Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy: a pan-European multicenter propensity-matched study.

BACKGROUND: The use of robot-assisted and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy is increasing, yet large adjusted analyses that can be generalized internationally are lacking. This study aimed to compare outcomes after robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy in a pan-European cohort. METHODS: An international multicenter retrospective study including patients after robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy from 50 centers in 12 European countries (2009-2020). Propensity score matching was performed in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo ≥III). RESULTS: Among 2,082 patients undergoing minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy, 1,006 underwent robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and 1,076 laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy. After matching 812 versus 812 patients, the rates of major morbidity (31.9% vs 29.6%; P = .347) and 30-day/in-hospital mortality (4.3% vs 4.6%; P = .904) did not differ significantly between robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy, respectively. Robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with a lower conversion rate (6.7% vs 18.0%; P < .001) and higher lymph node retrieval (16 vs 14; P = .003). Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with shorter operation time (446 minutes versus 400 minutes; P < .001), and lower rates of postoperative pancreatic fistula grade B/C (19.0% vs 11.7%; P < .001), delayed gastric emptying grade B/C (21.4% vs 7.4%; P < .001), and a higher R0-resection rate (73.2% vs 84.4%; P < .001). CONCLUSION: This European multicenter study found no differences in overall major morbidity and 30-day/in-hospital mortality after robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy compared with laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy. Further, laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with a lower rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula, delayed gastric emptying, wound infection, shorter length of stay, and a higher R0 resection rate than robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy. In contrast, robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with a lower conversion rate and a higher number of retrieved lymph nodes as compared with laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy.

Minimally invasive robot-assisted and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy in a pan-European registry a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: International guidelines recommend monitoring of the use and outcome of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS). However, data from prospective international audits on minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) are lacking. This study examined the use and outcome of robot-assisted (RDP) and laparoscopic (LDP) distal pancreatectomy in the E-MIPS registry. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Post-hoc analysis in a prospective audit on MIPS, including consecutive patients undergoing MIDP in 83 centers from 19 European countries (01-01-2019/31-12-2021). Primary outcomes included intraoperative events (grade 1: excessive blood loss, grade 2: conversion/change in operation, grade 3: intraoperative death), major morbidity, and in-hospital/30-day mortality. Multivariable logistic regression analyses identified high-risk groups for intraoperative events. RDP and LDP were compared in the total cohort and in high-risk groups. RESULTS: Overall, 1672 patients undergoing MIDP were included; 606 (36.2%) RDP and 1066 (63.8%) LDP. The annual use of RDP increased from 30.5% to 42.6% (P<0.001). RDP was associated with fewer grade 2 intraoperative events compared to LDP (9.6% vs. 16.8%, P<0.001), with longer operating time (238 vs. 201 minutes,P<0.001). No significant differences were observed between RDP and LDP regarding major morbidity (23.4% vs. 25.9%, P=0.264) and in-hospital/30-day mortality (0.3% vs. 0.8%, P=0.344). Three high-risk groups were identified; BMI>25 kg/m2, previous abdominal surgery, and vascular involvement. In each group, RDP was associated with fewer conversions and longer operative times. CONCLUSION: This European registry-based study demonstrated favorable outcomes for MIDP, with mortality rates below 1%. LDP remains the predominant approach, whereas the use of RDP is increasing. RDP was associated with less conversions and longer operative time, including in high-risk subgroups. Future randomized trials should confirm these findings and assess cost differences.

Near complete remission of an inoperable pancreatic acinar cell carcinoma after BRAF-/MEK-inhibitor treatment-A case report and review of the literature.

INTRODUCTION: Pancreatic acinar cell carcinomas are rare malignant neoplasms. High-quality evidence about the best treatment strategy is lacking. We present the case of a 52-year-old male with a BRAFV600E -mutated PACC who experienced a complete remission after chemotherapy with BRAF-/MEK-inhibitors. CASE: The patient presented with upper abdomen pain, night sweat, and weight loss. CT scan showed a pancreatic tumor extending from the pancreas head to body. Histological workup identified an acinar cell carcinoma. As the tumor was inoperable, chemotherapy with FOFIRNIOX was initiated and initially showed a slight regression of disease. The regimen had to be discontinued due to severe side effects. Molecular analysis identified a BRAFV600E mutation, so the patient was started on BRAF- and MEK-inhibitors (dabrafenib/trametinib). After 16 months, CT scans showed a near complete remission with a markedly improved overall health. DISCUSSION: Studies suggest that up to one-fourth of PACCs carry a BRAF mutation and might therefore be susceptible to a BRAF-/MEK-inhibitor therapy. This offers a new therapeutic pathway to treat this rare but malignant neoplasm.

