Annals of surgery最新文献

Objective: To establish globally applicable benchmark outcomes for pelvic exenteration (PE) in patients with locally advanced primary rectal cancer (LARC) and locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC), using outcomes achieved at highly specialised centres.

Background: PE is established as the standard of care for selected patients with LARC and LRRC. There are currently no available benchmarks against which surgical performance in PE can be compared for audit and quality improvement.

Methods: This international multicentre retrospective cohort study included patients undergoing PE for LARC or LRRC at 16 highly experienced centres between 2018 and 2023. Ten outcome benchmarks were established in a lower-risk subgroup. Benchmarks were defined by the 75th percentile of the results achieved at the individual centres.

Results: Seven hundred sixty-three patients underwent PE, of which 464 patients (61%) had LARCs and 299 (39%) had LRRCs. Five hundred forty-four patients (71%) who met predefined lower-risk criteria formed the benchmark cohort. For patients with LARC, the calculated benchmark threshold for major complication rate was ≤44%; Comprehensive Complication Index: ≤30.2; 30-day mortality rate: 0%; 90-day mortality rate: ≤4.3%; R0 resection rate: ≥79%. For patients with LRRC, the calculated benchmark threshold for major complication rate was ≤53%; Comprehensive Complication Index: ≤34.1; 30-day mortality rate: 0%; 90-day mortality rate: ≤6%; R0 resection rate: ≥77%.

Conclusions: The reported benchmarks for PE in patients with LARC and LRRC represent the best available care for this patient group globally and can be used for rigorous assessment of surgical quality and to facilitate quality improvement initiatives at international exenteration centres.

Objective: To evaluate the oncological superiority of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) versus open distal pancreatectomy (OPD) in left-sided pancreatic cancer.

Background: The oncological efficacy of LDP in left-sided pancreatic cancer remains controversial.

Methods: We performed a multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial of LDP versus OPD in left-sided pancreatic cancer patients. Candidates were recruited from 6 centers in China, and randomly assigned to receive either LDP or ODP. The primary outcome was recurrence-free survival, and the secondary outcomes were overall survival, R0 resection rate, and retrieved lymph node numbers.

Results: Of the 481 eligible pancreatic cancer patients between January 9, 2019 and December 8, 2021, 306 candidates were initially enrolled and randomly assigned at 1:1 to receive either LDP or ODP. The last follow-up was performed on December 15, 2023, and 130 patients in the LDP group and 129 patients in the ODP group were included for per-protocol analysis. Median recurrence-free survival was 15.5 (12.5-18.5) months in the LDP group compared with 15 (9.5-20.5) months in the ODP group ( P = 0.471). The R0 resection rate in 2 groups was 88.5% versus 89.1%, respectively. Median retrieved lymph node numbers in 2 groups were similar [13.5 (10-20) vs 12 (7-17), P = 0.165]. Complications with a Clavien-Dindo score ≥ 3 occurred in 10 of 130 patients in the LDP group, and 11 of 129 patients in the ODP group.

Conclusions: Although LDP did not provide significant oncological benefits for left-sided pancreatic cancer, it was safe, applicable, and appropriate.

Objective: To assess the performance of an algorithm for automated grading of surgery-related adverse events (AEs) according to Clavien-Dindo (C-D) classification.

Background: Surgery-related AEs are common, lead to increased patient morbidity, and raise health care costs. Resource-intensive manual chart review is still standard, and, to our knowledge, algorithms using electronic health record (EHR) data to grade AEs according to C-D classification have not been explored.

Methods: The algorithm was developed in a research database containing all EHR data of Karolinska University Hospital Stockholm and returns a C-D grade for each AE within 30 days. This raw score was used to grade the postoperative recovery of 1379 elective colorectal procedures according to C-D classification and Comprehensive Complication Index. Agreement with manual annotation of colorectal surgeon (gold standard) and research nurse (current practice) was assessed in a random sample of 399 procedures.

Results: For the C-D classification, kappa was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.71 to 0.84) for algorithm versus surgeon and 0.74 (95% CI: 0.67 to 0.82) for algorithm versus nurse. The kappa value increased to 0.89 (95% CI: 0.84 to 0.95) after the correction of misclassified annotations by the surgeon. The intraclass correlation for Comprehensive Complication Index between algorithm and surgeon was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.87 to 0.91) after correction and 0.76 (95% CI: 0.71 to 0.80) for algorithm versus nurse.

Conclusions: The performance of the algorithm motivates in our opinion implementation to real-time data under continuous scientific evaluation of the impact on AEs in different types of surgery. In the future, local EHR data could be used to enhance risk prediction with machine learning techniques.

