Profile of and risk factors for early unplanned readmissions in patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis.

INTRODUCTION: Acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP) complicates up to 15% of acute pancreatitis cases. ANP has historically been associated with a significant risk for readmission, but there are currently no studies exploring factors that associate with risk for unplanned, early (<30-day) readmissions in this patient population. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of all consecutive patients presenting to hospitals in the Indiana University (IU) Health system with pancreatic necrosis between December 2016 and June 2020. Patients younger than 18 years of age, without confirmed pancreatic necrosis and those that suffered in-hospital mortality were excluded. Logistic regression was performed to identify potential predictors of early readmission in this group of patients. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-two patients met study criteria. 27.7% of the cohort was readmitted within 30-days of index discharge. The median time to readmission was 10 days (IQR 5-17 days). The most frequent reason for readmission was abdominal pain (75.6%), followed by nausea and vomiting in (35.6%). Discharge to home was associated with 93% lower odds of readmission. We found no additional clinical factors that predicted early readmission. CONCLUSION: Patients with ANP have a significant risk for early (<30 days) readmission. Direct discharge to home, rather than short or long-term rehabilitation facilities, is associated with lower odds of early readmission. Analysis was otherwise negative for independent, clinical predictors of early unplanned readmissions in ANP.

The addition of flexible endoscopic suturing to stenting for the management of transmural esophageal wall defects: a single tertiary center experience.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic stenting is the standard of care for full thickness esophageal wall defects. The aim of this study is to evaluate outcomes of endoscopic closure of esophageal defects using stenting, with or without endoscopic suturing. METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective study of patients with esophageal wall defects who underwent endoscopic interventions. Outcomes of stenting with or without endoscopic suturing of the defect were assessed. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to examine factors associated with successful defect closure. RESULTS: One hundred and fourteen patients with esophageal wall defects underwent 254 endoscopies with an overall complete closure rate of 75.8%. Twenty-three (20.2%) patients underwent primary closure using endoscopic suturing and subsequent esophageal stenting, while 91 (79.8%) underwent esophageal stenting only. The dual modality group (versus the stent-only group) had similar defect closure rates (84.2 vs. 73.8%, p = 0.55) and time to stent migration (37 vs. 12.5 days, p = 0.07), but was associated with longer procedure times (60 vs. 36 min, p < 0.01) and fewer additional endoscopic procedures (13.6 vs. 43.2%, p = 0.01). Stent suturing significantly decreased migration (35.5 vs. 58.5%, p = 0.04), was associated with fewer additional endoscopies (15.4 vs. 50%, p < 0.01) and reduced need for additional stents (7.7 vs. 34.3%, p < 0.01). On multivariate analysis, chronic defects (> four weeks old) were 81% less likely to close compared to acute (≤ 4 weeks) defects (OR 0.19, CI 0.04-0.77, p = 0.02), and large diameter stents (23 mm) were associated with higher odds of defect closure (OR 3.36, CI 1.02-11.4, p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Endoscopic treatment of esophageal wall defects is safe, effective, and more likely to be successful in acute defects using larger caliber stents. Stent suturing reduces migration, need for additional endoscopic procedures, and stent exchanges. Further comparative studies with larger cohorts are needed to validate our results.

South African guidelines for receptor radioligand therapy (RLT) with Lu-177-PSMA in prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in South Africa, as it is in the rest of the world. In African men, however, prostate cancer tends to follow a more aggressive course when compared to their European counterparts. This is attributed to a plethora of diverse factors of which an underlying genetic component has been shown to be an important aspect. Such differences highlight the need for individualised therapy and for local guidelines. The aim of this guideline is to aid nuclear physicians and other clinicians who manage patients with prostate cancer in the correct identification and treatment of patients who are likely to benefit from receptor radioligand therapy. RECOMMENDATIONS: There are a multitude of treatment modalities available for the treatment of prostate cancer and these therapies may be required at various time points during the course of the disease in any individual patient. A multidisciplinary approach is crucial in deciding which therapy, or combination of therapies, would be most advantageous at particular time points. The multidisciplinary team should include a urologist, oncologist and nuclear medicine physician as a minimum, and should ideally also involve a palliative/pain specialist, a dietician and a psychologist. CONCLUSION: Treatment with 177Lu-PSMA has emerged as a promising systemic modality, which involves the delivery of targeted radiation therapy in the form of ß-particles to sites of tumour tissue. Therapy is provided on an outpatient basis, is well tolerated with relatively few side effects and has a positive effect on overall survival and quality of life. At present, it is used mostly in the setting of advanced, castrate-resistant cancer. Patients are selected (amongst other criteria) based on the prior PSMA-based SPECT/PET/CT imaging (99mTc-,68Ga- or 18F-PSMA), which should demonstrate sufficient receptor expression in order to consider PSMA-based targeted radionuclide therapy. Such imaging of an intended target prior to its therapeutic targeting is known as a theranostic approach.