Early Versus Late Drainage Removal in Patients Who Underwent Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Using Trial Sequential Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The superiority of early drain removal (EDR) versus late (LDR) after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) has been demonstrated only in RCTs. METHODS: A meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model and trial sequential analysis. The critical endpoints were morbidity, redrainage, relaparotomy, and postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF). Hemorrhage (PPH), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), length of stay (LOS), and readmission rates were also evaluated. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Type I and type II errors were excluded, comparing the accrued sample size (ASS) with the required sample size (RIS). When RIS is superior to ASS, type I or II errors can be hypothesized. RESULTS: ASS was 632 for all endpoints except DGE and PPH (557 patients). The major morbidity (RR 0.55; 95% CI 0.32-0.97) was lower in the EDR group. The CR-POPF rate was lower in the EDR than in the LDR group (RR 0.50), but this difference is not statistically significant (95% CI 0.24-1.03). The RIS to confirm or exclude these results can be reached by randomizing 5959 patients. The need for percutaneous drainage, relaparotomy, PPH, DGE, and readmission rates was similar. The related RISs were higher than ASS, and type II errors cannot be excluded. LOS was shorter in the EDR than the LDR group (MD - 2.25; 95% CI - 3.23 to - 1.28). The RIS was 567, and type I errors can be excluded. CONCLUSIONS: EDR, compared with LDR, is associated with lower major morbidity and shorter LOS.

Physical Prehabilitation in Patients who Underwent Major Abdominal Surgery: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Component Network Meta-Analysis Using GRADE and CINeMA Approach.

BACKGROUND: Physical prehabilitation is recommended before major abdominal surgery to ameliorate short-term outcomes. METHODS: A frequentist, random-effects network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to clarify which type of preoperative physical activity among aerobic exercise (AE), inspiratory muscle training (IMT), and resistance training produces benefits in patients who underwent major abdominal surgery. The surface under the P-score, odds ratio (OR), or mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were reported. The results were adjusted by using the component network approach. The critical endpoints were overall and major morbidity rate and mortality rate. The important but not critical endpoints were the length of stay (LOS) and pneumonia. RESULTS: The meta-analysis included 25 studies. The best approaches for overall morbidity rate were AE and AE + IMT (OR = 0.61, p-score = 0.76, and OR = 0.66, p-score = 0.68). The best approaches for pneumonia were AE + IMT and AE (OR = 0.21, p-score = 0.91, and OR = 0.52, p-score = 0.68). The component analysis confirmed that the best incremental OR (0.30; 95% CI 0.12-0.74) could be obtained using AE + IMT. The best approach for LOS was AE alone (MD - 1.63 days; 95% CI - 3.43 to 0.18). The best combination of components was AE + IMT (MD - 1.70; 95% CI - 2.06 to - 1.27). CONCLUSIONS: Physical prehabilitation reduces the overall morbidity rate, pneumonia, and length of stay. The most relevant effect of prehabilitation requires the simultaneous use of AE and IMT.

The Presence of an Aberrant Right Hepatic Artery Did Not Influence Surgical and Oncological Outcomes After Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The presence of an aberrant right hepatic artery (a-RHA) could influence the oncological and postoperative results after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). METHODS: A systematic review and metanalysis were conducted, including all comparative studies having patients who underwent PD without (na-RHA) or with a-RHA. The results were reported as risk ratios (RRs), mean differences (MDs), or hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95 CI). The random effects model was used to calculate the effect sizes. The endpoints were distinguished as critical and important. Critical endpoints were: R1 resection, overall survival (OS), morbidity, mortality, and biliary fistula (BL). Important endpoints were: postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), post pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), length of stay (LOS), and operative time (OT). RESULTS: Considering the R1 rate no significant differences were observed between the two groups (RR 1.06; 0.89 to 1.27). The two groups have a similar OS (HR 0.95; 0.85 to 1.06). Postoperative morbidity and mortality were similar between the two groups, with a RR of 0.97 (0.88 to 1.06) and 0.81 (0.54 to 1.20), respectively. The biliary fistula rate was similar between the two groups (RR of 1.09; 0.72 to 1.66). No differences were observed for non-critical endpoints. CONCLUSION: The presence of a-RHA does not affect negatively the short-term and long-term clinical outcomes of PD.