Objective: This study aimed to investigate the clinical significance and risk factors of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after post-pancreatectomy acute pancreatitis (PPAP) in patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD).

Background: PPAP has been recognized as a critical factor in the pathophysiology of POPF after PD.

Methods: A total of 817 consecutive patients who underwent elective PD between January 2020 and June 2022 were included. PPAP and POPF were defined in accordance with the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definitions. Multivariate logistic analyses were performed to investigate the risk factors for POPF. Comparisons between PPAP-associated POPF and non-PPAP-associated POPF were made to further characterize this intriguing complication.

Results: Overall, 159 (19.5%) patients developed POPF after PD, of which 73 (45.9%) occurred following PPAP, and the remaining 86 (54.1%) had non-PPAP-associated POPF. Patients with PPAP-associated POPF experienced significantly higher morbidity than patients without POPF. Multivariate analyses revealed distinct risk factors for each POPF type. For PPAP-associated POPF, independent risk factors included estimated blood loss >200 mL (OR: 1.93), main pancreatic duct ≤3 cm (OR: 2.88), and soft pancreatic texture (OR: 2.01), largely overlapping with fistula risk score elements. On the other hand, non-PPAP-associated POPF was associated with age >65 years (OR: 1.95), male (OR: 2.10), and main pancreatic duct ≤3 cm (OR: 2.57). Notably, among patients with PPAP, the incidence of POPF consistently hovered around 50% regardless of the fistula risk score stratification.

Conclusions: PPAP-associated POPF presents as a distinct pathophysiology in the development of POPF after PD, potentially opening doors for future prevention strategies targeting the early postoperative period.

Objective: To evaluate the association of infrapopliteal peripheral vascular intervention (PVI) with long-term outcomes compared with isolated femoropopliteal PVI for the treatment of claudication.

Background: There are limited data supporting or opposing the use of infrapopliteal PVIs for the treatment of claudication.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of all patients in the Medicare-matched Vascular Quality Initiative database who underwent an index infrainguinal PVI for claudication from January 2004 to December 2019 using Cox proportional hazards models.

Results: Of 14,261 patients (39.9% females; 85.6% age ≥65 years, 87.7% non-Hispanic White) who underwent an index infrainguinal PVI for claudication, 16.6% (N = 2369) received an infrapopliteal PVI. The median follow-up after index PVI was 3.7 years (interquartile range: 2.1-6.1). Compared with patients who underwent isolated femoropopliteal PVI, patients receiving any infrapopliteal PVI had a higher 3-year cumulative incidence of conversion to chronic limb-threatening ischemia (33.3% vs 23.8%; P < 0.001), repeat PVI (41.0% vs 38.2%; P < 0.01), and amputation (8.1% vs 2.8%; P < 0.001). After risk adjustment, patients undergoing infrapopliteal PVI had a higher risk of conversion to chronic limb-threatening ischemia [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 1.39, 95% CI: 1.25-1.53], repeat PVI (aHR: 1.10, 95% CI: 1.01-1.19), and amputation (aHR: 2.18, 95% CI: 1.77-2.67). Findings were consistent after adjusting for competing risk of death, in a 1:1 propensity-matched analysis, and in subgroup analyses stratified by TASC disease, diabetes, and end-stage kidney disease.

Conclusions: Infrapopliteal PVI is associated with worse long-term outcomes than femoropopliteal PVI for claudication. These risks should be discussed with patients.

Objective: We sought to compare the identification of unhealthy substance use before surgery using Tobacco, Alcohol, Prescription medication, and other Substance use (TAPS), a standardized 4-item instrument, versus routine clinical documentation in the electronic medical record (EHR).

Background: Over 20% of individuals exhibit unhealthy substance use before elective surgery. Routine EHR documentation is often based on nonstandard questions that may not fully capture the extent of substance use and are subject to bias. In contrast, brief standardized screening could provide a more efficient and systematic approach.

Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study among adults (≥18 y) at a preoperative clinic from August to September 2021. Positive screens for unhealthy substances by TAPS were compared with data from the EHR. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were reported. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to assess diagnostic ability. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the predictors of positive screens by TAPS.

Results: The cohort included 240 surgical patients. TAPS screening identified significantly more positive screens than EHR documentation (43.3% vs. 14.2%). Patients with unhealthy substance use were younger (50.8 vs. 56.7 y; P =0.003), and TAPS revealed alcohol misuse in 30.8% of cases, contrasting with 0% in clinician documentation ( P <0.001). Of the 104 TAPS-positive patients, 69.2% were missed by EHR documentation. Sensitivity (31%) and accuracy (AUC=0.65) of clinician documentation for any unhealthy substance use were lower compared with TAPS.