Patient-reported outcomes at three months after pancreatic surgery for benign and malignant diseases - A prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Pancreatic surgery may have a long-lasting effect on patients' health status and quality of life (QoL). We aim to evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PRO) 3 months after pancreatic surgery. METHODS: Patients scheduled for pancreatic surgery were enrolled in a prospective trial at five German centers. Patients completed PRO questionnaires (EQ-5D-5L, EORTC QLQ-PAN26, patient-reported happiness, and HADS-D), we report the first follow-up 3 months after surgery as an interim analysis. Statistical testing was performed using R software. RESULTS: From 2019 to 2022 203 patients were enrolled, a three-month follow-up questionnaire was available in 135 (65.5 %). 77 (57.9 %) underwent surgery for malignant disease. Patient-reported health status (EQ-5D-5L) was impaired in 4/5 dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain, discomfort) for patients with malignant and 3/5 dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities) for patients with benign disease 3 months after surgery (p < 0.05). Patients with malignant disease reported an increase in depressive symptoms, patients with benign disease had a decrease in anxiety symptoms (HADS-D; depression: 5.00 vs 6.51, p = 0.002; anxiety: 8.04 vs. 6.34, p = 0.030). Regarding pancreatic-disease-specific symptoms (EORTC-QLQ-PAN26), patients with malignant disease reported increased problems with taste, weight loss, weakness in arms and legs, dry mouth, body image and troubling side effects at three months. Patients with benign disease indicated more weakness in arms and legs, troubling side effects but less future worries at three months. CONCLUSION: Patient-reported outcomes of patients undergoing pancreatic surgery for benign vs. malignant disease show important differences. Patients with malignant tumors report more severely decreased quality of life 3 months postoperatively than patients with benign tumors.

Thoracic Epidural Analgesia Is Not Associated With Improved Survival After Pancreatic Surgery: Long-Term Follow-Up of the Randomized Controlled PAKMAN Trial.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative thoracic epidural analgesia (EDA) and patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) are common forms of analgesia after pancreatic surgery. Current guidelines recommend EDA over PCIA, and evidence suggests that EDA may improve long-term survival after surgery, especially in cancer patients. The aim of this study was to determine whether perioperative EDA is associated with an improved patient prognosis compared to PCIA in pancreatic surgery. METHODS: The PAKMAN trial was an adaptive, pragmatic, international, multicenter, randomized controlled superiority trial conducted from June 2015 to October 2017. Three to five years after index surgery a long-term follow-up was performed from October 2020 to April 2021. RESULTS: For long-term follow-up of survival, 109 patients with EDA were compared to 111 patients with PCIA after partial pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). Long-term follow-up of quality of life (QoL) and pain assessment was available for 40 patients with EDA and 45 patients with PCIA (questionnaire response rate: 94%). Survival analysis revealed that EDA, when compared to PCIA, was not associated with improved overall survival (OS, HR, 1.176, 95% HR-CI, 0.809-1.710, P = .397, n = 220). Likewise, recurrence-free survival did not differ between groups (HR, 1.116, 95% HR-CI, 0.817-1.664, P = .397, n = 220). OS subgroup analysis including only patients with malignancies showed no significant difference between EDA and PCIA (HR, 1.369, 95% HR-CI, 0.932-2.011, P = .109, n = 179). Similar long-term effects on QoL and pain severity were observed in both groups (EDA: n = 40, PCIA: n = 45). CONCLUSIONS: Results from this long-term follow-up of the PAKMAN randomized controlled trial do not support favoring EDA over PCIA in pancreatic surgery. Until further evidence is available, EDA and PCIA should be considered similar regarding long-term survival.

