Five days of postoperative antimicrobial therapy decreases infectious complications following pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients at risk for bile contamination

AbstractObjectivesPancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is associated with high morbidity, in part as a result of infectious complications increased by preoperative bile contamination. The aim of the present study was to assess the effect on the incidence of infectious complications of short‐term antimicrobial therapy (AMT) in high‐risk patients.MethodsPatients with a high risk for positive intraoperative bile culture (i.e. those with ampulloma or pancreatic adenocarcinoma with preoperative endoscopic procedures) (high‐risk group, n = 99) were compared with low‐risk patients (i.e. those with pancreatic adenocarcinoma without preoperative endoscopic procedures) (low‐risk group, n = 76). The high‐risk group received a 5‐day course of perioperative AMT secondarily adapted to the bile antibiogram. The low‐risk group received only the usual antimicrobial prophylaxis.ResultsPositive bile cultures were significantly more frequent in high‐risk patients (81% versus 12%; P < 0.001). The overall rate of infectious complications was lower in the high‐risk group (29% versus 46%; P = 0.018). The statistically significant decrease in the rate of infectious complications reflected reduced rates of urinary tract infections, pulmonary infections and septicaemia. Rates of wound infection (3% versus 5%; P = 0.639) and intra‐abdominal abscess (7% versus 7%; P = 0.886) were similar in the high‐ and low‐risk groups, as was the need for curative AMT.ConclusionsThis exploratory study suggests that a postoperative short course of AMT in patients at high risk for biliary contamination reduces the overall rate of infectious complications after PD. The adaptation of perioperative antimicrobial policy to the patient's risk for bile contamination seems promising and should be further evaluated

Benchmarking of robotic and laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy by using two different methods

Benchmarking; PancreatectomyBenchmarking; PancreatectomiaBenchmarking; PancreatectomíaBackground Benchmarking is an important tool for quality comparison and improvement. However, no benchmark values are available for minimally invasive spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy, either laparoscopically or robotically assisted. The aim of this study was to establish benchmarks for these techniques using two different methods. Methods Data from patients undergoing laparoscopically or robotically assisted spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy were extracted from a multicentre database (2006–2019). Benchmarks for 10 outcomes were calculated using the Achievable Benchmark of Care (ABC) and best-patient-in-best-centre methods. Results Overall, 951 laparoscopically assisted (77.3 per cent) and 279 robotically assisted (22.7 per cent) procedures were included. Using the ABC method, the benchmarks for laparoscopically assisted and robotically assisted spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy respectively were: 150 and 207 min for duration of operation, 55 and 100 ml for blood loss, 3.5 and 1.7 per cent for conversion, 0 and 1.7 per cent for failure to preserve the spleen, 27.3 and 34.0 per cent for overall morbidity, 5.1 and 3.3 per cent for major morbidity, 3.6 and 7.1 per cent for pancreatic fistula grade B/C, 5 and 6 days for duration of hospital stay, 2.9 and 5.4 per cent for readmissions, and 0 and 0 per cent for 90-day mortality. Best-patient-in-best-centre methodology revealed milder benchmark cut-offs for laparoscopically and robotically assisted procedures, with operating times of 254 and 262.5 min, blood loss of 150 and 195 ml, conversion rates of 5.8 and 8.2 per cent, rates of failure to salvage spleen of 29.9 and 27.3 per cent, overall morbidity rates of 62.7 and 55.7 per cent, major morbidity rates of 20.4 and 14 per cent, POPF B/C rates of 23.8 and 24.2 per cent, duration of hospital stay of 8 and 8 days, readmission rates of 20 and 15.1 per cent, and 90-day mortality rates of 0 and 0 per cent respectively. Conclusion Two benchmark methods for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy produced different values, and should be interpreted and applied differently

Prognostic Role of Examined and Positive Lymph Nodes after Distal Pancreatectomy for Non-Functioning Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

Background: The most appropriate nodal staging system for non-functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (NF-PanNETs) remains unclear. Despite some evidence is available for pancreaticoduodenectomy, the adequate nodal staging is still unknown for distal pancreatectomy (DP). The aim of the present study was to evaluate the prognostic impact of the number of positive lymph nodes (PLNs) after DP for NF-PanNETs and to define the minimal number of lymph nodes to be harvested for an appropriate nodal staging. Methods: Data were retrospectively collected from patients who underwent DP with curative intent (R0-R1) for sporadic well-differentiated NF-PanNETs in 4 European high-volume centres. NF-PanNETs with nodal involvement (N+) were subclassified into N1 (1–3 PLNs) and N2 (4 or more PLNs). Univariate and multivariate analyses of disease-free survival (DFS) were performed. Results: Of 271 patients in the study, 62 (23%) had nodal involvement (N+). A higher probability of N+ was associated with the following factors: grading, resection margin status, perineural and microvascular invasion, and the number of examined lymph nodes. Three-year DFS rate for N0, N1, and N2 patients was 92, 72, and 50%, respectively (p &#x3c; 0.001). At multivariate analysis, independent predictors of DFS were grading, T stage, presence of necrosis, and nodal status. For patients with ≥12 examined/resected lymph nodes, the N status remained a significant predictor of disease recurrence (p &#x3c; 0.001), while it failed to predict recurrence in patients with &#x3c;12 lymph nodes examined/resected (p = 0.116). Conclusions: A minimal number of 12 nodes should be harvested in case of DP for NF-PanNET for an appropriate nodal staging. The number of positive lymph nodes is an independent predictor of DFS after DP for NF-PanNET, and the N0/N1/N2 nodal classification seems to be more relevant than the current N0/N+ staging

A micro-bead device to explore Plasmodium falciparum-infected, spherocytic or aged red blood cells prone to mechanical retention by spleen endothelial slits

Présentation oraleInternational audiencen.