Immunonutrition in patients who underwent major abdominal surgery: A comprehensive systematic review and component network metanalysis using GRADE and CINeMA approaches.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of immunonutrition in patients who underwent major abdominal surgery have been recently established, but the optimal combination of immunonutrients has remained unclear. The aim is to clarify this point. METHODS: A systematic search of randomized clinical trials about immunonutrition in major abdominal surgery was made. A frequentist random-effects component network meta-analysis was conducted, reporting the P score and odds ratio or mean difference with a 95% confidence interval. The best components and best plausible strategies were described. The critical endpoints were morbidity and mortality rates. The important endpoints were infectious complication rate and length of stay. RESULTS: The meta-analysis includes 87 studies and 8,375 patients. The best approach for morbidity rate, with a moderate grade of certainty, was the use of perioperative enteral/oral immunonutrition with arginine, glutamine, and polyunsaturated fatty acids (odds ratio 0.32; 0.10 to 0.98; P score of 0.93). The mortality rate was reduced by postoperative enteral immunonutrition with RNA, arginine, and polyunsaturated fatty acids (odds ratio 59; 0.29 to 1.22; P score 0.84) but with a low grade of certainty. No significant heterogeneity or incoherence is observed. The length of stay and infectious results are "at risk" for high heterogeneity or network meta-analysis incoherence. The component analysis confirmed that postoperative oral/enteral use of 2 or 3 components is crucial to reducing morbidity rate. CONCLUSION: The oral/enteral immunonutrition in the postoperative period, with multiple immunonutrients, can reduce the morbidity rate in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. The effect of immunonutrition on mortality, infectious disease, and length of stay is unclear.

Value of immunonutrition in patients undergoing pancreatic resection: a trial sequential meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of immunonutrition (IM) in patients who underwent pancreatic surgery are unclear. METHODS: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing IM with standard nutrition (SN) in pancreatic surgery was carried out. A random-effects trial sequential meta-analysis was made, reporting Risk Ratio (RR), mean difference (MD), and required information size (RIS). If RIS was reached, false negative (type II error) and positive results (type I error) could be excluded. The endpoints were morbidity, mortality, infectious complication, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) rates, and length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: The meta-analysis includes 6 RCTs and 477 patients. Morbidity (RR 0.77; 0.26 to 2.25), mortality (RR 0.90; 0.76 to 1.07), and POPF rates were similar. The RISs were 17,316, 7,417, and 464,006, suggesting a type II error. Infectious complications were lower in the IM group, with a RR of 0.54 (0.36-0.79; 95 CI). The LOS was shorter in IM (MD -0.3 days; -0.6 to -0.1). For both, the RISs were reached, excluding type I error. CONCLUSION: The IM can reduce infectious complications and LOS The small differences in mortality, morbidity, and POPF make it impossible to exclude type II error due to large RISs.

An Update on Appendiceal Neuroendocrine Tumors.

The mainstay of appendiceal neuroendocrine neoplasm (aNEN) treatment is surgery, based on simple appendectomy or right-sided hemicolectomy with lymphadenectomy (RHC). The majority of aNENs are adequately treated with appendectomy, but current guidelines have poor accuracy in terms of selecting patients requiring RHC, especially in aNENs 1-2 cm in size. Simple appendectomy is curative for appendiceal NETs (G1-G2) < 1 cm (if the resection status is R0), whereas RHC with lymph node dissection is recommended in tumors ≥ 2 cm in diameter, based on the high risk of nodal metastases in these cases. The clinical management of aNENs 1-2 cm in size is more controversial because lymph node or distant metastases are uncommon but possible. In our opinion, patients with tumor size > 15 mm or with grading G2 (according to WHO 2010) and/or lympho-vascular invasion should be referred for radicalization with RHC. However, decision-making in these cases should include discussion within a multidisciplinary tumor board at referral centers with the aim of offering each patient a tailored treatment, also considering that relatively young patients with long-life expectancy represent the majority of cases.

Appendiceal goblet cell carcinoma has marginal advantages from perioperative chemotherapy: a population-based study with an entropy balancing analysis.