Impact of Neoadjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer: Transatlantic Trend and Postoperative Outcomes Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of modern chemotherapy a decade ago has led to increased use of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). A recent North American study demonstrated increased use of NAT and improved operative outcomes in patients with PDAC. The aims of this study were to compare the use of NAT and short-term outcomes in patients with PDAC undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) among registries from the US and Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden. STUDY DESIGN: Databases from 2 multicenter (voluntary) and 2 nationwide (mandatory) registries were queried from 2018 to 2020. Patients undergoing PD for PDAC were compared based on the use of upfront surgery vs NAT. Adoption of NAT was measured in each country over time. Thirty-day outcomes, including the composite measure (ideal outcomes), were compared by multivariable analyses. Sensitivity analyses of patients undergoing vascular resection were performed. RESULTS: Overall, 11,402 patients underwent PD for PDAC with 33.7% of patients receiving NAT. The use of NAT increased steadily from 28.3% in 2018 to 38.5% in 2020 (p < 0.0001). However, use of NAT varied widely by country: the US (46.8%), the Netherlands (44.9%), Sweden (11.0%), and Germany (7.8%). On multivariable analysis, NAT was significantly (p < 0.01) associated with reduced rates of serious morbidity, clinically relevant pancreatic fistulae, reoperations, and increased ideal outcomes. These associations remained on sensitivity analysis of patients undergoing vascular resection. CONCLUSIONS: NAT before PD for pancreatic cancer varied widely among 4 Western audits yet increased by 26% during 3 years. NAT was associated with improved short-term outcomes.

Implementation and outcome of minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy in Europe: a registry-based retrospective study A critical appraisal of the first 3 years of the E-MIPS registry.

BACKGROUND: International multicenter audit-based studies focusing on the outcome of minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) are lacking. The European registry for Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery (E-MIPS) is the E-AHPBA endorsed registry aimed to monitor and safeguard the introduction of MIPD in Europe. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A planned analysis of outcomes among consecutive patients after MIPD from 45 centers in 14 European countries in the E-MIPS registry (2019-2021). Main outcomes of interest were major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3) and 30-day/in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Overall, 1,336 patients after MIPD were included (835 robot-assisted (R-MIPD) and 501 laparoscopic MIPD (L-MIPD)). Overall, 20 centers performed R-MIPD, 15 centers L-MIPD, and 10 centers both. Between 2019 and 2021, the rate of centers performing L-MIPD decreased from 46.9% to 25%, whereas for R-MIPD this increased from 46.9% to 65.6%. Overall, the rate of major morbidity was 41.2%, 30-day/in-hospital mortality 4.5%, conversion rate 9.7%, POPF grade B/C 22.7%, and PPH grade B/C 10.8%. Median length of hospital stay was 12 days [IQR 8-21]. A lower rate of major morbidity, POPF grade B/C, PPH grade BH/C, DGE grade B/C, percutaneous drainage and readmission was found after L-MIPD. The number of centers meeting the Miami Guidelines volume cut-off of ≥20 MIPDs annually increased from 9 (28.1%) in 2019 to 12 (37.5%) in 2021 (P=0.424). Rates of conversion (7.4% vs. 14.8% P<0.001) and reoperation (8.9% vs. 15.1%) P<0.001) were lower in centers which fulfilled the Miami volume cut-off. CONCLUSION: During the first 3 years of the pan-European E-MIPS registry, morbidity and mortality rates after MIPD were acceptable. A shift is ongoing from L-MIPD to R-MIPD. Variations in outcomes between the two minimally invasive approaches and the impact of the volume-cut-off should be further evaluated over a longer time period.

When Should Lymphadenectomy Be Performed in Non-Metastatic Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors? A Population-Based Analysis of the German Clinical Cancer Registry Group.

BACKGROUND: Patient selection for lymphadenectomy remains a controversial aspect in the treatment of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs), given the growing importance of parenchyma-sparing resections and minimally invasive procedures. METHODS: This population-based analysis was derived from the German Cancer Registry Group during the period from 2000 to 2021. Patients with upfront resected non-functional non-metastatic pNETs were included. RESULTS: Out of 5520 patients with pNET, 1006 patients met the inclusion criteria. Fifty-three percent of the patients were male. The median age was 64 ± 17 years. G1, G2, and G3 pNETs were found in 57%, 37%, and 7% of the patients, respectively. Lymph node metastasis (LNM) was present in 253 (24%) of all patients. LNM was an independent prognostic factor (HR 1.79, CI 95% 1.21-2.64, p = 0.001) for disease-free survival (DFS). The 3-, 5-, and 10-year disease-free survival in nodal negative tumors compared to nodal positive was 82% vs. 53%, 75% vs. 38%, and 48% vs. 16%. LNM was present in 5% of T1 tumors, 25% of T2 tumors, and 49% of T3-T4 tumors. In T1 tumors, G1 was the most predominant tumor grade (80%). However, in T2 tumors, G2 and G3 represented 44% and 5% of all tumors. LNM was associated with tumors located in the pancreatic head (p < 0.001), positive resection margin (p < 0.001), tumors larger than 2 cm (p < 0.001), and higher tumor grade (p < 0.001). The multivariable analysis showed that tumor size, tumor grade, and location were independent prognostic factors associated with LNM that could potentially be used to predict LNM preoperatively. CONCLUSION: LNM is an independent negative prognostic factor for DFS in pNETs. Due to the low incidence of LNM in T1 tumors (5%), parenchyma-sparing surgery seems oncologically adequate in small G1 pNETs, while regional lymphadenectomy should be recommended in T2 or G2/G3 pNETs.