Outcomes After Minimally-invasive Versus Open Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Pan-European Propensity Score Matched Study

OBJECTIVE: To assess short-term outcomes after minimally invasive (laparoscopic, robot-assisted, and hybrid) pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) among European centers. BACKGROUND: Current evidence on MIPD is based on national registries or single expert centers. International, matched studies comparing outcomes for MIPD and OPD are lacking. METHODS: Retrospective propensity score matched study comparing MIPD in 14 centers (7 countries) performing ≥10 MIPDs annually (2012-2017) versus OPD in 53 German/Dutch surgical registry centers performing ≥10 OPDs annually (2014-2017). Primary outcome was 30-day major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo ≥3). RESULTS: Of 4220 patients, 729/730 MIPDs (412 laparoscopic, 184 robot-assisted, and 130 hybrid) were matched to 729 OPDs. Median annual case-volume was 19 MIPDs (interquartile range, IQR 13-22), including the first MIPDs performed in 10/14 centers, and 31 OPDs (IQR 21-38). Major morbidity (28% vs 30%, P = 0.526), mortality (4.0% vs 3.3%, P = 0.576), percutaneous drainage (12% vs 12%, P = 0.809), reoperation (11% vs 13%, P = 0.329), and hospital stay (mean 17 vs 17 days, P > 0.99) were comparable between MIPD and OPD. Grade-B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) (23% vs 13%, P < 0.001) occurred more frequently after MIPD. Single-row pancreatojejunostomy was associated with POPF in MIPD (odds ratio, OR 2.95, P < 0.001), but not in OPD. Laparoscopic, robot-assisted, and hybrid MIPD had comparable major morbidity (27% vs 27% vs 35%), POPF (24% vs 19% vs 25%), and mortality (2.9% vs 5.2% vs 5.4%), with a fewer conversions in robot-assisted- versus laparoscopic MIPD (5% vs 26%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In the early experience of 14 European centers performing ≥10 MIPDs annually, no differences were found in major morbidity, mortality, and hospital stay between MIPD and OPD. The high rates of POPF and conversion, and the lack of superior outcomes (ie, hospital stay, morbidity) could indicate that more experience and higher annual MIPD volumes are needed

Learning Curves of Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy in Experienced Pancreatic Centers

IMPORTANCE Understanding the learning curve of a new complex surgical technique helps to reduce potential patient harm. Current series on the learning curve of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) are mostly small, single-center series, thus providing limited data.OBJECTIVE To evaluate the length of pooled learning curves of MIDP in experienced centers.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This international, multicenter, retrospective cohort study included MIDP procedures performed from January 1, 2006, through June 30, 2019, in 26 European centers from 8 countries that each performed more than 15 distal pancreatectomies annually, with an overall experience exceeding 50 MIDP procedures. Consecutive patients who underwent elective laparoscopic or robotic distal pancreatectomy for all indications were included. Data were analyzed between September 1, 2021, and May 1, 2022.EXPOSURES The learning curve for MIDP was estimated by pooling data from all centers.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The learning curvewas assessed for the primary textbook outcome (TBO), which is a composite measure that reflects optimal outcome, and for surgical mastery. Generalized additive models and a 2-piece linear model with a break point were used to estimate the learning curve length of MIDP. Case mix-expected probabilities were plotted and compared with observed outcomes to assess the association of changing case mix with outcomes. The learning curve also was assessed for the secondary outcomes of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, conversion to open rate, and postoperative pancreatic fistula grade B/C.RESULTS From a total of 2610 MIDP procedures, the learning curve analysis was conducted on 2041 procedures (mean [SD] patient age, 58 [15.3] years; among 2040 with reported sex, 1249 were female [61.2%] and 791 male [38.8%]). The 2-piece model showed an increase and eventually a break point for TBO at 85 procedures (95% CI, 13-157 procedures), with a plateau TBO rate at 70%. The learning-associated loss of TBO rate was estimated at 3.3%. For conversion, a break point was estimated at 40 procedures (95% CI, 11-68 procedures); for operation time, at 56 procedures (95% CI, 35-77 procedures); and for intraoperative blood loss, at 71 procedures (95% CI, 28-114 procedures). For postoperative pancreatic fistula, no break point could be estimated.CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE In experienced international centers, the learning curve length of MIDP for TBO was considerable with 85 procedures. These findings suggest that although learning curves for conversion, operation time, and intraoperative blood loss are completed earlier, extensive experience may be needed to master the learning curve of MIDP

Peritoneal Sclerosis in a Patient on Long-term Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis (CAPD). : An Autopsy Case.