Conclusions: Standardized TAPS screening detected preoperative unhealthy substance use more frequently than routine clinician documentation, emphasizing the need for integrating standardized measures into surgical practice to ensure safer perioperative care and outcomes.

Objective: We aimed to determine if advances in neoadjuvant therapy affected recurrence patterns and survival outcomes after pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

Background: Data are limited on how modern multimodality therapy affects PDAC recurrence and postrecurrence survival.

Methods: Patients who received neoadjuvant therapy followed by curative-intent pancreatectomy for PDAC during 1998-2018 were identified. Treatments, recurrence sites and timing, and survival were compared between patients who completed neoadjuvant therapy and pancreatectomy during 1998-2004, 2005-2011, and 2012-2018.

Results: The study included 727 patients (203, 251, and 273 in the 1998-2004, 2005-2011, and 2012-2018 cohorts, respectively). The use of neoadjuvant induction chemotherapy increased over time, and regimens changed over time, with >80% of patients treated in 2012-2018 receiving FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel. Overall, recurrence sites and incidence (67.5%, 66.1%, and 65.9%) remained stable, and 85% of recurrences occurred within 2 years of surgery. However, compared with earlier cohorts, the 2012-2018 cohort had a lower conditional risk of recurrence in postoperative year 1 and a higher risk in postoperative year 2. Overall survival increased over time (median, 30.6, 33.6, and 48.7 mo, P < 0.005), driven by improved postrecurrence overall survival (median, 7.8, 12.5, and 12.6 mo; 3-year rate, 7%, 10%, and 20%; P < 0.005).

Conclusions: We observed changes in neoadjuvant therapy regimens over time and an associated shift in the conditional risk of recurrence from postoperative year 1 to postoperative year 2, although recurrence remained common. Overall survival and postrecurrence survival remarkably improved over time, reflecting improved multimodality regimens for recurrent disease.

Objective: To assess whether long-term survivors of pancreatic surgery show increased risk to develop impaired bone mineral density, osteoporosis, and vitamin D deficiency.

Background: Pancreatic resection poses a risk for malabsorption of fat-soluble vitamins and other micronutrients essential for bone mineralization. Here, we evaluated the long-term effects of pancreatic resection on bone mineral density (BMD) and its clinical sequelae.

Methods: This was a 2-pronged analysis of postpancreatectomy patients with a follow-up period >3 years comprising (1) a large, propensity score matched, cohort study based on a multinational federated research network (FRN) and (2) a retrospective single institution review of clinical and radiographic patient data. In the FRN analysis, an initial cohort of 8423 postpancreatectomy patients were identified and propensity score matched with normal controls. The primary endpoint was the 10-year risk of developing osteoporotic pathologic fractures and secondary endpoints included diagnosis of osteoporosis, vitamin D deficiency, and related therapies. The single institution retrospective analysis identified 224 patients who underwent pancreatic resection between 2005 and 2019. BMD was quantified in CT images acquired before and after surgery. BMD trends and related factors were assessed in a time-series mixed-effect linear regression model.

Results: A total of 8080 propensity score-matched pairs were included in the FRN analysis. The analysis revealed a 2.4-fold increase in pathologic fractures ( P <0.0001) and 1.4- to 1.5-fold increase in osteoporosis/osteomalacia ( P <0.0001) and vitamin D deficiency ( P <0.0001) in postpancreatectomy patients. Vitamin D supplements were more common in the pancreatectomy group (OR=1.4, 95% CI: 1.28-1.53, P <0.0001), as were specific osteoporosis/osteomalacia treatments such as calcitonin, denosumab, romosozumab, abaloparatide, and teriparatide (OR=2.24, 95% CI: 1.69-2.95, P <0.0001). Retrospective analysis of CT imaging revealed that BMD declined more rapidly following pancreatic resection compared with normal historical controls ( P =0.015). Older age, pancreatic cancer, and pancreaticoduodenectomy were associated with increased rates of BMD loss ( P <0.05, each).

Conclusions: After pancreatic resection, patients are at higher risk for BMD loss and subsequent fractures. As the cohort of pancreatic resection survivorship grows, attention will need to be paid to focused prevention efforts to reduce BMD loss, osteoporosis, and fractures in these vulnerable patients, with specific attention to the pancreatic cancer population.