Conception and prospective multicentric validation of a Robotic Surgery Training Curriculum (RoSTraC) for surgical residents: from simulation via laboratory training to integration into the operation room.

There is a lack of training curricula and educational concepts for robotic-assisted surgery (RAS). It remains unclear how surgical residents can be trained in this new technology and how robotics can be integrated into surgical residency training. The conception of a training curriculum for RAS addressing surgical residents resulted in a three-step training curriculum including multimodal learning contents: basics and simulation training of RAS (step 1), laboratory training on the institutional robotic system (step 2) and structured on-patient training in the operating room (step 3). For all three steps, learning content and video tutorials are provided via cloud-based access to allow self-contained training of the trainees. A prospective multicentric validation study was conducted including seven surgical residents. Transferability of acquired skills to a RAS procedure were analyzed using the GEARS score. All participants successfully completed RoSTraC within 1 year. Transferability of acquired RAS skills could be demonstrated using a RAS gastroenterostomy on a synthetic biological organ model. GEARS scores concerning this procedure improved significantly after completion of RoSTraC (17.1 (±5.8) vs. 23.1 (±4.9), p < 0.001). In step 3 of RoSTraC, all participants performed a median of 12 (range 5-21) RAS procedures on the console in the operation room. RoSTraC provides a highly standardized and comprehensive training curriculum for RAS for surgical residents. We could demonstrate that participating surgical residents acquired fundamental and advanced RAS skills. Finally, we could confirm that all surgical residents were successfully and safely embedded into the local RAS team.

Effect of Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy on Cytoreductive Surgery in Gastric Cancer With Synchronous Peritoneal Metastases: The Phase III GASTRIPEC-I Trial.

PURPOSE: In patients with peritoneal metastasis (PM) from gastric cancer (GC), chemotherapy is the treatment of choice. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) are still being debated. This randomized, controlled, open-label, multicenter phase III trial (EudraCT 2006-006088-22; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02158988) explored the impact on overall survival (OS) of HIPEC after CRS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients with GC and histologically proven PM were randomly assigned (1:1) to perioperative chemotherapy and CRS alone (CRS-A) or CRS plus HIPEC (CRS + H). HIPEC comprised mitomycin C 15 mg/m2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 in 5 L of saline perfused for 60 minutes at 42°C. The primary end point was OS; secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), other distant metastasis-free survival (MFS), and safety. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: Between March 2014 and June 2018, 105 patients were randomly assigned (53 patients to CRS-A and 52 patients to CRS + H). The trial stopped prematurely because of slow recruitment. In 55 patients, treatment stopped before CRS mainly due to disease progression/death. Median OS was the same for both groups (CRS + H, 14.9 [97.2% CI, 8.7 to 17.7] months v CRS-A, 14.9 [97.2% CI, 7.0 to 19.4] months; P = .1647). The PFS was 3.5 months (95% CI, 3.0 to 7.0) in the CRS-A group and 7.1 months (95% CI, 3.7 to 10.5; P = .047) in the CRS + H group. The CRS + H group showed better MFS (10.2 months [95% CI, 7.7 to 14.7] v CRS-A, 9.2 months [95% CI, 6.8 to 11.5]; P = .0286). The incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) was similar between groups (CRS-A, 38.1% v CRS + H, 43.6%; P = .79). CONCLUSION: This study showed no OS difference between CRS + H and CRS-A. PFS and MFS were significantly better in the CRS + H group, which needs further exploration. HIPEC did not increase AEs.

The Brescia Internationally Validated European Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery (EGUMIPS).

