% of the patients in the setting of failure of primary pelvic surgery.

Implementation of an enhanced recovery program for complete cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in a referral center: a case control prospective study.

Objectives: Current recommendations regarding enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) after complete cytoreductive surgery (CCRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) are based on a low level of evidence. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of implementing an adapted ERP for CCRS and HIPEC in a referral center. Methods: We conducted a study with a prospective group of 44 patients (post-ERP group) who underwent CCRS with HIPEC between July 2016 and June 2018, the period during which ERP was implemented. This group was compared to a second retrospective group of 21 patients who underwent CCRS with HIPEC between June 2015 and June 2016, during which ERP was not yet implemented (pre-ERP group). Results: The ERP compliance rate was 65% in the post-ERP group. The hospital length of stay (HLS) was shorter in the post-ERP group: 24.9 days (IQR 11-68, pre-ERP group) vs. 16.1 days (IQR 6-45, post-ERP group), as was the major morbidity rate (pre-ERP group=33.3% vs. post-ERP group=20.5%). The nasogastric tube, urinary catheter and abdominal drains were all retrieved faster in the post-ERP group. Conclusions: The implementation of an adapted ERP after CCRS with HIPEC procedures reduces morbidity and shortens the HLS.

The Angers CT Score is a Risk Factor for the Failure of the Conservative Management of Adhesive Small Bowel Obstruction: A Prospective Observational Multicentric Study.

BACKGROUND: Identifying the 30% of adhesive small bowel obstructions (aSBO) for which conservative management will require surgery is essential. The association between the previously described radiological score and failure of the conservative management of aSBO remains to be confirmed in a large prospective multicentric cohort. Our aim was to assess the risk factors of failure of the conservative management of aSBO considering the radiological score. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This prospective observational study took place in 15 French centers over 3 months. Consecutive patients experiencing aSBO with no early surgery were included. The six radiological features from the Angers radiological computed tomography (CT) score were noted (beak sign, closed loop, focal or diffuse intraperitoneal liquid, focal or diffuse mesenteric haziness, focal or diffuse mesenteric liquid, and diameter of the most dilated small bowel loop > 40 mm). RESULTS: Two hundred and seventy nine patients with aSBO were screened. Sixty patients (21.5%) underwent early surgery, and 219 (78.5%) had primary conservative management. In the end, 218 patients were included in the analysis of the risk factors for conservative treatment failure. Among them, 162 (74.3%) had had successful management while for 56 (25.7%) management had failed. In multivariate analysis, a history of surgery was not a significant risk factor for the failure of conservative treatment (OR = 0.11; 95%CI = 0-1.23). A previous episode of aSBO was protective against the failure of conservative treatment (OR = 0.36; 95%CI = 0.15-0.85) and an Angers CT score ≥ 5 as the only individual risk factor (OR = 2.39; 95%CI = 1.01-5.69). CONCLUSION: The radiological score of aSBO is a promising tool in improving the management of aSBO patients. A first episode of aSBO and/or a radiological score ≥5 should lead physicians to consider early surgical management.

Impact of Preoperative Protein Sparing Modified Fast Diet on Bariatric Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Bariatric surgery can become technically challenging in the setting of liver steatosis and hepatomegaly. The protein sparing modified fast (PSMF) diet helps in achieving rapid weight loss. The aim of this study is to explore the results of a preoperative PSMF diet on liver volume and steatosis as well as on intraoperative and postoperative complications in patients with hepatomegaly undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). METHODS: Between January 2010 and January 2021, 713 patients undergoing RYGB as a primary bariatric surgery were divided in two groups. Those with a measured liver length above 16 cm and or evidence of liver steatosis on ultrasound (group 1) were offered a preoperative PSMF diet while the remaining (group 2) proceeded directly to surgery. Between January 2010 and April 2012, patients included in group 1 had liver volume measurements on magnetic resonance imaging the day before the diet was started and the day before the surgery. For the length of the study, intraoperative and postoperative data were recorded for both groups. RESULTS: Five days of preoperative PSMF diet resulted in a significant reduction of total and left liver volume (15.8% and 21% respectively, p < 0.001). There was no difference in intraoperative bleeding and conversion rate or postoperative complication rate between both groups. CONCLUSION: The PSMF diet helps in achieving a rapid decrease in liver volume. Patients with hepatomegaly initially thought to be at a higher risk of intraoperative complications reached comparable rates to patients without hepatomegaly after the diet regimen without any impact on the postoperative course.