PURPOSE: The aim is to clarify the use of perioperative chemotherapy in resectable goblet cell carcinoma (GCC). METHODS: A retrospective study was carried out based on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results study. The population was divided: into patients who received only radical surgery (group A) and those who received radical surgery plus chemotherapy (group B). An entropy balancing was carried out to correct the imbalance between the two groups. Two models were generated. Model 1 contained only high-risk patients: group B and a "virtual" group A with similar characteristics. Model 2 included only low-risk patients: group A and "virtual" group B with identical attributes. The efficacy of entropy balancing was evaluated with the d value. The overall survival was compared and reported with Hazard Ratio (HR) within a confidence interval of 95% (95 CI). RESULTS: The groups A and B were imbalanced for tumor size (d = 0.392), T (d = 1.128), N (d = 1.340), M (d = 1.456), mean number of positive lymph nodes (d = 0.907), and LNR (d = 0.889). Before the balancing, the risk of death was higher in group B than in A (4.3; 2.5 to 7.4). After reweighting, all large differences were eliminated (d < 0.200). In high-risk patients, the risk of death was higher in patients who underwent surgery alone than those who received perioperative chemotherapy (HR 0.5; 0.2 to 1.3) without statistical significance (p = 0.187). In low-risk patients, the risk of death was similar (HR 1.1; 0.3 to 3.3). CONCLUSION: Perioperative chemotherapy could provide some marginal advantages to high-risk patients.

Trial sequential meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: is it the time to stop the randomization?

BACKGROUND: The advantages of LPD compared with OPD remain debatable. The study aimed to compare the laparoscopic (LPD) versus open (OPD) for pancreaticoduodenectomy. METHODS: A meta-analysis of randomized studies (RCTs) comparing LPD and OPD was made. The results were reported as relative risk (RRs) or mean differences (MDs). The trial sequential analysis was used to test the type I and type II errors defining the required information size (RIS). The primary outcome was mortality, major morbidity, and postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). R1 resection, post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage, delayed gastric emptying, biliary fistula, reoperation, readmission, operative time (OT), lymph nodes harvested, and length of stay (LOS) were also studied. RESULTS: Four RCTs, counting 818 patients, were found. The RRs for mortality, major morbidity, and POPF were 1.16, 1.04, and 0.86, without significant differences. The RISs were 35,672, 16,548, and 8206. To confirm this equivalence, at least 34,854, 15,730, and 7338 should be randomized. OT was significantly longer in LPD than OPD, with an MD of 63.22. The LOS was significantly shorter in LPD than in OPD, with - 1.76 days. The RISs were 1297 and 1273, excluding a false-positive result. No significant differences were observed for the remaining endpoints, and RISs suggested that more than 3000 patients should be randomized to confirm the equivalence. CONCLUSION: The equivalence of LPD and OPD for mortality, major morbidity, and POPF is affected by type II error. The RISs to demonstrate a superiority of one of the two techniques seem unrealistic to obtain.

EAES rapid guideline: updated systematic review, network meta-analysis, CINeMA and GRADE assessment, and evidence-informed European recommendations on the management of common bile duct stones.

BACKGROUND: Choledocholithiasis presents in a considerable proportion of patients with gallbladder disease. There are several management options, including preoperative or intraoperative endoscopic cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-informed, interdisciplinary, European recommendations on the management of common bile duct stones in the context of intact gallbladder with a clinical decision to intervene to both the gallbladder and the common bile duct stones. METHODS: We updated a systematic review and network meta-analysis of LCBDE, preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative ERCP. We formed evidence summaries using the GRADE and the CINeMA methodology, and a panel of general surgeons, gastroenterologists, and a patient representative contributed to the development of a GRADE evidence-to-decision framework to select among multiple interventions. RESULTS: The panel reached unanimous consensus on the first Delphi round. We suggest LCBDE over preoperative, intraoperative, or postoperative ERCP, when surgical experience and expertise are available; intraoperative ERCP over LCBDE, preoperative or postoperative ERCP, when this is logistically feasible in a given healthcare setting; and preoperative ERCP over LCBDE or postoperative ERCP, when intraoperative ERCP is not feasible and there is insufficient experience or expertise with LCBDE (weak recommendation). The evidence summaries and decision aids are available on the platform MAGICapp ( https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/nJ5zyL ). CONCLUSION: We developed a rapid guideline on the management of common bile duct stones in line with latest methodological standards. It can be used by healthcare professionals and other stakeholders to inform clinical and policy decisions. GUIDELINE REGISTRATION NUMBER: IPGRP-2022CN170.