若年性ネフロン癆による慢性腎不全でCAPD (continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis)導入し, 6年6ヵ月後に死亡した20歳男性の1剖検例を報告した。CAPD導入数カ月後, 腹膜炎による除水能低下を起こしたが, 約5ヵ月後に回復した。CAPD導入1年5ヵ月以降重症な腹膜炎罹患により除水能低下状態が遷延したが, 次第に回復した。しかし, 体液貯留傾向のため, 3年2ヵ月後より高張透析液を使用し除水量の増加を得たが, 3年9ヵ月後に不可逆的な除水能低下状態となった。一方, クレアチニンの透析排液/血漿濃度比(D/P)から見た溶質除去能は, その約半年後まで保たれており, 血清クレアチニン値の上昇は軽度であった。剖検にて腹膜の線維性肥厚と高度の内腔狭窄を伴う動静脈硬化を認め, 腹膜硬化症と診断した。本例の腹膜硬化症は, 頻回の腹膜炎と高張透析液の使用が主な原因と考えられた。腹膜機能を長期に維持するためには, 腹膜炎の予防と高張透析液の使用を最小限にすることが重要と考えられた。A 20-year-old man, treated with continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) for 6.5 years because of-end-stage renal disease due to juvenile nephronophthysis, died of ultrafiltration failure, and the morphological examination of peritoneum was carried out at autopsy. Nine episodes of peritonitis developed, and ultrafiltration transiently decreased after each episodes. At 2 years after the start of CAPD, severe peritonitis occurred, and then his body weight and blood pressure gradually increased. At 4 years after the beginning of CAPD, when hyperosmotic dialysate was frequently used, ultrafiltration was irreversively deteriorated. On the other hand, creatinine dialysate/plasma ratio remained within normal limits for about several months, and the increase in the level of serum creatinine was very little. The peritoneum obtained at autopsy revealed marked fibrous thickening as well as the conspicuous luminal narrowing of arteries and veins due to intimal thickening. The development of peritoneal sclerosis seemed to be related with the frequency and severity of peritonitis and the use of hyperosmotic dialysate

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

BACKGROUND: International guidelines recommend monitoring 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. PATIENTS 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 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 &lt;0.001). RDP was associated with fewer grade 2 intraoperative events compared with LDP (9.6% vs. 16.8%, P &lt;0.001), with longer operating time (238 vs. 201 min, P &lt;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 greater than 25 kg/m 2 , 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 fewer conversions and longer operative time, including in high-risk subgroups. Future randomized trials should confirm these findings and assess cost differences.</p

Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy for resectable pancreatic cancer (DIPLOMA):an international randomised non-inferiority trial

Background: The oncological safety of minimally invasive surgery has been questioned for several abdominal cancers. Concerns also exist regarding the use of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer as randomised trials are lacking. Methods: In this international randomised non-inferiority trial, we recruited adults with resectable pancreatic cancer from 35 centres in 12 countries. Patients were randomly assigned to either MIDP (laparoscopic or robotic) or open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). Both patients and pathologists were blinded to the assigned approach. Primary endpoint was radical resection (R0, ≥1 mm free margin) in patients who had ultimately undergone resection. Analyses for the primary endpoint were by modified intention-to-treat, excluding patients with missing data on primary endpoint. The pre-defined non-inferiority margin of −7% was compared with the lower limit of the two-sided 90% confidence interval (CI) of absolute difference in the primary endpoint. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN44897265). Findings: Between May 8, 2018 and May 7, 2021, 258 patients were randomly assigned to MIDP (131 patients) or ODP (127 patients). Modified intention-to-treat analysis included 114 patients in the MIDP group and 110 patients in the ODP group. An R0 resection occurred in 83 (73%) patients in the MIDP group and in 76 (69%) patients in the ODP group (difference 3.7%, 90% CI −6.2 to 13.6%; pnon-inferiority = 0.039). Median lymph node yield was comparable (22.0 [16.0–30.0] vs 23.0 [14.0–32.0] nodes, p = 0.86), as was the rate of intraperitoneal recurrence (41% vs 38%, p = 0.45). Median follow-up was 23.5 (interquartile range 17.0–30.0) months. Other postoperative outcomes were comparable, including median time to functional recovery (5 [95% CI 4.5–5.5] vs 5 [95% CI 4.7–5.3] days; p = 0.22) and overall survival (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.67–1.46, p = 0.94). Serious adverse events were reported in 23 (18%) of 131 patients in the MIDP group vs 28 (22%) of 127 patients in the ODP group. Interpretation: This trial provides evidence on the non-inferiority of MIDP compared to ODP regarding radical resection rates in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. The present findings support the applicability of minimally invasive surgery in patients with resectable left-sided pancreatic cancer. Funding: Medtronic Covidien AG, Johnson &amp; Johnson Medical Limited, Dutch Gastroenterology Society.</p