Sarcopenia remaining after intensive nutritional feeding support could be a criterion for the selection of patients for surgery for oesogastric junction adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia is recognized as a negative prognostic factor in several cancers. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of nutritional support with feeding jejunostomy (FJ) on the occurrence of sarcopenia and how it may affect postoperative short-term outcomes and long-term survival outcomes in patients undergoing esophagectomy for oesogastric junction adenocarcinoma (OJA). METHODS: Patients with OJA were included. The presence of sarcopenia was determined using cutoff values of the total cross-sectional muscle tissue measured on CT scan. We analyzed risk factors for sarcopenia occurrence and the impact of preoperative sarcopenia on postoperative results, overall survival and disease-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 124 patients were eligible for analysis. Ninety-one patients underwent surgery after chemotherapy, and 72 of them received preoperative FJ. Among the 91 patients, 21 patients (23.0%) were sarcopenic after preoperative chemotherapy. Multivariate analysis showed that FJ is a protective factor against sarcopenia occurrence. Overall survival was significantly different between sarcopenic and nonsarcopenic patients (median survival = 33.7 vs. 58.6 months, respectively, p = 0.04), and sarcopenia occurrence was an independent risk factor for overall survival in patients who underwent surgery (HR = 3.02; CI 95% 1.55-5.9; p < 0.005). Subgroup analyses showed no differences in overall survival between patients who presented sarcopenia despite nutritional prehabilitation with a FJ and patients excluded from surgery in palliative situations (median survival = 21.9 vs. 17.2 months, respectively, p = 0.46). CONCLUSION: The persistence of sarcopenia after preoperative chemotherapy despite renutrition with FJ could be a selection factor to propose curative surgery for OJA.

Peritoneal Metastases of Colorectal Origin Treated with Complete Cytoreduction and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: The Efficiency of Mitomycin C.

BACKGROUND: Survival of patients affected by colorectal cancer peritoneal metastases (CRC-PM) can be improved with combined complete cytoreductive surgery (CCRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). Two chemotherapeutic agents are mainly used: mitomycin C (MMC) and oxaliplatin. A recent prospective randomized clinical trial showed that oxaliplatin-based HIPEC does not improve survival compared with CCRS alone. The purpose of our study was to compare the survival effectiveness of MMC versus oxaliplatin-based HIPEC using a homogeneous surgical technique and drug protocol. METHODS: This retrospective monocentric study included all patients prospectively registered for having undergone CCRS and HIPEC using MMC or oxaliplatin for CRC-PM in Strasbourg University Hospital, France, from December 2004 until December 2019. MMC-based HIPEC and oxaliplatin-based HIPEC groups were compared with an inverse probability of treatment weighting. RESULTS: A total of 137 patients were included. Groups were comparable for all baseline characteristics except for peritoneal carcinomatosis index. In the weighted multivariate analysis, disease-free survival (DFS) and peritoneal disease-free survival (PDFS) were significantly higher in the MMC-based HIPEC group compared with the oxaliplatin-based HIPEC group with a hazard ratio of 0.74 (CI 95% 0.56-0.98), p = 0.035 and 0.59 (CI 95% 0.40-0.98), p = 0.0084, respectively. There was no difference in overall survival or postoperative morbidity between groups. CONCLUSIONS: These results favor a superiority of MMC for DFS and PDFS in comparison with oxaliplatin in HIPEC after CCRS in treatment with curative intent for CRC-PM.

