Thirty-day prevalence and clinical impact of fluid collections at the resection margin after distal pancreatectomy: Follow-up of a multicentric randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative fluid collections at the resection margin of the pancreatic stump are frequent after distal pancreatectomy, yet their clinical impact is unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the 30-day prevalence of postoperative fluid collections after distal pancreatectomy and the factors associated with a clinically relevant condition. METHODS: Patients enrolled in a randomized controlled trial of parenchymal transection with either reinforced, triple-row staple, or ultrasonic dissector underwent routine magnetic resonance 30 days postoperatively. Postoperative fluid collection was defined as a cyst-like lesion of at least 1 cm at the pancreatic resection margin. Postoperative fluid collections requiring any therapy were defined as clinically relevant. RESULTS: A total of 133 patients were analyzed; 69 were in the triple-row staple transection arm, and 64 were in the ultrasonic dissector transection arm. The overall 30-day prevalence of postoperative fluid collections was 68% (n = 90), without any significant difference between the two trial arms. Postoperative serum hyperamylasemia was more frequent in patients with postoperative fluid collections than those without (31% vs 7%, P = .001). Among the postoperative fluid collection population, an early postoperative pancreatic fistula (odds ratio 14.9, P = .002), post pancreatectomy acute pancreatitis (odds ratio 12.7, P = .036), and postoperative fluid collection size larger than 50 mm (odds ratio 6.6, P = .046) were independently associated with a clinically relevant postoperative fluid collection. CONCLUSION: Postoperative fluid collections at the resection margin are common after distal pancreatectomy and can be predicted by early assessment of postoperative serum hyperamylasemia. A preceding pancreatectomy acute pancreatitis and/or postoperative pancreatic fistula and large collections (>50 mm) were associated with a clinically relevant postoperative fluid collection, representing targets for closer follow-up or earlier therapeutic interventions.

Intraperitoneal prophylactic drain after pancreaticoduodenectomy: an Italian survey.

Intraperitoneal prophylactic drain (IPD) use in pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is still controversial. A survey was designed to investigate surgeons' use of IPD in PD patients through 23 questions and one clinical vignette. For the clinical scenario, respondents were asked to report their regret of omission and commission regarding the use of IPD elicited on a scale between 0 (no regret) and 100 (maximum regret). The threshold model and a multilevel mixed regression were applied. One hundred three (97.2%) respondents confirmed using at least two IPDs. The median regret due to the omission of IPD was 84 (67-100, IQR). The median regret due to the commission of IPD was 10 (3.5-20, IQR). The CR-POPF probability threshold at which drainage omission was the less regrettable choice was 3% (1-50, IQR). The threshold was lower for those surgeons who performed minimally invasive PD (P = 0.048), adopted late removal (P = 0.002), perceived FRS able to predict the risk (P = 0.006), and IPD able to avoid relaparotomy P = 0.036). Drain management policies after PD remain heterogeneous among surgeons. The regret model suggested that IPD omission could be performed in low-risk patients.

Toward a new paradigm of care: a surgical leaders' Delphi consensus on the organizational factors of the new pancreas units (E-AHPBA PUECOF study).

Pancreas units represent new organizational models of care that are now at the center of the European debate. The PUECOF study, endorsed by the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (E-AHPBA), aims to reach an expert consensus by enquiring surgical leaders about the Pancreas Units' most relevant organizational factors, with 30 surgical leaders from 14 countries participating in the Delphi survey. Results underline that surgeons believe in the need to organize multidisciplinary meetings, nurture team leadership, and create metrics. Clinical professionals and patients are considered the most relevant stakeholders, while the debate is open when considering different subjects like industry leaders and patient associations. Non-technical skills such as ethics, teamwork, professionalism, and leadership are highly considered, with mentoring, clinical cases, and training as the most appreciated facilitating factors. Surgeons show trust in functional leaders, key performance indicators, and the facilitating role played by nurse navigators and case managers. Pancreas units have a high potential to improve patients' outcomes. While the pancreas unit model of care will not change the technical content of pancreatic surgery, it may bring surgeons several benefits, including more cases, professional development, easier coordination, less stress, and opportunities to create fruitful connections with research institutions and industry leaders.

