BJS Open最新文献

Background: The lack of preoperative prognostic factors to accurately predict tumour aggressiveness in non-functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours may result in inappropriate management decisions. This study aimed to critically evaluate the adequacy of surgical treatment in patients with resectable non-functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours and investigate preoperative features of surgical appropriateness.

Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on patients who underwent curative surgery for non-functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours at San Raffaele Hospital (2002-2022). The appropriateness of surgical treatment was categorized as appropriate, potential overtreatment and potential undertreatment based on histologic features of aggressiveness and disease relapse within 1 year from surgery (early relapse).

Results: A total of 384 patients were included. Among them, 230 (60%) received appropriate surgical treatment, whereas the remaining 154 (40%) underwent potentially inadequate treatment: 129 (34%) experienced potential overtreatment and 25 (6%) received potential undertreatment. The appropriateness of surgical treatment was significantly associated with radiological tumour size (P < 0.001), tumour site (P = 0.012), surgical technique (P < 0.001) and year of surgical resection (P < 0.001). Surgery performed before 2015 (OR 2.580, 95% c.i. 1.570 to 4.242; P < 0.001), radiological tumour diameter < 25.5 mm (OR 6.566, 95% c.i. 4.010 to 10.751; P < 0.001) and pancreatic body/tail localization (OR 1.908, 95% c.i. 1.119 to 3.253; P = 0.018) were identified as independent predictors of potential overtreatment. Radiological tumour size was the only independent determinant of potential undertreatment (OR 0.291, 95% c.i. 0.107 to 0.791; P = 0.016). Patients subjected to potential undertreatment exhibited significantly poorer disease-free survival (P < 0.001), overall survival (P < 0.001) and disease-specific survival (P < 0.001).

Conclusions: Potential overtreatment occurs in nearly one-third of patients undergoing surgery for non-functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours. Tumour diameter emerges as the sole variable capable of predicting the risk of both potential surgical overtreatment and undertreatment.

Background: Inguinal lymph node dissection plays an important role in the management of melanoma, penile and vulval cancer. Inguinal lymph node dissection is associated with various intraoperative and postoperative complications with significant heterogeneity in classification and reporting. This lack of standardization challenges efforts to study and report inguinal lymph node dissection outcomes. The aim of this study was to devise a system to standardize the classification and reporting of inguinal lymph node dissection perioperative complications by creating a worldwide collaborative, the complications and adverse events in lymphadenectomy of the inguinal area (CALI) group.

Methods: A modified 3-round Delphi consensus approach surveyed a worldwide group of experts in inguinal lymph node dissection for melanoma, penile and vulval cancer. The group of experts included general surgeons, urologists and oncologists (gynaecological and surgical). The survey assessed expert agreement on inguinal lymph node dissection perioperative complications. Panel interrater agreement and consistency were assessed as the overall percentage agreement and Cronbach's α.

Results: Forty-seven experienced consultants were enrolled: 26 (55.3%) urologists, 11 (23.4%) surgical oncologists, 6 (12.8%) general surgeons and 4 (8.5%) gynaecology oncologists. Based on their expertise, 31 (66%), 10 (21.3%) and 22 (46.8%) of the participants treat penile cancer, vulval cancer and melanoma using inguinal lymph node dissection respectively; 89.4% (42 of 47) agreed with the definitions and inclusion as part of the inguinal lymph node dissection intraoperative complication group, while 93.6% (44 of 47) agreed that postoperative complications should be subclassified into five macrocategories. Unanimous agreement (100%, 37 of 37) was achieved with the final standardized classification system for reporting inguinal lymph node dissection complications in melanoma, vulval cancer and penile cancer.

Conclusion: The complications and adverse events in lymphadenectomy of the inguinal area classification system has been developed as a tool to standardize the assessment and reporting of complications during inguinal lymph node dissection for the treatment of melanoma, vulval and penile cancer.

Background: The routine use of MRI in rectal cancer treatment allows the use of a strict definition for low rectal cancer. This study aimed to compare minimally invasive total mesorectal excision in MRI-defined low rectal cancer in expert laparoscopic, transanal and robotic high-volume centres.