CDX2 controls genes involved in the metabolism of 5-fluorouracil and is associated with reduced efficacy of chemotherapy in colorectal cancer.

Most patients affected with colorectal cancers (CRC) are treated with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based chemotherapy but its efficacy is often hampered by resistance mechanisms linked to tumor heterogeneity. A better understanding of the molecular determinants involved in chemoresistance is critical for precision medicine and therapeutic progress. Caudal type homeobox 2 (CDX2) is a master regulator of intestinal identity and acts as tumor suppressor in the colon. Here, using a translational approach, we examined the role of CDX2 in CRC chemoresistance. Unexpectedly, we discovered that the prognosis value of CDX2 for disease-free survival of patients affected with CRC is lost upon chemotherapy and that CDX2 expression enhances resistance of colon cancer cells towards 5-FU. At the molecular level, we found that CDX2 expression correlates with higher levels of genes regulating the bioavailability of 5-FU through efflux (ABCC11) and catabolism (DPYD) in patients affected with CRC and CRC cell lines. We further showed that CDX2 directly regulates the expression of ABCC11 and that the inhibition of ABCC11 improves 5-FU-sensitivity of CDX2-expressing colon cancer cells. Thus, this study illustrates how biological functions are hijacked in CRC cells and reveals the therapeutic interest of CDX2/ABCC11/DPYD to improve systemic chemotherapy in CRC.

Does baseline quality of life predict the occurrence of complications in resectable esophageal cancer?

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of baseline health related quality of life (HRQOL) on the occurrence of postoperative complications and death in patients with resectable esophageal cancer. METHODS: Existing data from a prospective, multicenter, open label, randomized, controlled phase III trial comparing hybrid versus open esophagectomy in patients with resectable esophageal cancer from 2009 to 2012 in France were used. A Cox regression model was used to assess the prognostic value of the baseline HRQOL score on the occurrence of major complications (MC), and major pulmonary complications (MPC) at 30 days post-surgery, as well as on 1-year postoperative overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Every 10-point increase in the baseline role functioning score was associated with a 14% reduction in the risk of MC, while every 10-point increase in fatigue or pain score was associated with an 18% increase in the risk of MC. Similarly, higher scores on fatigue and pain were associated with a higher risk of MPC. Compared with the hybrid procedure, patients undergoing open esophagectomy had a significantly higher risk of MC and MPC. Patients diagnosed with esophageal adenocarcinoma were at significantly lower risk of MC or MPC compared to patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Higher pain (HR = 1.23, p = 0.035) and insomnia (HR = 1.16, P = 0.031) scores were associated with increased 1-year OS. CONCLUSION: Fatigue, pain, insomnia, and squamous cell pathology were indicators of poor prognosis, and that the presence of these findings might possibly change the management plan towards other forms of treatment and warrant close attention.

