Oncologic management of ampullary cancer: International survey among surgical and medical oncologists.

BACKGROUND: Ampullary adenocarcinoma (AAC) is a rare neoplasm which as a result is lacking specific treatment guidelines. This international survey study was performed to gain insight in the current daily practice of AAC. METHODS: Surgeons and medical oncologists, whom were members of the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group, International Study Group on Ampullary Cancer, International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, European and International Consortium on Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery, or contributed to (peri)ampullary cancer research, were invited through email and newsletters between January and October 2021. RESULTS: Overall, 217 surgeons and medical oncologists completed the survey. Most of the respondents work in Europe (60%), and in a pancreatic expertise center (86%). The majority of respondents (87%) stated that the histological AAC subtype (e.g. intestinal vs. pancreatobiliary) was determined in the resection specimen. Neoadjuvant treatment for resectable disease was considered by 24% and adjuvant therapy by 90% of the respondents, with 80% of them choosing adjuvant chemotherapy alone. The formation of multidisciplinary teams, improvement in resection procedures, increased availability of chemotherapy regimens, and increased knowledge on tumor biology were considered as the most important developments in the last five years. The necessity for randomized controlled trials was mentioned by 50% of the respondents. CONCLUSIONS: This international survey highlights the existing variation in the management of patients with AAC, especially regarding the use of (neo)adjuvant therapy. More data from trials and international registries are needed to develop evidence-based guidelines on surgical and oncological management with the ultimate aim to improve outcomes for patients with AAC.

Parastomal hernias after cystectomy and ileal conduit urinary diversion: surgical treatment and the use of prophylactic mesh: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Parastomal hernia after ileal conduit urinary diversion is an underestimated and undertreated clinical entity, which heavily impairs patients' quality of life due to symptoms of pain, leakage, application or skin problems. As for all gastrointestinal stomata the best surgical repair technique has yet to be determined. Thereby, surgery for ileal conduit parastomal hernias poses some specific perioperative challenges. This review aims to give an overview of current evidence on the surgical treatment of parastomal hernia after cystectomy and ileal conduit urinary diversion, and on the use of prophylactic mesh at index surgery in its prevention. METHODS: A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA-guidelines. The electronic databases Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched. Studies were included if they presented postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing surgical treatment of parastomal hernia at the ileal conduit site, irrespective of the technique used. A search was performed to identify additional studies on prophylactic mesh in the prevention of ileal conduit parastomal hernia, that were not identified by the initial search. RESULTS: Eight retrospective case-series were included for analysis, reporting different surgical techniques. If reported, highest complication rate was 45%. Recurrence rates varied highly, ranging from 0 to 80%. Notably, lower recurrence rates were reported in studies with shorter follow-up. Overall, available data suggest significant morbidity after the surgical treatment of ileal conduit parastomal hernias. Data from five conference abstracts on the matter were retrieved, and systematically reported. Regarding prophylactic mesh in the prevention of ileal conduit parastomal hernia, 5 communications were identified. All of them used keyhole mesh in a retromuscular position, and reported on favorable results in the mesh group without an increase in mesh-related complications. CONCLUSION: Data on the surgical treatment of ileal conduit parastomal hernias and the use of prophylactic mesh in its prevention is scarce. Given the specific perioperative challenges and the paucity of reported results, more high-quality evidence is needed to determine the optimal treatment of this specific surgical problem. Initial results on the use of prophylactic mesh in the prevention of ileal conduit parastomal hernias seem promising.

Patterns of recurrence following definitive chemoradiation for patients with proximal esophageal cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this retrospective study was to determine the patterns of recurrence and overall survival (OS) in patients achieving clinical complete response after treatment with definitive chemoradiation (CRT) for proximal esophageal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with proximal esophageal cancer treated with CRT between 2004 and 2014 in 11 centers in the Netherlands were included. OS and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cumulative incidence of first recurrence (locoregional or distant) and locoregional recurrence (LRR) were assessed using competing risk analyses. RESULTS: In 197 of the 200 identified patients, response was evaluated, 133 (68%) showed a complete response. In complete responders, median OS, three-year OS, and PFS were 45.0 months (95% CI 34.8-61.5 months), 58% (95% CI 48-66), and 49% (95% CI 40-57), respectively. Three- and five-year risk of recurrence were respectively 40% (95% CI 31-48), and 45% (95% CI 36-54). Three- and five-year risk of LRR were 26% (95% CI 19-33), and 30% (95% CI 22-38). Eight of 32 patients with an isolated LRR underwent salvage surgery, with a median OS of 32.0 months (95% CI 6.8-not reached). CONCLUSION: In patients with a complete response after definitive CRT for proximal esophageal cancer, most recurrences were locoregional and developed within the first three years after CRT. These findings suggest to shorten locoregional follow-up from five to three years.