OBJECTIVE: To develop and update evidence-based and consensus-based guidelines on laparoscopic and robotic pancreatic surgery. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS), including laparoscopic and robotic surgery, is complex and technically demanding. Minimizing the risk for patients requires stringent, evidence-based guidelines. Since the International Miami Guidelines on MIPS in 2019, new developments and key publications have been reported, necessitating an update. METHODS: Evidence-based guidelines on 22 topics in 8 domains were proposed: terminology, indications, patients, procedures, surgical techniques and instrumentation, assessment tools, implementation and training, and artificial intelligence. The Brescia Internationally Validated European Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery (EGUMIPS, September 2022) used the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology to assess the evidence and develop guideline recommendations, the Delphi method to establish consensus on the recommendations among the Expert Committee, and the AGREE II-GRS tool for guideline quality assessment and external validation by a Validation Committee. RESULTS: Overall, 27 European experts, 6 international experts, 22 international Validation Committee members, 11 Jury Committee members, 18 Research Committee members, and 121 registered attendees of the 2-day meeting were involved in the development and validation of the guidelines. In total, 98 recommendations were developed, including 33 on laparoscopic, 34 on robotic, and 31 on general MIPS, covering 22 topics in 8 domains. Out of 98 recommendations, 97 reached at least 80% consensus among the experts and congress attendees, and all recommendations were externally validated by the Validation Committee. CONCLUSIONS: The EGUMIPS evidence-based guidelines on laparoscopic and robotic MIPS can be applied in current clinical practice to provide guidance to patients, surgeons, policy-makers, and medical societies.

International survey on opinions and use of robot-assisted and laparoscopic minimally invasive pancreatic surgery: 5-year follow up.

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the value of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS) has been increasing but it is unclear how this has influenced the view of pancreatic surgeons on MIPS. METHODS: An anonymous survey was sent to members of eight international Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Associations. Outcomes were compared with the 2016 international survey. RESULTS: Overall, 315 surgeons from 47 countries participated. The median volume of pancreatic resections per center was 70 (IQR 40-120). Most surgeons considered minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) superior to open (ODP) (94.6%) and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) superior to minimally invasive (MIPD) (67.9%). Since 2016, there has been an increase in the number of surgeons performing both MIDP (79%-85.7%, p = 0.024) and MIPD (29%-45.7%, p < 0.001), and an increase in the use of the robot-assisted approach for both MIDP (16%-45.6%, p < 0.001) and MIPD (23%-47.9%, p < 0.001). The use of laparoscopy remained stable for MIDP (91% vs. 88.1%, p = 0.245) and decreased for MIPD (51%-36.8%, p = 0.024). CONCLUSION: This survey showed considerable changes of MIPS since 2016 with most surgeons considering MIDP superior to ODP and an increased use of robot-assisted MIPS. Surgeons prefer OPD and therefore the value of MIPD remains to be determined in randomized trials.

The impact of surgical-oncologic textbook outcome in patients with stage I to III pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: A cross-validation study of two national registries.

BACKGROUND: Using national registries, we aimed to evaluate oncologic textbook outcomes in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients. METHODS: Patients with stage I to III pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and surgical resection from 2010 to 2020 in the US and Germany were identified using the National Cancer Database and National Cancer Registries data. The surgical-oncologic textbook outcome was defined as complete oncologic resection with no residual tumor and ≥12 harvested lymph nodes. The composite endpoint was defined as surgical-oncologic textbook outcome and receipt of perioperative systemic and/or radiation therapy. RESULTS: In total, 33,498 patients from the National Cancer Database and 14,589 patients from the National Cancer Registries were included. In the National Cancer Database, 28,931 (86%) patients had complete oncologic resection with no residual tumor, and 11,595 (79%) in the National Cancer Registries. 8,723 (26%) patients in the National Cancer Database and 556 (4%) in the National Cancer Registries had <12 lymph nodes harvested. The National Cancer Database shows 26,135 (78%) underwent perioperative therapy and 8,333 (57%) in the National Cancer Registries. Surgical-oncologic textbook outcome was achieved in 21,198 (63%) patients in the National Cancer Database and in 11,234 (77%) patients from the National Cancer Registries. 16,967 (50%) patients in the National Cancer Database and 7,878 (54%) patients in the National Cancer Registries had composite textbook outcome. Median overall survival in patients with composite textbook outcomes was 32 months in the National Cancer Database and 27 months in the National Cancer Registries (P < .001). In contrast, those with non-textbook outcomes had a median overall survival of 23 months in the National Cancer Database and 20 months in the National Cancer Registries (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Surgical-oncologic textbook outcomes were achieved in > 50% of stage I to III pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma for both the National Cancer Database and the National Cancer Registries. Failure to achieve textbook outcomes was associated with impaired survival across both registries.

