Care after pancreatic resection according to an algorithm for early detection and minimally invasive management of pancreatic fistula versus current practice (PORSCH-trial):design and rationale of a nationwide stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial

Background: Pancreatic resection is a major abdominal operation with 50% risk of postoperative complications. A common complication is pancreatic fistula, which may have severe clinical consequences such as postoperative bleeding, organ failure and death. The objective of this study is to investigate whether implementation of an algorithm for early detection and minimally invasive management of pancreatic fistula may improve outcomes after pancreatic resection. Methods: This is a nationwide stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized, superiority trial, designed in adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines. During a period of 22 months, all Dutch centers performing pancreatic surgery will cross over in a randomized order from current practice to best practice according to the algorithm. This evidence-based and consensus-based algorithm will provide daily multilevel advice on the management of patients after pancreatic resection (i.e. indication for abdominal imaging, antibiotic treatment, percutaneous drainage and removal of abdominal drains). The algorithm is designed to aid early detection and minimally invasive step-up management of postoperative pancreatic fistula. Outcomes of current practice will be compared with outcomes after implementation of the algorithm. The primary outcome is a composite of major complications (i.e. post-pancreatectomy bleeding, new-onset organ failure and death) and will be measured in a sample size of at least 1600 patients undergoing pancreatic resection. Secondary endpoints include the individual components of the primary endpoint and other clinical outcomes, healthcare resource utilization and costs analysis. Follow up will be up to 90 days after pancreatic resection. Discussion: It is hypothesized that a structured nationwide implementation of a dedicated algorithm for early detection and minimally invasive step-up management of postoperative pancreatic fistula will reduce the risk of major complications and death after pancreatic resection, as compared to current practice. Trial registration: Netherlands Trial Register: NL 6671. Registered on 16 December 2017

Long-term efficacy of metal versus plastic stents in inoperable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma; a multicenter retrospective propensity score matched comparison

Background: For palliative drainage of inoperable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA) uncovered metal stents are preferred over plastic stents. However, there is a lack of data on re-interventions at the long-term. The aim is to evaluate the potential difference in the number of re-interventions in patients surviving at least 6 months. Methods: Retrospective study including patients with pCCA who underwent plastic stent placement(s) or had metal stent(s) in situ for at least 6 months. The primary outcome was the number of re-interventions per patient-year. A propensity score matching (1:1) analysis was performed using age, Bismuth classification, reason for inoperability, pathological confirmation, systemic therapy and initial approach (endoscopic vs percutaneous). Results: Patients in the metal stent group (n = 87) underwent fewer re-interventions compared with the plastic stent group (n = 40) (3.0 vs. 4.7 per patient-year; IRR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.88). When only non-elective re-interventions were included, there was no significant difference (2.1 vs. 2.7; IRR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.55 to 1.08). Results were similar in the propensity score-matched dataset. Conclusions: This study shows that, also in patients with inoperable pCCA who survive at least 6 months, placement of metal stent(s) leads to fewer re-interventions in comparison with plastic stents

The risk of not receiving adjuvant chemotherapy after resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a nationwide analysis

Background: The relation between type of postoperative complication and not receiving chemotherapy after resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is unclear. The aim was to investigate which patient factors and postoperative complications were associated with not receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. Methods: Patients who underwent resection (2014–2017) for PDAC were identified from the nationwide mandatory Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. The association between patient-, tumor-, center-, treatment characteristics, and the risk of not receiving adjuvant chemotherapy was analyzed with multivariable logistic regression. Results: Overall, of 1306 patients, 24% (n = 312) developed postoperative Clavien Dindo ≥3 complications. In-hospital mortality was 3.5% (n = 46). Some 433 patients (33%) did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy. Independent predictors (all p < 0.050) for not receiving adjuvant chemotherapy were older age (odds ratio (OR) 0.96), higher ECOG performance status (OR 0.57), postoperative complications (OR 0.32), especially grade B/C pancreatic fistula (OR 0.51) and post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (OR 0.36), poor tumor differentiation grade (OR 0.62), and annual center volume of <40 pancreatoduodenectomies (OR 0.51). Conclusions: This study demonstrated that a third of patients do not receive chemotherapy after resection of PDAC. Next to higher age, worse performance status and lower annual surgical volume, this is mostly related to surgical complications, especially postoperative pancreatic fistula and post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage

Risk Models for Developing Pancreatic Fistula after Pancreatoduodenectomy: Validation in a Nationwide Prospective Cohort