REDISCOVER International Guidelines on the Perioperative Care of Surgical Patients With Borderline-resectable and Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The REDISCOVER consensus conference aimed at developing and validate guidelines on the perioperative care of patients with borderline resectable (BR-) and locally advanced (LA) pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Coupled with improvements in chemotherapy and radiation, the contemporary approach to pancreatic surgery supports resection of BR-PDAC and, to a lesser extent, LA-PDAC. Guidelines outlining the selection and perioperative care for these patients are lacking. METHODS: The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology was used to develop the REDISCOVER guidelines and create recommendations. The Delphi approach was used to reach consensus (agreement ≥80%) among experts. Recommendations were approved after a debate and vote among international experts in pancreatic surgery and pancreatic cancer management. A Validation Committee used the AGREE II-GRS tool to assess the methodological quality of the guidelines. Moreover, an independent multidisciplinary advisory group revised the statements to ensure adherence to non-surgical guidelines. RESULTS: Overall, 34 recommendations were created targeting centralization, training, staging, patient selection for surgery, possibility of surgery in uncommon scenarios, timing of surgery, avoidance of vascular reconstruction, details of vascular resection/reconstruction, arterial divestment, frozen section histology of perivascular tissue, extent of lymphadenectomy, anticoagulation prophylaxis and role of minimally invasive surgery. The level of evidence was however low for 29 of 34 clinical questions. Participants agreed that the most conducive mean to promptly advance our understanding in this field is to establish an international registry addressing this patient population ( https://rediscover.unipi.it/ ). CONCLUSIONS: The REDISCOVER guidelines provide clinical recommendations pertaining to pancreatectomy with vascular resection for patients with BR- and LA-PDAC, and serve as the basis of a new international registry for this patient population.

Epidemiology of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms: a review and protocol presentation for bridging tumor registry data with the Italian association for neuroendocrine tumors (Itanet) national database.

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are rare tumors with diverse clinical behaviors. Large databases like the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program and national NEN registries have provided significant epidemiological knowledge, but they have limitations given the recent advancements in NEN diagnostics and treatments. For instance, newer imaging techniques and therapies have revolutionized NEN management, rendering older data less representative. Additionally, crucial parameters, like the Ki67 index, are missing from many databases. Acknowledging these gaps, the Italian Association for Neuroendocrine Tumors (Itanet) initiated a national multicenter prospective database in 2019, aiming to gather data on newly-diagnosed gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine (GEP) NENs. This observational study, coordinated by Itanet, includes patients from 37 Italian centers. The database, which is rigorously maintained and updated, focuses on diverse parameters including age, diagnostic techniques, tumor stage, treatments, and survival metrics. As of October 2023, data from 1,600 patients have been recorded, with an anticipation of reaching 3600 by the end of 2025. This study aims at understanding the epidemiology, clinical attributes, and treatment strategies for GEP-NENs in Italy, and to introduce the Itanet database project. Once comprehensive follow-up data will be acquired, the goal will be to discern predictors of treatment outcomes and disease prognosis. The Itanet database will offer an unparalleled, updated perspective on GEP-NENs, addressing the limitations of older databases and aiding in optimizing patient care. STUDY REGISTRATION: This protocol was registered in clinicaltriasl.gov (NCT04282083).