Near-infrared fluorescence tattooing: a new approach for endoscopic marking of tumors in minimally invasive colorectal surgery using a persistent near-infrared marker.

INTRODUCTION: Intraoperative accurate localization of tumors in the lower gastrointestinal tract is essential to ensure oncologic radicality. In minimally invasive colon surgery, tactile identification of tumors is challenging due to diminished or absent haptics. In clinical practice, preoperative endoscopic application of a blue dye (ink) to the tumor site has become the standard for marking and identification of tumors in the colon. However, this method has the major limitation that accidental intraperitoneal spillage of the dye can significantly complicate the identification of anatomical structures and surgical planes. In this work, we describe a new approach of NIR fluorescent tattooing using a near-infrared (NIR) fluorescent marker instead of a blue dye (ink) for endoscopic tattooing. METHODS: AFS81x is a newly developed NIR fluorescent marker. In an experimental study with four domestic pigs, the newly developed NIR fluorescent marker (AFS81x) was used for endoscopic tattooing of the colon. 7-12 endoscopic submucosal injections of AFS81x were placed per animal in the colon. On day 0, day 1, and day 10 after endoscopic tattooing with AFS81x, the visualization of the fluorescent markings in the colon was evaluated during laparoscopic surgery by two surgeons and photographically documented. RESULTS: The detection rate of the NIR fluorescent tattoos at day 0, day 1, and day 10 after endoscopic tattooing was 100%. Recognizability of anatomical structures during laparoscopy was not affected in any of the markings, as the markings were not visible in the white light channel of the laparoscope, but only in the NIR channel or in the overlay of the white light and the NIR channel of the laparoscope. The brightness, the sharpness, and size of the endoscopic tattoos did not change significantly on day 1 and day 10, but remained almost identical compared to day 0. CONCLUSION: The new approach of endoscopic NIR fluorescence tattooing using the newly developed NIR fluorescence marker AFS81x enables stable marking of colonic sites over a long period of at least 10 days without compromising the recognizability of anatomical structures and surgical planes in any way.

Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic and peri-ampullary neoplasm (DIPLOMA-2): study protocol for an international multicenter patient-blinded randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) aims to reduce the negative impact of surgery as compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) and is increasingly becoming part of clinical practice for selected patients worldwide. However, the safety of MIPD remains a topic of debate and the potential shorter time to functional recovery needs to be confirmed. To guide safe implementation of MIPD, large-scale international randomized trials comparing MIPD and OPD in experienced high-volume centers are needed. We hypothesize that MIPD is non-inferior in terms of overall complications, but superior regarding time to functional recovery, as compared to OPD. METHODS/DESIGN: The DIPLOMA-2 trial is an international randomized controlled, patient-blinded, non-inferiority trial performed in 14 high-volume pancreatic centers in Europe with a minimum annual volume of 30 MIPD and 30 OPD. A total of 288 patients with an indication for elective pancreatoduodenectomy for pre-malignant and malignant disease, eligible for both open and minimally invasive approach, are randomly allocated for MIPD or OPD in a 2:1 ratio. Centers perform either laparoscopic or robot-assisted MIPD based on their surgical expertise. The primary outcome is the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI®), measuring all complications graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification up to 90 days after surgery. The sample size is calculated with the following assumptions: 2.5% one-sided significance level (α), 80% power (1-ß), expected difference of the mean CCI® score of 0 points between MIPD and OPD, and a non-inferiority margin of 7.5 points. The main secondary outcome is time to functional recovery, which will be analyzed for superiority. Other secondary outcomes include post-operative 90-day Fitbit™ measured activity, operative outcomes (e.g., blood loss, operative time, conversion to open surgery, surgeon-reported outcomes), oncological findings in case of malignancy (e.g., R0-resection rate, time to adjuvant treatment, survival), postoperative outcomes (e.g., clinically relevant complications), healthcare resource utilization (length of stay, readmissions, intensive care stay), quality of life, and costs. Postoperative follow-up is up to 36 months. DISCUSSION: The DIPLOMA-2 trial aims to establish the safety of MIPD as the new standard of care for this selected patient population undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy in high-volume centers, ultimately aiming for superior patient recovery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN27483786. Registered on August 2, 2023.

