Severity of oEsophageal Anastomotic Leak in patients after oesophagectomy:the SEAL score

Background Anastomotic leak (AL) is a common but severe complication after oesophagectomy. It is unknown how to determine the severity of AL objectively at diagnosis. Determining leak severity may guide treatment decisions and improve future research. This study aimed to identify leak-related prognostic factors for mortality, and to develop a Severity of oEsophageal Anastomotic Leak (SEAL) score. Methods This international, retrospective cohort study in 71 centres worldwide included patients with AL after oesophagectomy between 2011 and 2019. The primary endpoint was 90-day mortality. Leak-related prognostic factors were identified after adjusting for confounders and were included in multivariable logistic regression to develop the SEAL score. Four classes of leak severity (mild, moderate, severe, and critical) were defined based on the risk of 90-day mortality, and the score was validated internally. Results Some 1509 patients with AL were included and the 90-day mortality rate was 11.7 per cent. Twelve leak-related prognostic factors were included in the SEAL score. The score showed good calibration and discrimination (c-index 0.77, 95 per cent c.i. 0.73 to 0.81). Higher classes of leak severity graded by the SEAL score were associated with a significant increase in duration of ICU stay, healing time, Comprehensive Complication Index score, and Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group classification. Conclusion The SEAL score grades leak severity into four classes by combining 12 leak-related predictors and can be used to the assess severity of AL after oesophagectomy.The Severity of oEsophageal Anastomotic Leak (SEAL) score was developed using data from the TENTACLE-Esophagus study, an international, multicentre retrospective cohort study including 1509 patients with anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy. The SEAL score was developed to determine anastomotic leak severity at diagnosis, and combines 12 leak-related parameters at diagnosis. The score may be useful in clinical practice and could improve future research.</p

Real-world evidence of adjuvant gemcitabine plus capecitabine vs gemcitabine monotherapy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

The added value of capecitabine to adjuvant gemcitabine monotherapy (GEM) in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) was shown by the ESPAC-4 trial. Real-world data on the effectiveness of gemcitabine plus capecitabine (GEMCAP), in patients ineligible for mFOLFIRINOX, are lacking. Our study assessed whether adjuvant GEMCAP is superior to GEM in a nationwide cohort. Patients treated with adjuvant GEMCAP or GEM after resection of PDAC without preoperative treatment were identified from The Netherlands Cancer Registry (2015-2019). The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), measured from start of chemotherapy. The treatment effect of GEMCAP vs GEM was adjusted for sex, age, performance status, tumor size, lymph node involvement, resection margin and tumor differentiation in a multivariable Cox regression analysis. Secondary outcome was the percentage of patients who completed the planned six adjuvant treatment cycles. Overall, 778 patients were included, of whom 21.1% received GEMCAP and 78.9% received GEM. The median OS was 31.4 months (95% CI 26.8-40.7) for GEMCAP and 22.1 months (95% CI 20.6-25.0) for GEM (HR: 0.71, 95% CI 0.56-0.90; logrank P =.004). After adjustment for prognostic factors, survival remained superior for patients treated with GEMCAP (HR: 0.73, 95% CI 0.57-0.92, logrank P =.009). Survival with GEMCAP was superior to GEM in most subgroups of prognostic factors. Adjuvant chemotherapy was completed in 69.5% of the patients treated with GEMCAP and 62.7% with GEM (P =.11). In this nationwide cohort of patients with PDAC, adjuvant GEMCAP was associated with superior survival as compared to GEM monotherapy and number of cycles was similar

Intrathoracic vs Cervical Anastomosis After Totally or Hybrid Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer A Randomized Clinical Trial

Background: Transthoracic minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is increasingly performed as part of curative multimodality treatment. There appears to be no robust evidence on the preferred location of the anastomosis after transthoracic MIE. Objective: To compare an intrathoracic with a cervical anastomosis in a randomized clinical trial. Design, Setting, and Participants: This open, multicenter randomized clinical superiority trial was performed at 9 Dutch high-volume hospitals. Patients with midesophageal to distal esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer planned for curative resection were included. Data collection occurred from April 2016 through February 2020. Intervention: Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to transthoracic MIE with intrathoracic or cervical anastomosis. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was anastomotic leakage requiring endoscopic, radiologic, or surgical intervention. Secondary outcomes were overall anastomotic leak rate, other postoperative complications, length of stay, mortality, and quality of life. Results: Two hundred sixty-two patients were randomized, and 245 were eligible for analysis. Anastomotic leakage necessitating reintervention occurred in 15 of 122 patients with intrathoracic anastomosis (12.3%) and in 39 of 123 patients with cervical anastomosis (31.7%; risk difference, -19.4% [95% CI, -29.5% to -9.3%]). Overall anastomotic leak rate was 12.3% in the intrathoracic anastomosis group and 34.1% in the cervical anastomosis group (risk difference, -21.9% [95% CI, -32.1% to -11.6%]). Intensive care unit length of stay, mortality rates, and overall quality of life were comparable between groups, but intrathoracic anastomosis was associated with fewer severe complications (risk difference, -11.3% [-20.4% to -2.2%]), lower incidence of recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy (risk difference, -7.3% [95% CI, -12.1% to -2.5%]), and better quality of life in 3 subdomains (mean differences: dysphagia, -12.2 [95% CI, -19.6 to -4.7]; problems of choking when swallowing, -10.3 [95% CI, -16.4 to 4.2]; trouble with talking, -15.3 [95% CI, -22.9 to -7.7]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, intrathoracic anastomosis resulted in better outcome for patients treated with transthoracic MIE for midesophageal to distal esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer. Trial Registration: Trialregister.nl Identifier: NL4183 (NTR4333)