Outcomes of a 3-Year Prospective Surveillance in Individuals at High Risk of Pancreatic Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Pancreatic cancer (PC) surveillance of high-risk individuals (HRI) is becoming more common worldwide, aiming at anticipating PC diagnosis at a preclinical stage. In 2015, the Italian Registry of Families at Risk of Pancreatic Cancer was created. We aimed to assess the prevalence and incidence of pancreatic findings, oncological outcomes, and harms 7 years after the Italian Registry of Families at Risk of Pancreatic Cancer inception, focusing on individuals with at least a 3-year follow-up or developing events before. METHODS: HRI (subjects with a family history or mutation carriers with/without a family history were enrolled in 18 centers). They underwent annual magnetic resonance with cholangiopancreatography or endoscopic ultrasound (NCT04095195). RESULTS: During the study period (June 2015-September 2022), 679 individuals were enrolled. Of these, 524 (77.2%) underwent at least baseline imaging, and 156 (29.8%) with at least a 3-year follow-up or pancreatic malignancy/premalignancy-related events, and represented the study population. The median age was 51 (interquartile range 16) years. Familial PC cases accounted for 81.4% of HRI and individuals with pathogenic variant for 18.6%. Malignant (n = 8) and premalignant (1 PanIN3) lesions were found in 9 individuals. Five of these 8 cases occurred in pathogenic variant carriers, 4 in familial PC cases (2 tested negative at germline testing and 2 others were not tested). Three of the 8 PC were stage I. Five of the 8 PC were resectable, 3 Stage I, all advanced cases being prevalent. The 1-, 2-, and 3-year cumulative hazard of PC was 1.7%, 2.5%, and 3%, respectively. Median overall and disease-free survival of patients with resected PC were 18 and 12 months (95% CI not computable). Considering HRI who underwent baseline imaging, 6 pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (1 resected) and 1 low-yield surgery (low-grade mixed-intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm) were also reported. DISCUSSION: PC surveillance in a fully public health care system is feasible and safe, and leads to early PC or premalignant lesions diagnoses, mostly at baseline but also over time.

Perioperative NALIRIFOX in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: The open-label, multicenter, phase II nITRO trial.

BACKGROUND: Upfront surgery followed by postoperative treatment is a commonly adopted treatment for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (rPDAC). However, the risk of positive surgical margins, the poor recovery that often impairs postoperative treatments, and the risk of recurrence might limit the outcome of this strategy. This study evaluated the safety and the activity of liposomal irinotecan 50 mg/m2 + 5-fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 + leucovorin 400 mg/m2 + oxaliplatin 60 mg/m2 (NALIRIFOX) in the perioperative treatment of patients with rPDAC. METHODS: Eligible patients had a rPDAC with < 180° interface with major veins' wall. Patients received 3 cycles before and 3 cycles after resection with NALIRIFOX, days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients undergoing an R0 resection. RESULTS: 107 patients began preoperative treatment. Nine patients discontinued the treatment because of related or unrelated adverse events. Disease-control rate was 92.9%. 87 patients underwent surgical exploration, 11 had intraoperative evidence of metastatic disease, and 1 died for surgical complications. R0 resection rate was 65.3%. 49 patients completed the three postoperative cycles. The most common grade ≥ 3 adverse events were diarrhea and neutropenia. Median overall survival (OS) of ITT patients was 32.3 months (95% CI 27.8-44.3). Median disease-free and OS from surgery of resected patients were 19.3 (95% CI 12.6-34.1) and 40.3 months (95% CI 29-NA), respectively. CONCLUSION: Perioperative NALIRIFOX was manageable and active, and deserves further investigation in randomized trials comparing it with standard upfront surgery followed by adjuvant therapy.

Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma and Nutrition: Exploring the Role of Diet and Gut Health.

The incidence of pancreatic cancer is increasing worldwide. The most common form is represented by pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) which has been shown to be linked to chronic inflammation. Notably, the gut microbiota has emerged as a critical player in regulating immune responses and inflammation. Indeed, intestinal dysbiosis, characterized by an imbalance in the gut microbiota composition, can contribute to the initiation of chronic inflammation. Sterile chronic inflammation can occur, probably activated by the translocation of bacterial components, such as lipopolysaccharide (LPS), the major component of Gram-negative microbiota, with the consequent induction of innate mucosal immunity, through the activation of Toll-like receptors (TLRs). Furthermore, the interaction between LPS and TLRs could enhance cancer progression. Recent research has shed light on the pivotal role of nutrition, as a modifiable risk factor, in PDAC immunological processes, particularly focusing on the immuno-modulatory effects of the gut microbiota. Different dietary regimens, fiber intake, immunonutrients, and antioxidants have the potential to either exacerbate or mitigate chronic inflammation, thereby influencing the pathogenesis and natural history of PDAC. These dietary components may affect the gut microbiota composition and, consequently, the level of inflammation, either promoting or protecting against PDAC. In this review of reviews, we discuss the modulatory role of nutrition and the gut microbiota in PDAC's immunological processes to explore a translational therapeutic approach that could improve the survival and quality of life of these patients.

Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy in obese patients.

BACKGROUND: Although robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) has a lower conversion rate to open surgery and causes less blood loss than laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP), clear evidence on the impact of the surgical approach on morbidity is lacking. Prior studies have shown a higher rate of complications among obese patients undergoing pancreatectomy. The primary aim of this study is to compare short-term outcomes of RDP vs. LDP in patients with a BMI ≥ 30. METHODS: In this multicenter study, all obese patients who underwent RDP or LDP for any indication between 2012 and 2022 at 18 international expert centers were included. The baseline characteristics underwent inverse probability treatment weighting to minimize allocation bias. RESULTS: Of 446 patients, 219 (50.2%) patients underwent RDP. The median age was 60 years, the median BMI was 33 (31-36), and the preoperative diagnosis was ductal adenocarcinoma in 21% of cases. The conversion rate was 19.9%, the overall complication rate was 57.8%, and the 90-day mortality rate was 0.7% (3 patients). RDP was associated with a lower complication rate (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.52-0.89; p = 0.005), less blood loss (150 vs. 200 ml; p < 0.001), fewer blood transfusion requirements (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.15-0.50; p < 0.001) and a lower Comprehensive Complications Index (8.7 vs. 8.9, p < 0.001) than LPD. RPD had a lower conversion rate (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.19-0.39; p < 0.001) and achieved better spleen preservation rate (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.13-3.39; p = 0.016) than LPD. CONCLUSIONS: In obese patients, RDP is associated with a lower conversion rate, fewer complications and better short-term outcomes than LPD.

Hepatic Artery Anomalies in Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Outcomes from a High-Volume Center.

INTRODUCTION: Hepatic artery anomalies (HAA) may have an impact on surgical and oncological outcomes of patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). METHODS: Patients who underwent PD at our institution between July 2015 and January 2020 were retrospectively reviewed and classified into two groups: group 1, with presence of HAA, and group 2, with no HAA. A weighted logistic regression model was employed to assess the association between HAA and postoperative complications, and to assess the association between HAA and R status in patients with pancreatic cancer. RESULTS: 502 patients were considered for analysis, with 75 (15%) of them in group 1. They had either an accessory (n = 28, 40.8%) or replaced (n = 26, 36.6%) right hepatic artery. Most patients underwent surgery for a malignancy (n = 451; 90%); among them, vascular resection was performed in 69 cases (15%). The presence of a HAA was reported at preoperative imaging only in 4 cases (5%) and the aberrant vessel was preserved in 72% of patients. At weighted multivariable logistic regression analysis, HAA were not associated to higher odds of morbidity (odds ratio [OR]: 0.753, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.543-1.043) nor to R1 status in case of pancreatic cancer (OR: 1.583, 95% CI: 0.979-2.561). CONCLUSION: At our institution, the presence of HAA does not have an impact on postoperative outcomes or affects oncological clearance after PD. Hospitals', surgeons', volume and systematic review of preoperative imaging are all factors that help reduce possible adverse events.

Treatment characteristics and outcomes of pure Acinar cell carcinoma of the pancreas - A multicentric European study on radically resected patients.

BACKGROUND: Acinar cell carcinomas (ACC) belong to the exocrine pancreatic malignancies. Due to their rarity, there is no consensus regarding treatment strategies for resectable ACC. METHODS: This is a retrospective multicentric study of radically resected pure pancreatic ACC. Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Further endpoints were oncologic outcomes related to tumor stage and therapeutic protocols. RESULTS: 59 patients (44 men) with a median age of 64 years were included. The median tumor size was 45.0 mm. 61.0% were pT3 (n = 36), nodal positivity rate was 37.3% (n = 22), and synchronous distant metastases were present in 10.1% of the patients (n = 6). 5-Years OS was 60.9% and median DFS 30 months. 24 out of 31 recurred systemically (n = 18 only systemic, n = 6 local and systemic). Regarding TNM-staging, only the N2-stage negatively influenced OS and DFS (p = 0.004, p = 0.001). Adjuvant treatment protocols (performed in 62.7%) did neither improve OS (p = 0.542) nor DFS (p = 0.159). In 9 cases, radical resection was achieved following neoadjuvant therapy. DISCUSSION: Radical surgery is currently the mainstay for resectable ACC, even for limited metastatic disease. Novel (neo)adjuvant treatment strategies are needed, since current systemic therapies do not result in a clear survival benefit in the perioperative setting.

Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy for resectable pancreatic cancer (DIPLOMA): an international randomised non-inferiority trial.

Background: The oncological safety of minimally invasive surgery has been questioned for several abdominal cancers. Concerns also exist regarding the use of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer as randomised trials are lacking. Methods: In this international randomised non-inferiority trial, we recruited adults with resectable pancreatic cancer from 35 centres in 12 countries. Patients were randomly assigned to either MIDP (laparoscopic or robotic) or open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). Both patients and pathologists were blinded to the assigned approach. Primary endpoint was radical resection (R0, ≥1 mm free margin) in patients who had ultimately undergone resection. Analyses for the primary endpoint were by modified intention-to-treat, excluding patients with missing data on primary endpoint. The pre-defined non-inferiority margin of -7% was compared with the lower limit of the two-sided 90% confidence interval (CI) of absolute difference in the primary endpoint. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN44897265). Findings: Between May 8, 2018 and May 7, 2021, 258 patients were randomly assigned to MIDP (131 patients) or ODP (127 patients). Modified intention-to-treat analysis included 114 patients in the MIDP group and 110 patients in the ODP group. An R0 resection occurred in 83 (73%) patients in the MIDP group and in 76 (69%) patients in the ODP group (difference 3.7%, 90% CI -6.2 to 13.6%; pnon-inferiority = 0.039). Median lymph node yield was comparable (22.0 [16.0-30.0] vs 23.0 [14.0-32.0] nodes, p = 0.86), as was the rate of intraperitoneal recurrence (41% vs 38%, p = 0.45). Median follow-up was 23.5 (interquartile range 17.0-30.0) months. Other postoperative outcomes were comparable, including median time to functional recovery (5 [95% CI 4.5-5.5] vs 5 [95% CI 4.7-5.3] days; p = 0.22) and overall survival (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.67-1.46, p = 0.94). Serious adverse events were reported in 23 (18%) of 131 patients in the MIDP group vs 28 (22%) of 127 patients in the ODP group. Interpretation: This trial provides evidence on the non-inferiority of MIDP compared to ODP regarding radical resection rates in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. The present findings support the applicability of minimally invasive surgery in patients with resectable left-sided pancreatic cancer. Funding: Medtronic Covidien AG, Johnson & Johnson Medical Limited, Dutch Gastroenterology Society.

Prospective minimally invasive pancreatic resections from the IGOMIPS registry: a snapshot of daily practice in Italy on 1191 between 2019 and 2022.

This retrospective analysis of the prospective IGOMIPS registry reports on 1191 minimally invasive pancreatic resections (MIPR) performed in Italy between 2019 and 2022, including 668 distal pancreatectomies (DP) (55.7%), 435 pancreatoduodenectomies (PD) (36.3%), 44 total pancreatectomies (3.7%), 36 tumor enucleations (3.0%), and 8 central pancreatectomies (0.7%). Spleen-preserving DP was performed in 109 patients (16.3%). Overall incidence of severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3) was 17.6% with a 90-day mortality of 1.9%. This registry analysis provided some important information. First, robotic assistance was preferred for all MIPR but DP with splenectomy. Second, robotic assistance reduced conversion to open surgery and blood loss in comparison to laparoscopy. Robotic PD was also associated with lower incidence of severe postoperative complications and a trend toward lower mortality. Fourth, the annual cut-off of ≥ 20 MIPR and ≥ 20 MIPD improved selected outcome measures. Fifth, most MIPR were performed by a single surgeon. Sixth, only two-thirds of the centers performed spleen-preserving DP. Seventh, DP with splenectomy was associated with higher conversion rate when compared to spleen-preserving DP. Eighth, the use of pancreatojejunostomy was the prevalent reconstruction in PD. Ninth, final histology was similar for MIPR performed at high- and low-volume centers, but neoadjuvant chemotherapy was used more frequently at high-volume centers. Finally, this registry analysis raises important concerns about the reliability of R1 assessment underscoring the importance of standardized pathology of pancreatic specimens. In conclusion, MIPR can be safely implemented on a national scale. Further analyses are required to understand nuances of implementation of MIPR in Italy.