Evolving knowledge in surgical oncology of pancreatic cancer: from theory to clinical practice-a fifteen-year journey at a tertiary referral centre.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an increasing disease having a poor prognosis. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of different models of care for pancreatic cancer in a tertiary referral centre in the period 2006-2020. Retrospective study of patients with PDAC observed from January 2006 to December 2020. The demographic and clinical data, and data regarding the imaging techniques used, preoperative staging, management, survival and multidisciplinary tumour board (MDTB) evaluation were collected and compared in three different periods characterised by different organisation of pancreatic cancer services: period A (2006-2010); period B (2011-2015) and period C (2016-2020). One thousand four hundred seven patients were analysed: 441(31.3%) in period A; 413 (29.4%) in B and 553 (39.3%) in C. The proportion of patients increased significantly, from 31.3% to 39.3% (P = 0.032). Body mass index (P = 0.033), comorbidity rate (P = 0.002) and Karnofsky performance status (P < 0.001) showed significant differences. Computed tomography scans (P < 0.001), endoscopic ultrasound (P < 0.001), fine needle aspiration, fine needle biopsy (P < 0.001), and fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (P < 0.001) increased; contrast-enhanced ultrasound (P = 0.028) decreased. The cTNM was significantly different (P < 0.001). The MDTB evaluation increased significantly (P < 0.001). Up-front surgery and exploratory laparotomy decreased (P < 0.001), neoadjuvant treatment increased (P < 0.001). The present study showed the evolving knowledge in surgical oncology of pancreatic cancer at a tertiary referral centre over the time. The different models of care of pancreatic cancer, in particular the introduction of the MDTB and the institution of a pancreas unit to the decision-making process seemed to be influential.

Effect of malnutrition on postoperative results after pancreatic resection: An entropy balancing analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Malnutrition is a well-recognized risk factor for major surgery-related complications, but the impact of preoperative nutritional therapy is still debated due to a lack of high-level evidence. The study aims to evaluate the role of preoperative malnutrition in the postoperative course of patients who underwent pancreatic resection. METHODS: This is a retrospective study involving 488 patients who underwent pancreatic resection. An entropy balance was applied to 134 patients at risk for moderate or severe malnutrition (M/S-MAL) to obtain a cohort equal to 354 patients, with the null or low risk of malnutrition (N/L-MAL). The reweighting scheme was made in two steps. In the 1st reweighting, the two cohorts were homogenized for confounding factors not modifiable. In the 2nd reweighting, the two cohorts were matched for modifiable factors by preoperative dietary support. The entropy balance was evaluated with the d-value. The postoperative results were reported as mean differences (MD) or odds ratio (OR) with a confidence interval at 95% (95 CI). RESULTS: The M/S-MAL included patients with lower values of BMI (d < 0.750), hemoglobin (d = 0.671), serum albumin (d = 0.554), total protein (d = 0.381). The M/S-MAL patients were more frequent ECOG 1-2 (d = 0.418), with jaundice (d = 0.445) or back pain (d = 0.366). The pancreaticoduodenectomy (d = 0.440) and vascular resection (d = 0.620) in the M/S-MAL group were performed more frequently. The pancreatic remnant was more often hard (d = 0.527), and the Wirsung duct dilated (d = 0.459) in the N/L-MAL group. The rate of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma was higher in M/S-MAL (d = 0.399). After 1st weighting, M/S-MAL patients have a high comprehensive complication index (CCI) (MD = 5.5; 0.3 to 10.7), were more frequently discharged not at home (OR 2.3; 1.1 to 5.4) with a prolonged mean hospital stay (MD 6.1.1; 0.1 to 12.1, days), After 2nd weighting, the two groups have similar postoperative results. CONCLUSION: The correction of malnutrition could play an independent role in reducing the severity of complication, length of stay, and type of discharge in patients who underwent pancreatic resection.

Survival after active surveillance versus upfront surgery for incidental small pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours.