What Is the Optimal Elective Colectomy for Splenic Flexure Cancer: End of the Debate? A Multicenter Study From the GRECCAR Group With a Propensity Score Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The optimal elective colectomy in patients with splenic flexure tumor is debated. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare splenic flexure colectomy, left hemicolectomy, and subtotal colectomy for perioperative, histological, and survival outcomes in this setting. DESIGN: This is a multicenter retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Patients diagnosed with nonmetastatic splenic flexure tumor who underwent elective colectomy were included. PATIENTS: Between 2006 and 2014, 313 consecutive patients were operated on in 15 French Research Group of Rectal Cancer Surgery centers. INTERVENTIONS: Propensity score weighting was performed to compare short- and long-term outcomes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was disease-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, quality of surgical resection, overall postoperative morbidity, surgical postoperative morbidity, and rate of anastomotic leakage. RESULTS: The most performed surgery was splenic flexure colectomy (59%), followed by subtotal colectomy (23%) and left hemicolectomy (18%). Subtotal colectomy was more often performed by laparotomy compared with splenic flexure colectomy and left hemicolectomy (93% vs 61% vs 56%, p < 0.0001), and was associated with a longer operative time (260 minutes (120-460) vs 180 minutes (68-440) vs 217 minutes (149-480), p < 0.0001). Postoperative morbidity was similar between the 3 groups, but the median length of hospital stay was significantly longer after subtotal colectomy (13 days (5-56) vs 10 (4-175) vs 9 (4-55), p = 0.0007). The median number of harvested lymph nodes was significantly higher after subtotal colectomy compared with splenic flexure colectomy and left hemicolectomy (24 (8-90) vs 15 (1-81) vs 16 (3-52), p < 0.0001). The rate of stage III disease and the number of patients treated by adjuvant chemotherapy were similar between the 3 groups. There was no difference in terms of disease-free survival and overall survival between the 3 procedures. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by its retrospective design. CONCLUSIONS: In the elective setting, splenic flexure colectomy is safe and oncologically adequate for patients with nonmetastatic splenic flexure tumor. However, given the oncological clearance after splenic flexure colectomy, it seems that the debate is not completely closed. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B703. CUL ES LA COLECTOMA ELECTIVA PTIMA PARA EL CNCER DE NGULO ESPLNICO FIN DEL DEBATE UN ESTUDIO MULTICNTRICO DEL GRUPO GRECCAR CON UN ANLISIS DE PUNTAJE DE PROPENSIN: ANTECEDENTES:La colectomía electiva óptima en pacientes con tumores del ángulo esplénico continua en debate.OBJETIVO:Comparar la colectomía de ángulo esplénico, hemicolectomía izquierda y colectomía subtotal para los resultados perioperatorios, histológicos y de supervivencia en este escenario.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo multicéntrico.ESCENARIO:Se incluyeron pacientes diagnosticados de tumores del ángulo esplénico no metastásicos que se sometieron a colectomía electiva.PACIENTES:Entre 2006 y 2014, 313 pacientes consecutivos fueron intervenidos en 15 centros GRECCAR.INTERVENCIONES:Se realizó una ponderación del puntaje de propensión para comparar los resultados a corto y largo plazo.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El criterio de valoración principal fue la supervivencia libre de enfermedad. Los criterios de valoración secundarios incluyeron la supervivencia general, la calidad de la resección quirúrgica, la morbilidad posoperatoria general, la morbilidad posoperatoria quirúrgica y la tasa de fuga anastomótica.RESULTADOS:La cirugía más realizada fue la colectomía del ángulo esplénico (59%), seguida de la colectomía subtotal (23%) y la hemicolectomía izquierda (18%). La colectomía subtotal se realizó con mayor frecuencia mediante laparotomía en comparación con la colectomía de ángulo esplénico y la hemicolectomía izquierda (93% frente a 61% frente a 56%, p <0.0001), y se asoció con un tiempo quirúrgico más prolongado (260 min [120-460] frente a 180 min [68-440] frente a 217 min [149-480], p <0.0001). La morbilidad posoperatoria fue similar entre los tres grupos, pero la duración media de la estancia hospitalaria fue significativamente más prolongada después de la colectomía subtotal (13 días [5-56] frente a 10 [4-175] frente a 9 [4-55], p = 0.0007). La mediana del número de ganglios linfáticos extraídos fue significativamente mayor después de la colectomía subtotal en comparación con la colectomía del ángulo esplénico y la hemicolectomía izquierda (24 [8-90] frente a 15 [1-81] frente a 16 [3-52], p <0.0001). La tasa de enfermedad en estadio III y el número de pacientes tratados con quimioterapia adyuvante fueron similares entre los 3 grupos. No hubo diferencias en términos de supervivencia libre de enfermedad y supervivencia general entre los 3 procedimientos.LIMITACIONES:El estudio estuvo limitado por su diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIONES:En un escenario electivo, la colectomía del ángulo esplénico es segura y oncológicamente adecuada para pacientes con tumores del ángulo esplénico no metastásicos. Sin embargo, dado el aclaramiento oncológico tras la colectomía del ángulo esplénico, parece que el debate no está completamente cerrado. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B703.