Learning Curves of Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy in Experienced Pancreatic Centers.

Importance: Understanding the learning curve of a new complex surgical technique helps to reduce potential patient harm. Current series on the learning curve of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) are mostly small, single-center series, thus providing limited data. Objective: To evaluate the length of pooled learning curves of MIDP in experienced centers. Design, Setting, and Participants: This international, multicenter, retrospective cohort study included MIDP procedures performed from January 1, 2006, through June 30, 2019, in 26 European centers from 8 countries that each performed more than 15 distal pancreatectomies annually, with an overall experience exceeding 50 MIDP procedures. Consecutive patients who underwent elective laparoscopic or robotic distal pancreatectomy for all indications were included. Data were analyzed between September 1, 2021, and May 1, 2022. Exposures: The learning curve for MIDP was estimated by pooling data from all centers. Main Outcomes and Measures: The learning curve was assessed for the primary textbook outcome (TBO), which is a composite measure that reflects optimal outcome, and for surgical mastery. Generalized additive models and a 2-piece linear model with a break point were used to estimate the learning curve length of MIDP. Case mix-expected probabilities were plotted and compared with observed outcomes to assess the association of changing case mix with outcomes. The learning curve also was assessed for the secondary outcomes of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, conversion to open rate, and postoperative pancreatic fistula grade B/C. Results: From a total of 2610 MIDP procedures, the learning curve analysis was conducted on 2041 procedures (mean [SD] patient age, 58 [15.3] years; among 2040 with reported sex, 1249 were female [61.2%] and 791 male [38.8%]). The 2-piece model showed an increase and eventually a break point for TBO at 85 procedures (95% CI, 13-157 procedures), with a plateau TBO rate at 70%. The learning-associated loss of TBO rate was estimated at 3.3%. For conversion, a break point was estimated at 40 procedures (95% CI, 11-68 procedures); for operation time, at 56 procedures (95% CI, 35-77 procedures); and for intraoperative blood loss, at 71 procedures (95% CI, 28-114 procedures). For postoperative pancreatic fistula, no break point could be estimated. Conclusion and Relevance: In experienced international centers, the learning curve length of MIDP for TBO was considerable with 85 procedures. These findings suggest that although learning curves for conversion, operation time, and intraoperative blood loss are completed earlier, extensive experience may be needed to master the learning curve of MIDP.

Virtual hospitals: The future of the healthcare system? An expert consensus.

Today, social and healthcare systems at a global level are facing constant challenges dictated by an increasing mismatch between the demand for care services and the supply of human and economic resources. Such a situation has been exacerbated in the past two years by the Covid-19 pandemic. This has led to an increase in the leverage of digitalisation, which has proved to be a crucial tool for the development and application of new organisational models at both hospital and territorial levels, thus addressing the various criticalities already present in the system. In this sense, the Virtual Hospital has emerged as a potential model for increasing effectiveness and efficiency in delivering sociomedical services. Starting from these premises, an EFTE (estimate, feedback, talk, estimate) approach was used to acquire an expert consensus within a multidisciplinary panel of academics and healthcare managers of the Veneto Region in Italy. This article reports the expert opinion on the possible application of the Virtual Hospital model in the national context, starting from the existing international evidence and good practices, highlighting the potential advantages and barriers to its implementation. Furthermore, the article analyses the most relevant areas of investment for the development of intangible assets and the acquisition of tangible assets necessary for its implementation.

Co-design, co-learning, and co-production of an app for pancreatic cancer patients-the "Pancreas Plus" study protocol.