Management of infected pancreatic necrosis in the intensive care unit: a narrative review.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute pancreatitis is marked by organ failure and (peri)pancreatic necrosis with local complications such as infected necrosis. Infection of these necrotic collections together with organ failure remain the major causes of admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) in acute pancreatitis. Appropriate treatment of infected necrosis is essential to reduce morbidity and mortality. Overall knowledge of the treatment options within a multidisciplinary team-with special attention to the appropriate use of antimicrobial therapy and invasive treatment techniques for source control-is essential in the treatment of this complex disease. OBJECTIVES: To address the current state of microbiological diagnosis, antimicrobial treatment, and source control for infected pancreatic necrosis in the ICU. SOURCES: A literature search was performed using the Medline and Cochrane libraries for articles subsequent to 2003 using the keywords: infected necrosis, pancreatitis, intensive care medicine, treatment, diagnosis and antibiotic(s). CONTENT: This narrative review provides an overview of key elements of diagnosis and treatment of infected pancreatic necrosis in the ICU. IMPLICATIONS: In pancreatic necrosis it is essential to continuously (re)evaluate the indication for antimicrobial treatment and invasive source control. Invasive diagnostics (e.g. through fine-needle aspiration, FNA), preferably prior to the start of broad-spectrum antimicrobial therapy, is advocated. Antimicrobial stewardship principles apply: paying attention to altered pharmacokinetics in the critically ill, de-escalation of broad-spectrum therapy once cultures become available, and early withdrawal of antibiotics once source control has been established. This is important to prevent the development of antimicrobial resistance, especially in a group of patients who may require repeated courses of antibiotics during the prolonged course of their illness.

Recurrence of idiopathic acute pancreatitis after cholecystectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Occult biliary disease has been suggested as a frequent underlying cause of idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP). Cholecystectomy has been proposed as a strategy to prevent recurrent IAP. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the efficacy of cholecystectomy in reducing the risk of recurrent IAP. METHODS: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched systematically for studies including patients with IAP treated by cholecystectomy, with data on recurrence of pancreatitis. Studies published before 1980 or including chronic pancreatitis and case reports were excluded. The primary outcome was recurrence rate. Quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Meta-analyses were undertaken to calculate risk ratios using a random-effects model with the inverse-variance method. RESULTS: Overall, ten studies were included, of which nine were used in pooled analyses. The study population consisted of 524 patients with 126 cholecystectomies. Of these 524 patients, 154 (29·4 (95 per cent c.i. 25·5 to 33·3) per cent) had recurrent disease. The recurrence rate was significantly lower after cholecystectomy than after conservative management (14 of 126 (11·1 per cent) versus 140 of 398 (35·2 per cent); risk ratio 0·44, 95 per cent c.i. 0·27 to 0·71). Even in patients in whom IAP was diagnosed after more extensive diagnostic testing, including endoscopic ultrasonography or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, the recurrence rate appeared to be lower after cholecystectomy (4 of 36 (11 per cent) versus 42 of 108 (38·9 per cent); risk ratio 0·41, 0·16 to 1·07). CONCLUSION: Cholecystectomy after an episode of IAP reduces the risk of recurrent pancreatitis. This implies that current diagnostics are insufficient to exclude a biliary cause.