Half of Postoperative Deaths After Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Could be Preventable: A French Root Cause Analysis on 5562 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a retrospective root-cause analysis of postoperative death after CRS and HIPEC procedures. BACKGROUND: The combination of CRS and HIPEC is an effective therapeutic strategy to treat peritoneal surface malignancies, however it is associated with significant postoperative mortality. METHODS: All patients treated with a combination of CRS and HIPEC between January 2009 and December 2018 in 22 French centers and died in the hospital, were retrospectively analyzed. Perioperative data of the 101 patients were collected by a local senior surgeon with a sole junior surgeon. Three independent experts investigated the typical root cause of death and provided conclusions on whether postoperative death was preventable (PREV group) or not (NON-PREV group). A typical root cause of preventable postoperative death was classified on a cause-and-effect diagram. RESULTS: Of the 5562 CRS+HIPEC procedures performed, 101 in-hospital deaths (1.8%) were identified, of which a total of 18 patients of 70 years old and above and 20 patients with ASA score of 3. Etiology of peritoneal disease was mainly colorectal. A total of 54 patients (53%) were classified in the PREV group and 47 patients (47%) in the NON-PREV group. The results of the study show that in the PREV group, WHO performance status 1-2 was more frequent and the Median Peritoneal Cancer Index was higher compared with those of the NON-PREV group. The cause of death in the PREV group was classified as: (i) preoperatively for debatable indication (59%), (ii) intraoperatively (30%) and (iii) postoperatively in 17 patients (31%). A multifactorial cause of death was found in 11 patients (20%). CONCLUSION: More than half of the postoperative deaths after combined CRS and HIPEC may be preventable, mainly by following guidelines regarding preoperative selection of the patients and adequate intraoperative decisions.

Current practice and perceptions of safety protocols for the use of intraperitoneal chemotherapy in the operating room: results of the IP-OR international survey.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the risk perception and the uptake of measures preventing environment-related risks in the operating room (OR) during hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). METHODS: A multicentric, international survey among OR teams in high-volume HIPEC and PIPAC centers: Surgeons (Surg), Scrub nurses (ScrubN), Anesthesiologists (Anest), Anesthesiology nurses (AnesthN), and OR Cleaning staff (CleanS). Scores extended from 0-10 (maximum). RESULTS: Ten centers in six countries participated in the study (response rate 100%). Two hundred and eleven responses from 68 Surg (32%), 49 ScrubN (23%), 45 Anest (21%), 31 AnesthN (15%), and 18 CleanS (9%) were gathered. Individual uptake of protection measures was 51.4%, similar among professions and between HIPEC and PIPAC. Perceived levels of protection were 7.57 vs. 7.17 for PIPAC and HIPEC, respectively (p<0.05), with Anesth scoring the lowest (6.81). Perceived contamination risk was 4.19 for HIPEC vs. 3.5 for PIPAC (p<0.01). Information level was lower for CleanS and Anesth for HIPEC and PIPAC procedures compared to all other responders (6.48 vs. 4.86, and 6.48 vs. 5.67, p<0.01). Willingness to obtain more information was 86%, the highest among CleanS (94%). CONCLUSIONS: Experience with the current practice of safety protocols was similar during HIPEC and PIPAC. The individual uptake of protection measures was rather low. The safety perception was better for PIPAC, but the perceived level of protection remained relatively low. The willingness to obtain more information was high. Intensified, standardized training of all OR team members involved in HIPEC and PIPAC is meaningful.