Methods: All MRI-defined low rectal cancer operated on between 2015 and 2017 in 11 Dutch centres were included. Primary outcomes were: R1 rate, total mesorectal excision quality and 3-year local recurrence and survivals (overall and disease free). Secondary outcomes included conversion rate, complications and whether there was a perioperative change in the preoperative treatment plan.

Results: Of 1071 eligible rectal cancers, 633 patients with low rectal cancer were identified. Quality of the total mesorectal excision specimen (P = 0.337), R1 rate (P = 0.107), conversion (P = 0.344), anastomotic leakage rate (P = 0.942), local recurrence (P = 0.809), overall survival (P = 0.436) and disease-free survival (P = 0.347) were comparable among the centres. The laparoscopic centre group had the highest rate of perioperative change in the preoperative treatment plan (10.4%), compared with robotic expert centres (5.2%) and transanal centres (2.1%), P = 0.004. The main reason for this change was stapling difficulty (43%), followed by low tumour location (29%). Multivariable analysis showed that laparoscopic surgery was the only independent risk factor for a change in the preoperative planned procedure, P = 0.024.

Conclusion: Centres with expertise in all three minimally invasive total mesorectal excision techniques can achieve good oncological resection in the treatment of MRI-defined low rectal cancer. However, compared with robotic expert centres and transanal centres, patients treated in laparoscopic centres have an increased risk of a change in the preoperative intended procedure due to technical limitations.

Background: Endoscopic resection of T1 colon cancer (CC) is currently limited by guidelines related to risk of lymph node metastases. However, clinical outcome following endoscopic and surgical resection is poorly investigated.

Method: A retrospective multicentre national cohort study was conducted on prospectively collected data from the Swedish colorectal cancer registry on all non-pedunculated T1 CC patients undergoing surgical and endoscopic resection between 2009 and 2021. Patients were categorized on the basis of deep submucosal invasion (Sm2-3), lymphovascular invasion (LVI), poor tumour differentiation, and R1/Rx into low- and high-risk cases. The primary outcomes of interest were recurrence rates and disease-free interval (DFI, defined as time from treatment to date of recurrence) according to resection methods and risk factors (sex, age at diagnosis, histologic grade, LVI, perineural invasion, mucinous subtype, submucosal invasion, tumour location, resection margin and nodal positivity in the surgical group).

Results: In total, 1805 patients undergoing endoscopic (488) and surgical (1317) resection with 60.0 months median follow-up were included. Recurrence occurred in 18 (3.7%) endoscopically and 48 (3.6%) surgically resected patients. Adjuvant treatment was administered in 7.4% and 0.2% of the cases respectively in the surgical and endoscopically treated patients. Five-year DFI was 95.6% after endoscopic and 96.2% after surgical resection, with no significant difference when adjusting for confounding factors (HR 1.03, 95% c.i. 0.56 to 1.91, P = 0.920). There were no statistically significant differences in recurrence comparing endoscopic (1.7%) versus surgical (3.6%) low-risk and endoscopic (5.4%) versus surgical (3.8%) high-risk cases. LVI was the only significant risk factor for recurrence in multivariate Cox regression (HR 3.73, 95% c.i. 1.76 to 7.92, P < 0.001).

Conclusions: This study shows no difference in recurrence after endoscopic and surgical resection in high-risk T1 CC. Although it was not possible to match groups according to treatment, the multivariate analysis showed that lymphovascular invasion was the only independent risk factor for recurrence.

Background: Umbilical hernias, while frequently asymptomatic, may become acutely symptomatic, strangulated or obstructed, and require emergency treatment. Robust evidence is required for high-quality care in this field. This scoping review aims to elucidate evidence gaps regarding emergency care of umbilical hernias.

Methods: EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL databases were searched using a predefined strategy until November 2023. Primary research studies reporting on any aspect of emergency umbilical hernia care and published in the English language were eligible for inclusion. Studies were excluded where emergency umbilical hernia care was not the primary focus and subsets of relevant data were unable to be extracted. Two independent reviewers screened abstracts and full texts, resolving disagreements by consensus or a third reviewer. Data were charted according to core concepts addressed by each study and a narrative synthesis was performed.

