A difficult early diagnosis of pancreatic body neoplasia.

The Authors report the case of a 60-year-old man, V.A., a smoker with type II diabetes and cholelithiasis. One month after the onset of symptoms in March 1995, his clinical picture led us to suspect a pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Only 110 days after the initial discovery of a high CA 19-9, following the failure of numerous techniques and the solution of various problems of differential diagnosis, the first unclear X-ray image of a suspected pancreatic neoplasia was obtained. A new computed tomography scan and a further increase in CA 19-9 later confirmed the diagnosis. Duodenopancreatectomy with splenectomy for adenocarcinoma was performed. The thread connecting 150 days of clinical history is CA 19-9, which acted as an ideal marker. It enabled a clinical "rarity" (pancreatic neoplasia in its initial stages) to be diagnosed and it increased as the neoplasia developed. After surgical removal of the tumor, the marker is now returning to normal levels and will be used to monitor the post-operative phase, when any increase in level could mean a recrudescence of the disease.

[Gallbladder and common bile duct calculi: treatment with laparoscopy vs laparotomy. Costs and benefits]. / Litiasi colecisto-coledocica: trattamento laparoscopico vs. laparatomico. Costi-benefìci.

The cost-benefit ratio of laparoscopy vs laparotomy was evaluated comparing 2 groups of patients: 500 operated using traditional laparotomy and 500 operated via laparoscopy. The first parameter considered was the average hospital stay, which was 8.4 days (min. 3, max. 22 days) in group I (laparotomy) (Fig. 1) against 4 days (min. 2, max. 13 days) in group II (laparoscopy). Even more interesting were the results related to the average postoperative hospital stay: 5 days for laparotomy, 2 days for laparoscopy. Currently, 90% of patients submitted to laparoscopic cholecystectomy is discharged in the first postoperative day. The cost of the surgical procedure is 1,100,000 It. Lit. for laparotomic cholecystectomy and 2,130,000 It. Lit. for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. However, considering the cost of the daily hospital stay and adding the cost of the surgical procedure we already save 50% with the laparoscopic method. Furthermore, if we consider the time occurring between patients' discharge and return to work a 50% reduction of the postoperative recovery time is obtained. The conclusions of the Authors are the following: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed by skilled surgeons presents an incidence of complications comparable to traditional cholecystectomy. The operating time is almost the same for both methods. Operative costs are higher for the laparoscopic technique. Postoperative hospital stay is drastically reduced with the laparoscopic procedure. Return to work is assured in a shorter time after laparoscopy.