Limited Resection Versus Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Duodenal Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors? Enucleation Interferes in the Debate: A European Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The optimal surgical procedure for duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (D-GISTs) remains poorly defined. Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) allows for a wide resection but is associated with a high morbidity rate. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of PD versus limited resection (LR) for D-GISTs and to evaluate the role of tumor enucleation (EN). METHODS: In this retrospective European multicenter cohort study, 100 patients who underwent resection for D-GIST between 2001 and 2013 were compared between PD (n = 19) and LR (n = 81). LR included segmental duodenectomy (n = 47), wedge resection (n = 21), or EN (n = 13). The primary objective was to evaluate disease-free survival (DFS) between the groups, while the secondary objectives were to analyze the overall morbidity and mortality, radicality of resection, and 5-year overall survival (OS) and recurrence rates between groups. Furthermore, the short- and long-term outcomes of EN were evaluated. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were comparable between the PD and LR groups, except for a more frequent D2 tumor location in the PD group (68.3% vs. 29.6%; p = 0.016). Postoperative morbidity was higher after PD (68.4% vs. 23.5%; p < 0.001). OS (p = 0.70) and DFS (p = 0.64) were comparable after adjustment for D2 location and adjuvant therapy rate. EN was performed more in American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) stage III/IV patients with tumors < 5 cm and was associated with a 5-year OS rate of 84.6%, without any disease recurrences. CONCLUSIONS: For D-GISTs, LR should be the procedure of choice due to lower morbidity and similar oncological outcomes compared with PD. In selected patients, EN appears to be associated with equivalent short- and long-term outcomes. Based on these results, a surgical treatment algorithm is proposed.

Five-Year Survival Outcomes of Hybrid Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy in Esophageal Cancer: Results of the MIRO Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Available data comparing the long-term results of hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy (HMIE) with that of open esophagectomy are conflicting, with similar or even better results reported for the minimally invasive esophagectomy group. Objective: To evaluate the long-term, 5-year outcomes of HMIE vs open esophagectomy, including overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and pattern of disease recurrence, and the potential risk factors associated with these outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial is a post hoc follow-up study that analyzes the results of the open-label Multicentre Randomized Controlled Phase III Trial, which enrolled patients from 13 different centers in France and was conducted from October 26, 2009, to April 4, 2012. Eligible patients were 18 to 75 years of age and were diagnosed with resectable cancer of the middle or lower third of the esophagus. After exclusions, patients were randomized to either the HMIE group or the open esophagectomy group. Data analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis from November 19, 2019, to December 4, 2020. Interventions: Hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy (laparoscopic gastric mobilization with open right thoracotomy) was compared with open esophagectomy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end points of this follow-up study were 5-year OS and DFS. The secondary end points were the site of disease recurrence and potential risk factors associated with DFS and OS. Results: A total of 207 patients were randomized, of whom 175 were men (85%), and the median (range) age was 61 (23-78) years. The median follow-up duration was 58.2 (95% CI, 56.5-63.8) months. The 5-year OS was 59% (95% CI, 48%-68%) in the HMIE group and 47% (95% CI, 37%-57%) in the open esophagectomy group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.71; 95% CI, 0.48-1.06). The 5-year DFS was 52% (95% CI, 42%-61%) in the HMIE group vs 44% (95% CI, 34%-53%) in the open esophagectomy group (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.55-1.17). No statistically significant difference in recurrence rate or location was found between groups. In a multivariable analysis, major intraoperative and postoperative complications (HR, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.41-3.45; P < .001) and major pulmonary complications (HR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.21-3.10; P = .005) were identified as risk factors associated with decreased OS. Similarly, multivariable analysis of DFS identified overall intraoperative and postoperative complications (HR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.28-2.90; P = .002) and major pulmonary complications (HR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.19-2.86; P = .006) as risk factors. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found no difference in long-term survival between the HMIE and open esophagectomy groups. Major postoperative overall complications and pulmonary complications appeared to be independent risk factors in decreased OS and DFS, providing additional evidence that HMIE may be associated with improved oncological results compared with open esophagectomy primarily because of a reduction in postoperative complications. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00937456.