Treatment and overall survival of four types of non-metastatic periampullary cancer:nationwide population-based cohort study

Background: Periampullary adenocarcinoma consists of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC), distal cholangiocarcinoma (DC), ampullary cancer (AC), and duodenal adenocarcinoma (DA). The aim of this study was to assess treatment modalities and overall survival by tumor origin. Methods: Patients diagnosed with non-metastatic periampullary cancer in 2012–2018 were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. OS was studied with Kaplan–Meier analysis and multivariable Cox regression analyses, stratified by origin. Results: Among the 8758 patients included, 68% had PDAC, 13% DC, 12% AC, and 7% DA. Resection was performed in 35% of PDAC, 56% of DC, 70% of AC, and 59% of DA. Neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant therapy was administered in 22% of PDAC, 7% of DC, 7% of AC, and 12% of DA. Three-year OS was highest for AC (37%) and DA (34%), followed by DC (21%) and PDAC (11%). Adjuvant therapy was associated with improved OS among PDAC (HR = 0.62; 95% CI 0.55–0.69) and DC (HR = 0.69; 95% CI 0.48–0.98), but not AC (HR = 0.87; 95% CI 0.62–1.22) and DA (HR = 0.85; 95% CI 0.48–1.50). Conclusion: This retrospective study identified considerable differences in treatment modalities and OS between the four periampullary cancer origins in daily clinical practice. An improved OS after adjuvant chemotherapy could not be demonstrated in patients with AC and DA

Structural and cellular features in metaphyseal and diaphyseal periosteum of osteoporotic rats

Despite the important physiological role of periosteum in the pathogenesis and treatment of osteoporosis, little is known about the structural and cellular characteristics of periosteum in osteoporosis. To study the structural and cellular differences in both diaphyseal and metaphyseal periosteum of osteoporotic rats, samples from the right femur of osteoporotic and normal female Lewis rats were collected and tissue sections were stained with hematoxylin and eosin, antibodies or staining kit against tartrate resistant acid phosphatase (TRAP), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), von Willebrand (vWF), tyrosine hydroxylase (TH) and calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP). The results showed that the osteoporotic rats had much thicker and more cellular cambial layer of metaphyseal periosteum compared with other periosteal areas and normal rats (P < 0.001). The number of TRAP+ osteoclasts in bone resorption pits, VEGF+ cells and the degree of vascularization were found to be greater in the cambial layer of metaphyseal periosteum of osteoporotic rats (P < 0.05), while no significant difference was detected in the number of ALP+ cells between the two groups. Sympathetic nerve fibers identified by TH staining were predominantly located in the cambial layer of metaphyseal periosteum of osteoporotic rats. No obvious difference in the expression of CGRP between the two groups was found. In conclusion, periosteum may play an important role in the cortical bone resorption in osteoporotic rats and this pathological process may be regulated by the sympathetic nervous system

Immediate versus postponed intervention for infected necrotizing pancreatitis

BACKGROUND Infected necrotizing pancreatitis is a potentially lethal disease that is treated with the use of a step-up approach, with catheter drainage often delayed until the infected necrosis is encapsulated. Whether outcomes could be improved by earlier catheter drainage is unknown. METHODS We conducted a multicenter, randomized superiority trial involving patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis, in which we compared immediate drainage within 24 hours after randomization once infected necrosis was diagnosed with drainage that was postponed until the stage of walled-off necrosis was reached. The primary end point was the score on the Comprehensive Complication Index, which incorporates all complications over the course of 6 months of follow-up. RESULTS A total of 104 patients were randomly assigned to immediate drainage (55 patients) or postponed drainage (49 patients). The mean score on the Comprehensive Complication Index (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more severe complications) was 57 in the immediate-drainage group and 58 in the postponed-drainage group (mean difference, −1; 95% confidence interval [CI], −12 to 10; P=0.90). Mortality was 13% in the immediate-drainage group and 10% in the postponed-drainage group (relative risk, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.42 to 3.68). The mean number of interventions (catheter drainage and necrosectomy) was 4.4 in the immediate-drainage group and 2.6 in the postponed-drainage group (mean difference, 1.8; 95% CI, 0.6 to 3.0). In the postponed-drainage group, 19 patients (39%) were treated conservatively with antibiotics and did not require drainage; 17 of these patients survived. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS This trial did not show the superiority of immediate drainage over postponed drainage with regard to complications in patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis. Patients randomly assigned to the postponed-drainage strategy received fewer invasive interventions