Background: Pancreatic cancer is a malignant and complex tumor that often leads to an adverse prognosis. Patients need to face a challenging treatment path, which involves highly-specialized multidisciplinary professionals. The complexity of the disease requires the development of dedicated tools to support patients in their care journey. Co-production stands as a valuable strategy in oncological care to engage patients in understanding their care journey and behaving accordingly to get the best possible clinical outcome. Methods: The non-profit association Unipancreas, active in promoting the latest advances in pancreatic cancer care and in supporting pancreatic cancer patients, has partnered with a multidisciplinary group of professionals to conceive the brand new program "Pancreas Plus" to employ a co-design, co-learning, and co-production path to design an app devoted to pancreatic cancer patients to assist them during their treatment and follow-up journey. The app, which is the outcome of a multi-stakeholder engagement project, offers health information and medical advice specifically tailored on the pancreatic cancer disease. The article reports the research protocol, which may be replicated for the design of other e-health tools focusing on different conditions. Discussion: The study's output will be an app that sees the pancreatic cancer patient as the main beneficiary but which can gather and address the interests and needs of all meaningful stakeholders, including clinicians, researchers, healthcare and educational institutions, and non-profit associations. Registration: Given the type of study, no registration is required.

Robot-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy in Patients with Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: An International, Retrospective, Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy (RDP) is increasingly used as an alternative to laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer but comparative multicenter studies confirming the safety and efficacy of RDP are lacking. METHODS: An international, multicenter, retrospective, cohort study, including consecutive patients undergoing RDP and LDP for resectable pancreatic cancer in 33 experienced centers from 11 countries (2010-2019). The primary outcome was R0-resection. Secondary outcomes included lymph node yield, major complications, conversion rate, and overall survival. RESULTS: In total, 542 patients after minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy were included: 103 RDP (19%) and 439 LDP (81%). The R0-resection rate was comparable (75.7% RDP vs. 69.3% LDP, p = 0.404). RDP was associated with longer operative time (290 vs. 240 min, p < 0.001), more vascular resections (7.6% vs. 2.7%, p = 0.030), lower conversion rate (4.9% vs. 17.3%, p = 0.001), more major complications (26.2% vs. 16.3%, p = 0.019), improved lymph node yield (18 vs. 16, p = 0.021), and longer hospital stay (10 vs. 8 days, p = 0.001). The 90-day mortality (1.9% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.268) and overall survival (median 28 vs. 31 months, p = 0.599) did not differ significantly between RDP and LDP, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In selected patients with resectable pancreatic cancer, RDP and LDP provide a comparable R0-resection rate and overall survival in experienced centers. Although the lymph node yield and conversion rate appeared favorable after RDP, LDP was associated with shorter operating time, less major complications, and shorter hospital stay. The specific benefits associated with each approach should be confirmed by multicenter, randomized trials.

Time for a paradigm shift in shared decision-making in trauma and emergency surgery? Results from an international survey.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making (SDM) between clinicians and patients is one of the pillars of the modern patient-centric philosophy of care. This study aims to explore SDM in the discipline of trauma and emergency surgery, investigating its interpretation as well as the barriers and facilitators for its implementation among surgeons. METHODS: Grounding on the literature on the topics of the understanding, barriers, and facilitators of SDM in trauma and emergency surgery, a survey was created by a multidisciplinary committee and endorsed by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES). The survey was sent to all 917 WSES members, advertised through the society's website, and shared on the society's Twitter profile. RESULTS: A total of 650 trauma and emergency surgeons from 71 countries in five continents participated in the initiative. Less than half of the surgeons understood SDM, and 30% still saw the value in exclusively engaging multidisciplinary provider teams without involving the patient. Several barriers to effectively partnering with the patient in the decision-making process were identified, such as the lack of time and the need to concentrate on making medical teams work smoothly. DISCUSSION: Our investigation underlines how only a minority of trauma and emergency surgeons understand SDM, and perhaps, the value of SDM is not fully accepted in trauma and emergency situations. The inclusion of SDM practices in clinical guidelines may represent the most feasible and advocated solutions.