ANTECEDENTES: Se ha sugerido que la enfermedad biliar oculta es una causa subyacente frecuente de pancreatitis aguda idiopática (idiopathic acute pancreatitis, IAP). La colecistectomía se ha propuesto como una estrategia para prevenir la IAP recidivante. El objetivo de esta revisión sistemática era determinar la eficacia de la colecistectomía para reducir el riesgo de la IAP recidivante. MÉTODOS: Se realizó una búsqueda sistemática en PubMed, Embase y Cochrane de estudios que incluían pacientes con IAP tratados con colecistectomía, y con datos sobre la recidiva de la pancreatitis. Se excluyeron los estudios anteriores a 1980, los que incluían pancreatitis crónica y los casos clínicos. El resultado principal fue la tasa de recidiva. La calidad se evaluó utilizando la escala de Newcastle-Ottawa. Se realizaron metaanálisis para calcular la tasa de riesgo utilizando un modelo de efectos aleatorios con el método de varianza inversa. RESULTADOS: En total, se incluyeron 10 estudios, de los cuales 9 se utilizaron para realizar análisis agrupados. La población de estudio incluyó 524 pacientes en los que se habían efectuado 126 colecistectomías. De estos 524 pacientes, 154 (29% (i.c. del 95% 25,5-33,3)) presentaron recidiva de la enfermedad. La tasa de recidiva fue significativamente menor después de la colecistectomía que después del tratamiento conservador (14/126 (11%) versus 140/398 (35)); tasa de riesgo 0,44 (i.c. del 95% 0,27-0,71)). Incluso en pacientes en los que se diagnosticó IAP tras haber efectuado pruebas diagnósticas más extensas, incluyendo ultrasonografía endoscópica o colangiopancreatografía por resonancia magnética, la tasa de recidiva después de la colecistectomía era menor (4/36 (11%) versus 42/108 (39%); tasa de riesgo 0,41 (i.c. del 95% 0,16-1,07)). CONCLUSIÓN: La práctica de una colecistectomía después de un episodio de IAP disminuye el riesgo de pancreatitis recidivante. Esto implica que los diagnósticos actuales son insuficientes para excluir una causa biliar (PROSPERO CRD42017055275).

Cost-effectiveness of same-admission versus interval cholecystectomy after mild gallstone pancreatitis in the PONCHO trial.

BACKGROUND: Same-admission cholecystectomy is indicated after gallstone pancreatitis to reduce the risk of recurrent disease or other gallstone-related complications, but its impact on overall costs is unclear. This study analysed the cost-effectiveness of same-admission versus interval cholecystectomy after mild gallstone pancreatitis. METHODS: In a multicentre RCT (Pancreatitis of biliary Origin: optimal timiNg of CHOlecystectomy; PONCHO) patients with mild gallstone pancreatitis were randomized before discharge to either cholecystectomy within 72 h (same-admission cholecystectomy) or cholecystectomy after 25-30 days (interval cholecystectomy). Healthcare use of all patients was recorded prospectively using clinical report forms. Unit costs of resources used were determined, and patients completed multiple Health and Labour Questionnaires to record pancreatitis-related absence from work. Cost-effectiveness analyses were performed from societal and healthcare perspectives, with the costs per readmission prevented as primary outcome with a time horizon of 6 months. RESULTS: All 264 trial participants were included in the present analysis, 128 randomized to same-admission cholecystectomy and 136 to interval cholecystectomy. Same-admission cholecystectomy reduced the risk of acute readmission for recurrent gallstone-related complications from 16·9 to 4·7 per cent (P = 0·002). Mean total costs from a societal perspective were €234 (95 per cent c.i. -1249 to 738) less per patient in the same-admission cholecystectomy group. Same-admission cholecystectomy was superior to interval cholecystectomy, with a societal incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of -€1918 to prevent one readmission for gallstone-related complications. CONCLUSION: In mild biliary pancreatitis, same-admission cholecystectomy was more effective and less costly than interval cholecystectomy.

Altered central pain processing after pancreatic surgery for chronic pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Chronic abdominal pain is common in chronic pancreatitis (CP) and may involve altered central pain processing. This study evaluated the relationship between pain processing and pain outcome after pancreatic duct decompression and/or pancreatic resection in patients with CP. METHODS: Patients with CP underwent quantitative sensory testing. Pain processing was measured via electrical pain detection (ePDT) and electrical pain tolerance (ePTT) thresholds in dermatomes C5 and L4. Inhibitory descending pain control mechanisms were assessed using the conditioned pain modulation (CPM) paradigm. Healthy controls and patients with CP were compared, and patients with CP and a poor pain outcome (visual analogue scale (VAS) score greater than 30) were compared with those with a good pain outcome (VAS score 30 or less). RESULTS: Forty-eight patients with CP had lower ePDT, ePTT and CPM responses compared with values in 15 healthy controls (P < 0·030). The sum of ePDT values was lower in patients with a poor pain outcome than in those with a good outcome (median 7·1 versus 11·2 mA; P = 0·008). There was a correlation with the VAS score and the sum of ePDT values (rs = -0·45, P = 0·016) and ePTT values (rs = -0·46, P = 0·011), and CPM response (rs = -0·43, P = 0·006) in patients with CP. CONCLUSION: After pain-relieving pancreatic surgery, patients with CP exhibit altered central pain processing compared with that in healthy controls. Poor pain outcomes are associated with more central sensitization and more pronociceptive descending pain modulation, and this should be considered when managing persistent pain after pain-relieving surgery for CP.