Acute Pancreatitis

The clinical presentation, diagnosis, and classification of acute pancreatitis are described in the 2012 Revised Atlanta Classification. Traditionally, but now under debate, the course of acute pancreatitis has been described as a biphasic course with two peaks of mortality: early and late. In the first weeks there are signs of a systemic inflammatory response syndrome; the weeks and months afterward are characterized by a compensatory antiinflammatory response syndrome. Reducing the change of secondary infection of (peri)pancreatic necrosis by early enteral feeding or probiotics has shown no beneficial results. The role of an endoscopic sphincterotomy in predicted severe acute pancreatitis and without cholangitis is still under debate. After recovery of mild biliary pancreatitis, there is an indication for an early cholecystectomy. Based on the 2013 International Association of Pancreatology (IAP)/American Pancreatic Association (APA) evidence-based guideline, the main indication for intervention in necrotizing pancreatitis is infected necrosis. When infection is proven or suspected, invasive interventions should be preferably delayed until at least 4 weeks after onset of disease to allow collections to become “walled-off.” Based on the surgical “step-up approach,” the first step is percutaneous catheter drainage. After catheter drainage, 65% of patients need necrosectomy. The preferred route of necrosectomy is minimally invasive. In infected necrosis, the surgical step-up approach is superior to a laparotomy and can alternatively be done endoscopically (transgastric catheter drainage and endoscopic necrosectomy). The TENSION trial compares the surgical and endoscopic step-up approach and results are expected in 2017

Immediate coiling of a gastroduodenal arterial bleeding in a case of haemorrhagic shock without haematemesis, a case report

INTRODUCTION: and importance: Upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is common in the clinic. In combination with haemorrhagic shock, morbidity is high. Rapid diagnosis and treatment can save lives. With the introduction of precision imaging several treatment options are feasible. Up-to-date diagnosis and treatment requires expertise from interventional radiology, gastroenterology and surgery to form a dedicated intervention team. This is illustrated by a typical case. CASE PRESENTATION: We report a 78-year-old otherwise healthy male with a severe diverticulum bleeding. He was initially diagnosed with acute pancreatitis. Approximately 60 minutes after CT scanning, he became haemodynamically instable. He also vomited coffee-like fluid but no clear blood or clots. A repeated CT scan showed active bleeding in the retroperitoneal space highly suspicious for a diverticular bleeding just outside the lumen of the duodenum. An acute multidisciplinary intervention team immediately decided not to perform endoscopy (according to the upper GI bleeding guidelines) but to extend the imaging procedure with digital subtraction angiography (DSA). By this time, active bleeding from a side branch of the gastroduodenal artery was noted and successfully coiled. CLINICAL DISCUSSION: Guidelines determine day-to-day management in clinical medicine. Still, there is an exception to every rule. The case presented here was typical of upper GI bleeding with haemodynamic instability and signs of shock, but without haematemesis. This combination indicated a bleeding from somewhere outside the lumen of the GI tract. Instead of endoscopy, the acute intervention team decided to perform CT angiography (CTa) with subsequent DSA. On imaging, the bleeding focus was immediately identified and treated by coiling. CONCLUSION: Performance of CTa immediately followed by DSA and no endoscopy was decided by an acute intervention team in a patient with upper GI bleeding and haemorrhagic shock. Swift coiling of the bleeding artery outside the GI tract lumen was successful. The team in charge relied on a hybrid multifunctional unit fully equipped to perform interventional radiologic as well as GI procedures

Effects of pregabalin on central sensitization in patients with chronic pancreatitis in a randomized, controlled trial.

Contains fulltext : 107716.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Intense abdominal pain is the dominant feature of chronic pancreatitis. During the disease changes in central pain processing, e.g. central sensitization manifest as spreading hyperalgesia, can result from ongoing nociceptive input. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the effect of pregabalin on pain processing in chronic pancreatitis as assessed by quantitative sensory testing (QST). METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluated effects of pregabalin on pain processing. QST was used to quantify pain processing by measuring thresholds to painful electrical and pressure stimulation in six body dermatomes. Descending endogenous pain modulation was quantified using the conditioned pain modulation (CPM) paradigm to elicit a DNIC (diffuse noxious inhibitory controls) response. The main effect parameter was the change in the sum of all body pain threshold values after three weeks of study treatment versus baseline values between both treatment groups. RESULTS: 64 patients were analyzed. No differences in change in sum of pain thresholds were present for pregabalin vs. placebo after three weeks of treatment. For individual dermatomes, change vs. baseline pain thresholds was significantly greater in pregabalin vs. placebo patients for electric pain detection threshold in C5 (P = 0.005), electric pain tolerance threshold in C5 (P = 0.04) and L1 (P = 0.05), and pressure pain tolerance threshold in T4 (P = 0.004). No differences were observed between pregabalin and placebo regarding conditioned pain modulation. CONCLUSION: Our study provides first evidence that pregabalin has moderate inhibitory effects on central sensitization manifest as spreading hyperalgesia in chronic pancreatitis patients. These findings suggest that QST can be of clinical use for monitoring pain treatments in the context of chronic pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00755573