The Role of Adjuvant Therapy in Duodenal Adenocarcinoma and Intestinal Subtype Ampullary Carcinoma after Curative Resection.

OBJECTIVE: Defining the role of adjuvant therapy in duodenal adenocarcinoma (DAC) and intestinal subtype ampullary carcinoma (iAC). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: DAC and iAC share a similar histological differentiation but the benefit of adjuvant therapy remains unclear. METHODS: Patients undergoing curative-intent surgical resection for DAC and iAC between 2010 and 2021 at five high-volume centers were included. Patient baseline, perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes were evaluated. Statistical testing was performed with SPSS 25 (IBM). RESULTS: A total of 136 patients with DAC and 171 with iAC were identified. Patients with DAC had more advanced tumors than those with iAC. Median overall survival (OS) in DAC patients was 101 months versus 155 months for iAC patients (P=0.098). DAC had a higher rate of local (14.1% vs. 1.2%, P<0.001) and systemic recurrence (30.4% vs. 3.5%, P<0.001). Adjuvant therapy failed to improve overall survival in all patients with DAC and iAC. For DAC, patients with perineural invasion, but not other negative prognostic factors had improved OS rates with adjuvant therapy (72 m vs. 44 m, P=0.044). IAC patients with N+ (190 m vs. 57 m, P=0.003), T3-4 (177 m vs. 59 m, P=0.050) and perineural invasion (150 m vs. 59 m, P=0.019) had improved OS rates with adjuvant therapy. CONCLUSION: While adjuvant therapy fails to improve OS in all patients with DAC and iAC in the current study, it improved overall survival in DAC patients with perineural invasion and in iAC patients with T3-4 tumors, positive lymph nodes, and perineural invasion.

Molecular profiling and specific targeting of gemcitabine-resistant subclones in heterogeneous pancreatic cancer cell populations.

Purpose: Chemotherapy is pivotal in the multimodal treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Technical advances unveiled a high degree of inter- and intratumoral heterogeneity. We hypothesized that intratumoral heterogeneity (ITH) impacts response to gemcitabine treatment and demands specific targeting of resistant subclones. Methods: Using single cell-derived cell lines (SCDCLs) from the classical cell line BxPC3 and the basal-like cell line Panc-1, we addressed the effect of ITH on response to gemcitabine treatment. Results: Individual SCDCLs of both parental tumor cell populations showed considerable heterogeneity in response to gemcitabine. Unsupervised PCA including the 1,000 most variably expressed genes showed a clustering of the SCDCLs according to their respective sensitivity to gemcitabine treatment for BxPC3, while this was less clear for Panc-1. In BxPC3 SCDCLs, enriched signaling pathways EMT, TNF signaling via NfKB, and IL2STAT5 signaling correlated with more resistant behavior to gemcitabine. In Panc-1 SCDCLs MYC targets V1 and V2 as well as E2F targets were associated with stronger resistance. We used recursive feature elimination for Feature Selection in order to compute sets of proteins that showed strong association with the response to gemcitabine. The optimal protein set calculated for Panc-1 comprised fewer proteins in comparison to the protein set determined for BxPC3. Based on molecular profiles, we could show that the gemcitabine-resistant SCDCLs of both BxPC3 and Panc-1 are more sensitive to the BET inhibitor JQ1 compared to the respective gemcitabine-sensitive SCDCLs. Conclusion: Our model system of SCDCLs identified gemcitabine-resistant subclones and provides evidence for the critical role of ITH for treatment response in PDAC. We exploited molecular differences as the basis for differential response and used these for more targeted therapy of resistant subclones.

[Organization of continuing education at a university hospital]. / Organisation der Weiterbildung an einer Universitätsklinik.

Continuing education at German university hospitals is individually organized within the framework of the continuing education regulations. In the personal organization (University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck) three sections (common trunk, medical specialist for visceral surgery and additional qualification in special visceral surgery) and two lines (clinical line and academic clinical line) are differentiated. The whole training is flanked by the mediation of technical competence even outside the operating room (Lübeck toolbox, RoSTraC curriculum, suture courses etc.). Future concepts for continuing education must take the healthcare structure in hospitals, the increasing specialization and the increasing technical complexity into account.