BACKGROUND: The safety of observing small non-functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (NF-Pan-NETs) remains under debate. METHODS: This was a multicentre retrospective study of patients with small incidental NF-Pan-NETs. Survival of patients who underwent upfront surgery versus active surveillance was compared. The risk of death was matched with that in the healthy population. The excess hazard rate and probability of a normal lifespan (NLP) were calculated. Propensity score matching (PSM) with a 1 : 1 ratio was used to minimize the risk of selection bias. RESULTS: Some 222 patients (43.7 per cent) underwent upfront surgery and 285 (56.3 per cent) were observed. The excess hazard rate for the entire cohort was quantifiable as 0.04 (95 per cent c.i. 0 to 0.08) deaths per 1000 persons per year, and the NLP was 99.7 per cent. Patients in the active surveillance group were older (median age 65 versus 58 years; P < 0.001), and more often had co-morbidity (45.3 versus 24.8 per cent; P = 0.001), and smaller tumours (median 12 versus 13 mm; P < 0.001), less frequently located in the pancreatic body-tail (59.5 versus 69.6 per cent; P = 0.008, 59.3 versus 73.9 per cent; P = 0.001). Median follow-up was longer for patients who underwent upfront surgery (5.6 versus 2.7 years; P < 0.001). After PSM, 118 patients per group were included. The excess hazard rates were 0.2 and 0.9 deaths per 1000 persons per year (P = 0.020) for patients in the active surveillance and upfront surgery groups respectively. Corresponding NLPs were 99.9 and 99.5 per cent respectively (P = 0.011). CONCLUSION: Active surveillance of small incidental NF-Pan-NETs is a reasonable alternative to resection.

Converted laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: is there an impact on patient outcome and total cost?

PURPOSE: Recent studies have reported worse outcomes of converted laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (CLDP) with respect to total laparoscopic (TLDP) and open (ODP). The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of conversion on patient outcome and on total cost. METHODS: Patients requiring a conversion (CLDP) were compared with both TLDP and ODP patients. The relevant patient- and tumour-related variables were collected for each patient. Both intra and postoperative data were extracted. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was carried out to equate the groups compared. RESULTS: Two hundred and five patients underwent DP, 105 (51.2%) ODPs, 81 (39.5%) TLDPs, and 19 (9.3%) CLDPs. After PSM, 19 CLDPs, 38 TLDPs, and 38 ODPs were compared. Patients who underwent CLDP showed a significantly longer operative time (P < 0.001), and an increase in blood loss (P = 0.032) and total cost (P = 0.034) with respect to TLDP, and a significantly longer operative time (P < 0.001), less frequent postoperative morbidity (P = 0.050), and a higher readmission rate (P = 0.035) with respect to ODP. CONCLUSION: Total laparoscopic pancreatectomy was superior regarding operative findings and total costs with respect to CLDP; ODP showed a higher postoperative morbidity rate and a lower readmission rate with respect to CLDP. However, the reasons for the readmission of patients who underwent CLDP were mainly related to postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) grade B which is usually due to pancreas texture. Thus, the majority of distal pancreatectomies can be started using a minimally invasive approach, performing an early conversion if necessary.

Preoperative carbohydrate loading before elective abdominal surgery: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of phase II/III randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The preoperative use of carbohydrate loading (CHO) is recommended in patients undergoing abdominal surgery, even if the advantages remain debatable. The aim was to evaluate the CHO benefits in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. METHODS: A systematic search of randomized clinical trials was made. A frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis was carried out, reporting the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA). The primary endpoint regarded the morbidity rate. The secondary endpoints were aspiration/regurgitation rates, the length of stay (LOS), the rate of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), the changes (Δ) in insulin sensitivity or resistance, and the postoperative C- reactive protein (CRP) values. RESULTS: CHO loading and water administration had a similar probability of being the approach with a lower morbidity rate (SUCRA = 62.4% and 64.7%). CHO and clear water also had a similar chance of avoiding the PONV (SUCRA of 80.8% and 77%). The aspiration regurgitation rate was not relevant in non-fasting patients (0.06%). CHO administration was associated with the shorter hospitalization (SUCRA 86.9%), with the best metabolic profile (SUCRA values for insulin resistance and sensitivity were 81.1% and 76%). CHO enriched was the best approach for postoperative CRP values. Preoperative fasting was the worst approach for morbidity, PONV, insulin resistance and sensitivity, and CRP (SUCRA values of 32.1%, 21.7%, 10.2%, 3.2%, and 2.0%). CONCLUSION: Both preoperative CHO loading and clear water use were superior to the fasting about morbidity. CHO drinks use could provide specific advantages, reduce the PONV rate, and improve carbohydrate homeostasis, inflammatory pathway, and hospitalization.