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of published fistula risk models by external validation, and to identify independent risk factors for postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Multiple risk models have been developed to predict POPF after pancreatoduodenectomy. External validation in high-quality prospective cohorts is, however, lacking or only performed for individual models. METHODS: A post-hoc analysis of data from the stepped-wedge cluster randomized PORSCH trial was performed. Included were all patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy in the Netherlands (January 2018-November 2019). Risk models on POPF were identified by a systematic literature search. Model performance was evaluated by calculating the area under the receiver operating curves (AUC) and calibration plots. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify independent risk factors associated with clinically relevant POPF. RESULTS: Overall, 1358 patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy were included, of whom 341 patients (25%) developed clinically relevant POPF. Fourteen risk models for POPF were evaluated, with AUCs ranging from 0.62-0.70. The updated alternative fistula risk score had an AUC of 0.70 (95% CI 0.69-0.72). The alternative fistula risk score demonstrated an AUC of 0.70 (95% CI 0.68-0.71), whilst an AUC of 0.70 (95% CI 0.69-0.71) was also found for the model by Petrova et al Soft pancreatic texture, pathology other than pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma or chronic pancreatitis, small pancreatic duct diameter, higher body-mass index, minimally invasive resection and male sex were identified as independent predictors of POPF. CONCLUSION: Published risk models predicting clinically relevant POPF after pancreatoduodenectomy have a moderate predictive accuracy. Their clinical applicability to identify high-risk patients and guide treatment strategies is therefore questionable

Algorithm-based care versus usual care for the early recognition and management of complications after pancreatic resection in the Netherlands: an open-label, nationwide, stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial

Background: Early recognition and management of postoperative complications, before they become clinically relevant, can improve postoperative outcomes for patients, especially for high-risk procedures such as pancreatic resection. Methods: We did an open-label, nationwide, stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial that included all patients having pancreatic resection during a 22-month period in the Netherlands. In this trial design, all 17 centres that did pancreatic surgery were randomly allocated for the timing of the crossover from usual care (the control group) to treatment given in accordance with a multimodal, multidisciplinary algorithm for the early recognition and minimally invasive management of postoperative complications (the intervention group). Randomisation was done by an independent statistician using a computer-generated scheme, stratified to ensure that low–medium-volume centres alternated with high-volume centres. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment. A smartphone app was designed that incorporated the algorithm and included the daily evaluation of clinical and biochemical markers. The algorithm determined when to do abdominal CT, radiological drainage, start antibiotic treatment, and remove abdominal drains. After crossover, clinicians were trained in how to use the algorithm during a 4-week wash-in period; analyses comparing outcomes between the control group and the intervention group included all patients other than those having pancreatic resection during this wash-in period. The primary outcome was a composite of bleeding that required invasive intervention, organ failure, and 90-day mortality, and was assessed by a masked adjudication committee. This trial was registered in the Netherlands Trial Register, NL6671. Findings: From Jan 8, 2018, to Nov 9, 2019, all 1805 patients who had pancreatic resection in the Netherlands were eligible for and included in this study. 57 patients who underwent resection during the wash-in phase were excluded from the primary analysis. 1748 patients (885 receiving usual care and 863 receiving algorithm-centred care) were included. The primary outcome occurred in fewer patients in the algorithm-centred care group than in the usual care group (73 [8%] of 863 patients vs 124 [14%] of 885 patients; adjusted risk ratio [RR] 0·48, 95% CI 0·38–0·61; p<0·0001). Among patients treated according to the algorithm, compared with patients who received usual care there was a decrease in bleeding that required intervention (47 [5%] patients vs 51 [6%] patients; RR 0·65, 0·42–0·99; p=0·046), organ failure (39 [5%] patients vs 92 [10%] patients; 0·35, 0·20–0·60; p=0·0001), and 90-day mortality (23 [3%] patients vs 44 [5%] patients; 0·42, 0·19–0·92; p=0·029). Interpretation: The algorithm for the early recognition and minimally invasive management of complications after pancreatic resection considerably improved clinical outcomes compared with usual care. This difference included an approximate 50% reduction in mortality at 90 days. Funding: The Dutch Cancer Society and UMC Utrecht

Algorithm-based care versus usual care for the early recognition and management of complications after pancreatic resection in the Netherlands:an open-label, nationwide, stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial

BACKGROUND: Early recognition and management of postoperative complications, before they become clinically relevant, can improve postoperative outcomes for patients, especially for high-risk procedures such as pancreatic resection. METHODS: We did an open-label, nationwide, stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial that included all patients having pancreatic resection during a 22-month period in the Netherlands. In this trial design, all 17 centres that did pancreatic surgery were randomly allocated for the timing of the crossover from usual care (the control group) to treatment given in accordance with a multimodal, multidisciplinary algorithm for the early recognition and minimally invasive management of postoperative complications (the intervention group). Randomisation was done by an independent statistician using a computer-generated scheme, stratified to ensure that low-medium-volume centres alternated with high-volume centres. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment. A smartphone app was designed that incorporated the algorithm and included the daily evaluation of clinical and biochemical markers. The algorithm determined when to do abdominal CT, radiological drainage, start antibiotic treatment, and remove abdominal drains. After crossover, clinicians were trained in how to use the algorithm during a 4-week wash-in period; analyses comparing outcomes between the control group and the intervention group included all patients other than those having pancreatic resection during this wash-in period. The primary outcome was a composite of bleeding that required invasive intervention, organ failure, and 90-day mortality, and was assessed by a masked adjudication committee. This trial was registered in the Netherlands Trial Register, NL6671. FINDINGS: From Jan 8, 2018, to Nov 9, 2019, all 1805 patients who had pancreatic resection in the Netherlands were eligible for and included in this study. 57 patients who underwent resection during the wash-in phase were excluded from the primary analysis. 1748 patients (885 receiving usual care and 863 receiving algorithm-centred care) were included. The primary outcome occurred in fewer patients in the algorithm-centred care group than in the usual care group (73 [8%] of 863 patients vs 124 [14%] of 885 patients; adjusted risk ratio [RR] 0·48, 95% CI 0·38-0·61; p<0·0001). Among patients treated according to the algorithm, compared with patients who received usual care there was a decrease in bleeding that required intervention (47 [5%] patients vs 51 [6%] patients; RR 0·65, 0·42-0·99; p=0·046), organ failure (39 [5%] patients vs 92 [10%] patients; 0·35, 0·20-0·60; p=0·0001), and 90-day mortality (23 [3%] patients vs 44 [5%] patients; 0·42, 0·19-0·92; p=0·029). INTERPRETATION: The algorithm for the early recognition and minimally invasive management of complications after pancreatic resection considerably improved clinical outcomes compared with usual care. This difference included an approximate 50% reduction in mortality at 90 days. FUNDING: The Dutch Cancer Society and UMC Utrecht

The avoidance model in knee and hip osteoarthritis: a systematic review of the evidence

The avoidance model in patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA) hypothesizes that pain and psychological distress lead to avoidance of activities, and thereby to muscle weakness and activity limitations. This paper systematically reviews the scientific evidence for the validity of this avoidance model. A qualitative data synthesis was used to identify levels of evidence. Sixty studies were included. In knee OA, strong evidence was found that avoidance of activities is associated with activity limitations via muscle weakness (mediation by muscle weakness), strong evidence was found for an association between muscle weakness and activity limitations, and weak evidence was found that pain and psychological distress are associated with muscle weakness via avoidance of activities (mediation by avoidance). In hip OA, weak evidence was found for mediation by muscle weakness; and strong evidence was found for an association between muscle weakness and activity limitations. More research is needed on the consecutive associations between pain or psychological distress, avoidance of activities and muscle weakness, and to confirm causal relationships

Prognostic Value of Thrombus Volume and Interaction With First-Line Endovascular Treatment Device Choice

BACKGROUND: A larger thrombus in patients with acute ischemic stroke might result in more complex endovascular treatment procedures, resulting in poorer patient outcomes. Current evidence on thrombus volume and length related to procedural and functional outcomes remains contradicting. This study aimed to assess the prognostic value of thrombus volume and thrombus length and whether this relationship differs between first-line stent retrievers and aspiration devices for endovascular treatment.METHODS: In this multicenter retrospective cohort study, 670 of 3279 patients from the MR CLEAN Registry (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands) for endovascularly treated large vessel occlusions were included. Thrombus volume (0.1 mL) and length (0.1 mm) based on manual segmentations and measurements were related to reperfusion grade (expanded Treatment in Cerebral Infarction score) after endovascular treatment, the number of retrieval attempts, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and a shift for functional outcome at 90 days measured with the reverted ordinal modified Rankin Scale (odds ratio &gt;1 implies a favorable outcome). Univariable and multivariable linear and logistic regression were used to report common odds ratios (cORs)/adjusted cOR and regression coefficients (B/aB) with 95% CIs. Furthermore, a multiplicative interaction term was used to analyze the relationship between first-line device choice, stent retrievers versus aspiration device, thrombus volume, and outcomes.RESULTS: Thrombus volume was associated with functional outcome (adjusted cOR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.71-0.97]) and number of retrieval attempts (aB, 0.16 [95% CI, 0.16-0.28]) but not with the other outcome measures. Thrombus length was only associated with functional independence (adjusted cOR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.24-0.85]). Patients with more voluminous thrombi had worse functional outcomes if endovascular treatment was based on first-line stent retrievers (interaction cOR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.50-0.89]; P=0.005; adjusted cOR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.55-1.0]; P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, patients with a more voluminous thrombus required more endovascular thrombus retrieval attempts and had a worse functional outcome. Patients with a lengthier thrombus were less likely to achieve functional independence at 90 days. For more voluminous thrombi, first-line stent retrieval compared with first-line aspiration might be associated with worse functional outcome.</p