Results: Searches generated 534 abstracts, from which 32 full texts were assessed and 14 included in the final review. This encompassed 52 042 patients undergoing emergency umbilical hernia care. Most were retrospective cohort designs (11/14), split between single (6/14) and multicentre (8/14) with only one randomized trial. Most multicentre studies were from national databases (7/8). Themes arising included risk assessment (n = 4), timing of surgery (n = 4), investigations (n = 1), repair method (n = 8, four mesh versus suture; four laparoscopic versus open) and operative outcomes (n = 11). The most commonly reported outcomes were mortality (n = 9) and morbidity (n = 7) rates and length of hospital stay (n = 5). No studies included patient-reported outcomes specific to emergency umbilical hernia repair.

Conclusion: This scoping review demonstrates the paucity of high-quality data for this condition. There is a need for randomized trials addressing all aspects of emergency umbilical hernia repair, with patient-reported outcomes.

Background: Major emergency abdominal surgery is associated with a high risk of morbidity and mortality. Given the ageing and increasingly frail population, understanding the impact of frailty on complication patterns after surgery is crucial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between clinical frailty and organ-specific postoperative complications after major emergency abdominal surgery.

Methods: A prospective cohort study including all patients undergoing major emergency abdominal surgery at Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev, Denmark, from 1 October 2020 to 1 August 2022, was performed. Clinical frailty scale scores were determined for all patients upon admission and patients were then analysed according to clinical frailty scale groups (scores of 1-3, 4-6, or 7-9). Postoperative complications were registered until discharge.

Results: A total of 520 patients were identified. Patients with a low clinical frailty scale score (1-3) experienced fewer total complications (120 complications per 100 patients) compared with patients with clinical frailty scale scores of 4-6 (250 complications per 100 patients) and 7-9 (277 complications per 100 patients) (P < 0.001). A high clinical frailty scale score was associated with a high risk of pneumonia (P = 0.009), delirium (P < 0.001), atrial fibrillation (P = 0.020), and infectious complications in general (P < 0.001). Patients with severe frailty (clinical frailty scale score of 7-9) suffered from more surgical complications (P = 0.001) compared with the rest of the cohort. Severe frailty was associated with a high risk of 30-day mortality (33% for patients with a clinical frailty scale score of 7-9 versus 3.6% for patients with a clinical frailty scale score of 1-3, P < 0.001). In a multivariate analysis, an increasing degree of clinical frailty was found to be significantly associated with developing at least one complication.

Conclusion: Patients with frailty have a significantly increased risk of postoperative complications after major emergency abdominal surgery, especially atrial fibrillation, delirium, and pneumonia. Likewise, patients with frailty have an increased risk of mortality within 90 days. Thus, frailty is a significant predictor for adverse events after major emergency abdominal surgery and should be considered in all patients undergoing major emergency abdominal surgery.

Background: Postoperative pancreatic fistulas remain a driver of major complications after partial pancreatectomy. It is unclear whether coverage of the anastomosis or pancreatic remnant can reduce the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistulas. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of autologous or artificial coverage of the pancreatic remnant or anastomosis on outcomes after partial pancreatectomy.

Methods: A systematic literature search was performed using MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up to March 2024. All RCTs analysing a coverage method in patients undergoing partial pancreatoduodenectomy or distal pancreatectomy were included. The primary outcome was postoperative pancreatic fistula development. Subgroup analyses for pancreatoduodenectomy or distal pancreatectomy and artificial or autologous coverage were conducted.

Results: A total of 18 RCTs with 2326 patients were included. In the overall analysis, coverage decreased the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistulas by 29% (OR 0.71, 95% c.i. 0.54 to 0.93, P < 0.01). This decrease was also seen in the 12 RCTs covering the remnant after distal pancreatectomy (OR 0.69, 95% c.i. 0.51 to 0.94, P < 0.02) and the 4 RCTs applying autologous coverage after pancreatoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy (OR 0.53, 95% c.i. 0.29 to 0.96, P < 0.04). Other subgroup analyses (artificial coverage or pancreatoduodenectomy) showed no statistically significant differences. The secondary endpoints of mortality, reoperations, and re-interventions were each affected positively by the use of coverage techniques. The certainty of evidence was very low to moderate.

Conclusion: The implementation of coverage, whether artificial or autologous, is beneficial after partial pancreatectomy, especially in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy with autologous coverage.