Minimally invasive adrenalectomy: a comprehensive systematic review and network meta-analysis of phase II/III randomized clinical controlled trials.

PURPOSE: The best approach for minimally invasive adrenalectomy is still under debate. METHODS: A systematic search of randomized clinical trials was carried out. A frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis was made reporting the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA). The primary endpoint regarded both in-hospital mortality and morbidity. The secondary endpoints were operative time (OP), blood loss (BL), length of stay (LOS), conversion, incisional hernia, and disease recurrence rate. RESULTS: Eight studies were included, involving 359 patients clustered as follows: 175 (48.7%) in the TPLA arm; 55 (15.3%) in the RPLA arm; 10 (2.8%) in the Ro-TPLA arm; 25 (7%) in the TPAA arm; 20 (5.6%) in the SILS-LA arm; and 74 (20.6%) in the RPA arm. The RPLA had the highest probability of being the safest approach (SUCRA 69.6%), followed by RPA (SUCRA 63.0%). TPAA, Ro-TPLA, SILS-LA, and TPLA have similar probability of being safe (SUCRA values 45.2%, 43.4%, 43.0%, and 38.5%, respectively). Analysis of the secondary endpoints confirmed the superiority of RPA regarding OP, BL, LOS, and incisional hernia rate. CONCLUSIONS: The best choice for patients with adrenal masses candidate for minimally invasive surgery seems to be RPA. An alternative could be RPLA. The remaining approaches could have some specific advantages but do not represent the first minimally invasive choice.

Adherence to Guidelines Influenced the Mortality, Hospital Stay, and Health Care System Costs in Patients With Acute Pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVES: The primary end point was the compliance rate with guidelines. The secondaries were mortality, hospital stay, and costs. METHODS: This study included 1904 patients with acute pancreatitis (AP): group A, diagnosed before 2013, and group B, after 2013. RESULTS: The compliance rate was 0.6%. The compliance rates increased for fluid resuscitation (3.3% vs 13.7%, P < 0.001), for antibiotics use (21.9% vs 28.1%, P = 0.002), for oral feeding (55.0% vs 49.7%, P = 0.007), and for correct use of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) (83% vs 91.9%, P < 0.001). Compliance to severity assessment with computed tomography (odds ratio [OR], 0.4; P = 0.029), parenteral nutrition recommendations (OR, 0.3; P = 0.009), and early surgery (OR, 0.3; P = 0.010) reduced the mortality. Compliance to antibiotic therapy (OR, 0.6; P < 0.001), correct use of parenteral nutrition (OR, 0.3; P < 0.001), correct use of ERCP (OR, 0.5; P < 0.001), and early surgery (OR, 0.3; P = 0.010) reduced hospital stay. The compliance reduced the costs for parenteral nutrition (P < 0.001), correct use of ERCP (P = 0.011), and surgery (P = 0.010). CONCLUSIONS: The adherence to guidelines for AP was low. Compliance could reduce mortality, prolonged hospital stay, and costs.

Performance of EUS-FNB in solid pancreatic masses: a lesson from 463 consecutive procedures and a practical nomogram.

The study's main goal was the diagnostic adequacy of pancreatic endoscopic ultrasonographic (EUS) fine-needle biopsy (FNB) and associated predictive factors. The secondary objective was to define the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNB in the diagnosis of pancreatic masses and pancreatic malignancies. None of the studies reported the diagnostic adequacy and accuracy of EUS. We retrospectively identified patients with solid pancreatic lesions that underwent EUS-FNB between 2013, and 2018. We calculated diagnostic adequacy and related factors. Using definitive histology on the surgically resected specimen as the gold standard, we calculated diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of EUS-FNB. We identified a total of 463 procedures. Diagnostic specimens were adequate in 436 procedures (94.1%), while 27 biopsies provided insufficient samples (5.9%). The multivariate analysis showed that lesion size and needle caliper were the only factors influencing diagnostic adequacy. The use of a biopsy needle (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.30-0.1.63, P 0.400) did not improve sample adequacy. We calculated sensitivity (100%), specificity (93.2%), diagnostic accuracy (93.2%), positive predictive value (97.1%), and negative predictive value (100%) using resected specimen as the gold standard. We found no significant complications. EUS-FNB is a reliable technique for the histological characterization of solid pancreatic masses.