Is Lanreotide Really Useful in High Output Stoma? Comparison between Lanreotide to Conventional Antidiarrheal Treatment Alone.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of high-output stoma (HOS) was reported to be approximately 3 to 16% in the literature, and HOS can cause dehydration. This complication is often severe enough to warrant hospital readmission and may result in renal failure. The aim of this study was to show a decrease of 50% in ileostomy output in the experimental arm using lanreotide treatment. METHODS: Patients with an ileostomy output ≥ 1.5 l/24 hours were included in this prospective, open, multicentre randomized trial. Patients were randomly allocated between treatment arms with either lanreotide (LAN) and antidiarrhoeal treatments (TAD) (LAN-TAD group) or antidiarrhoeal treatments only (TADS group). The primary outcome was ileostomy output after 72 days. The secondary endpoints were ileostomy output during the first 6 days, blood urea and creatinine values, hospital length of stay and serious adverse events. RESULTS: In the per-protocol analysis, there were nine patients in the control group (TADS) and six patients in the experimental group (TAD-LAN group). The stoma outputs at Day 3 (D3) in the experimental and control groups were 1,900 ± 855.7 mL and 1,728.6 ± 845.5 mL, respectively (p = 0.2). No differences were found concerning stoma output at D6, renal function, or hospital length of stay between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The trial was prematurely stopped due to the low number of patients included. The question of the usefulness of somatostatin analogues in HOS persists, especially as the cost of this treatment is high, and there is a lack of evidence of its effectiveness.

How to Prevent Sarcopenia Occurrence during Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Oesogastric Adenocarcinoma?

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of a preoperative feeding jejunostomy (FJ) on the occurrence of sarcopenia before and after preoperative chemotherapy for patients with an oesogastric adenocarcinoma (OGA). Forty-six patients with potentially resectable OGA were enrolled in a perioperative chemotherapy protocol. Sarcopenia was evaluated by measuring muscle surfaces (psoas, paraspinal and abdominal wall muscles) on abdominal CT images at the level of the 3rd lumbar vertebra. A FJ was placed in 31 patients (67.4%) before the neoadjuvant treatment (FJ group), while 15 patients (32.6%) started neoadjuvant treatments without FJ (control group). After preoperative chemotherapy, there were significantly more sarcopenic patients in the control group, compared to the FJ group. In the FJ group, 13% of the patients (n = 4) were sarcopenic before treatment and 22.6% of them (n = 7) became sarcopenic after preoperative chemotherapy (p = 0.3). In the control group, if initially only 6.7% (n = 1) of patients were sarcopenic, the majority of the patients (60%, n = 9) became sarcopenic after chemotherapy (p = 0.012). The FJ was an independent risk factor of sarcopenia after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. FJ with enteral nutritional support during the preoperative management of OGA seemed to efficiently counteract sarcopenia occurrence during preoperative chemotherapy.

Is nonanatomic rectal resection a valid therapeutic option for rectal gastrointestinal stromal tumors? A proposed decision algorithm.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The best surgical approach to rectal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) is still debated, and both nonanatomic rectal resection (NARR) and anatomic rectal resection (ARR) are applied. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and oncological outcomes of NARR and ARR for rectal GISTs (R-GISTs). METHODS: Through a large French multicentre retrospective study, 35 patients were treated for R-GIST between 2001 and 2013. Patients who underwent NARR and ARR were compared. RESULTS: There were 23 (65.7%) patients in group ARR and 12 (34.3%) in group NARR. Significantly more patients in the group with ARR had a neoadjuvant treatment (86%) with tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) (imatinib) compared to those with NARR (25%) (p < .01). The median preoperative tumor size was significantly different between the groups without and with neoadjuvant TKI: 30 ± 23 mm versus 64 ± 44.4 mm, respectively (p < .001). Overall postoperative morbidity was 20% (n = 7) (26% for ARR vs. 8% for NARR; p = .4). After a median follow-up of 60.2 (3.2-164.3) months, the 5-year disease-free survival rates were 79.5% (confidence interval [CI] 95%: 54-100) for the NARR group and 68% (CI 95%: 46.4-89.7) for the ARR group (p = .697), respectively. CONCLUSION: The use of NARR for small R-GIST's does not seem to impair the oncological prognosis.