Development and validation of a preoperative "difficulty score" for laparoscopic transabdominal adrenalectomy: a multicenter retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: A difficulty score for laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA) is lacking in the literature. A retrospective cohort study was designed to develop a preoperative "difficulty score" for LA. METHODS: A multicenter study was conducted involving four Italian tertiary centers for adrenal disease. The population was randomly divided into two subsets: training group and validation one. A multicenter study was undertaken, including 964 patients. Patient, adrenal lesion, surgeon's characteristics, and the type of procedure were studied as potential predictors of target events. The operative time (pOT), conversion rate (cLA), or both were used as indicators of the difficulty in three multivariate models. All models were developed in a training cohort (70% of the sample) and validated using 30% of patients. For all models, the ability to predict complicated postoperative course was reported describing the area under the curve (AUCs). Logistic regression, reporting odds ratio (OR) with p-value, was used. RESULTS: In model A, gender (OR 2.04, p = 0.001), BMI (OR 1.07, p = 0.002), previous surgery (OR 1.29, p = 0.048), site (OR 21.8, p < 0.001) and size of the lesion (OR 1.16, p = 0.002), cumulative sum of procedures (OR 0.99, p < 0.001), extended (OR 26.72, p < 0.001) or associated procedures (OR 4.32, p = 0.015) increased the pOT. In model B, ASA (OR 2.86, p = 0.001), lesion size (OR 1.20, p = 0.005), and extended resection (OR 8.85, p = 0.007) increased the cLA risk. Model C had similar results to model A. All scores obtained predicted the target events in validation cohort (OR 1.99, p < 0.001; OR 1.37, p = 0.007; OR 1.70, p < 0.001, score A, B, and C, respectively). The AUCs in predicting complications were 0.740, 0.686, and 0.763 for model A, B, and C, respectively. CONCLUSION: A difficulty score based on both pOT and cLA (Model C) was developed using 70% of the sample. The score was validated using a second cohort. Finally, the score was tested, and its results are able to predict a complicated postoperative course.

Prophylactic cholecystectomy is not mandatory in patients candidate to the resection for small intestine neuroendocrine neoplasms: a propensity score-matched and cost-minimization analysis.

To evaluate two competitive strategies in patients undergoing resection of Small-intestine neuroendocrine neoplasms (Si-NEN): prophylactic cholecystectomy (PC) versus On-demand delayed (OC) cholecystectomy. None comparative studies are available. This is a retrospective study based on 247 Si-NENs candidates for the primary tumor resection. Patients were divided into two arms: PC and OC. Propensity score matching was performed, reporting the d value. The primary outcome was the rehospitalization rate for any cause. The secondary endpoints were: the rehospitalization rate for biliary stone disease (BSD), the mean number of rehospitalization (any cause and BSD), the complication rate (all and severe). A P value < 0.05 was considered significant, and the number needed to treat (NNT) < 10 was considered clinically relevant. Before matching, 52 (21.1%) were in the PC arm and 195 (78.9%) in the OC group. The two arms have a sub-optimal balance for age (d = 0.575), symptoms (d = 0.661), ENETS TNM stage (d = 0.661). After matching, we included 52 patients in PC and 104 in OC one. The two groups are well balanced (all d values < 0.5). The rehospitalization rate was similar in the two groups (36% vs 31; P = 0.594; NNT = 21). The rehospitalization rate for BSD was lower in the PC arm than OC one (0% vs 7%) without statistical significance (P = 0.096) and relevance (NNT = 15). The mean number of readmission (any cause and BSD) and the complication rate (all and severe) were similar. PC was not mandatory in patients having Si-NEN and candidates to the resection of primary tumors.