Peritoneal carcinomatosis of gastric origin: a population-based study on incidence, survival and risk factors

Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) is an important cause of morbidity and mortality among patients with gastric cancer. The aim of the current study was to provide reliable population-based data on the incidence, risk factors and prognosis of PC of gastric origin. All patients diagnosed with gastric cancer in the area of the Eindhoven Cancer Registry between 1995 and 2011 were included. Incidence and survival were computed and risk factors for peritoneal carcinomatosis were determined using multivariate logistic regression analysis. In total, 5,220 patients were diagnosed with gastric cancer, of whom 2,029 (39%) presented with metastatic disease. PC was present in 706 patients (14%) of whom 491 patients (9%) had PC as the only metastatic site. Younger age (<60 years), female gender, advanced T- and N-stage, primary tumor of signet ring cells or linitis plastica and primary tumors covering multiple anatomical locations of the stomach were all associated with a higher odds ratios of developing PC. Median survival of patients without metastases was 14 months, but only 4 months for patients with PC. PC is a frequent condition in patients presenting with gastric cancer, especially in younger patients with advanced tumor stages. Given the detrimental influence of PC on survival, efforts should be undertaken to further explore the promising results that were obtained in preventing or treating this condition with multimodality strategies.

Laparoscopic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic or periampullary tumours (LEOPARD-2): a multicentre, patient-blinded, randomised controlled phase 2/3 trial

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy may improve postoperative recovery compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy. However, there are concerns that the extensive learning curve of this complex procedure could increase the risk of complications. We aimed to assess whether laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy could reduce time to functional recovery compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy.

METHODS

This multicentre, patient-blinded, parallel-group, randomised controlled phase 2/3 trial was performed in four centres in the Netherlands that each do 20 or more pancreatoduodenectomies annually; surgeons had to have completed a dedicated training programme for laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and have done 20 or more laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomies before trial participation. Patients with a benign, premalignant, or malignant indication for pancreatoduodenectomy, without signs of vascular involvement, were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo either laparoscopic or open pancreatoduodenectomy using a central web-based system. Randomisation was stratified for annual case volume and preoperative estimated risk of pancreatic fistula. Patients were blinded to treatment allocation. Analysis was done according to the intention-to-treat principle. The main objective of the phase 2 part of the trial was to assess the safety of laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (complications and mortality), and the primary outcome of phase 3 was time to functional recovery in days, defined as all of the following: adequate pain control with only oral analgesia; independent mobility; ability to maintain more than 50% of the daily required caloric intake; no need for intravenous fluid administration; and no signs of infection (temperature <38·5°C). This trial is registered with Trialregister.nl, number NTR5689.

FINDINGS

Between May 13 and Dec 20, 2016, 42 patients were randomised in the phase 2 part of the trial. Two patients did not receive surgery and were excluded from analyses in accordance with the study protocol. Three (15%) of 20 patients died within 90 days after laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy, compared with none of 20 patients after open pancreatoduodenectomy. Based on safety data from the phase 2 part of the trial, the data and safety monitoring board and protocol committee agreed to proceed with phase 3. Between Jan 31 and Nov 14, 2017, 63 additional patients were randomised in phase 3 of the trial. Four patients did not receive surgery and were excluded from analyses in accordance with the study protocol. After randomisation of 105 patients (combining patients from both phase 2 and phase 3), of whom 99 underwent surgery, the trial was prematurely terminated by the data and safety monitoring board because of a difference in 90-day complication-related mortality (five [10%] of 50 patients in the laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy group vs one [2%] of 49 in the open pancreatoduodenectomy group; risk ratio [RR] 4·90 [95% CI 0·59-40·44]; p=0·20). Median time to functional recovery was 10 days (95% CI 5-15) after laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy versus 8 days (95% CI 7-9) after open pancreatoduodenectomy (log-rank p=0·80). Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher complications (25 [50%] of 50 patients after laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy vs 19 [39%] of 49 after open pancreatoduodenectomy; RR 1·29 [95% CI 0·82-2·02]; p=0·26) and grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistulas (14 [28%] vs 12 [24%]; RR 1·14 [95% CI 0·59-2·22]; p=0·69) were comparable between groups.

INTERPRETATION

Although not statistically significant, laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with more complication-related deaths than was open pancreatoduodenectomy, and there was no difference between groups in time to functional recovery. These safety concerns were unexpected and worrisome, especially in the setting of trained surgeons working in centres performing 20 or more pancreatoduodenectomies annually. Experience, learning curve, and annual volume might have influenced the outcomes; future research should focus on these issues.

FUNDING

Grant for investigator-initiated studies by Johnson & Johnson Medical Limited.

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Distal Pancreatectomy (LEOPARD): A Multicenter Patient-blinded Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

This trial followed a structured nationwide training program in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP), according to the IDEAL framework for surgical innovation, and aimed to compare time to functional recovery after minimally invasive and open distal pancreatectomy (ODP).

BACKGROUND

MIDP is increasingly used and may enhance postoperative recovery as compared with ODP, but randomized studies are lacking.

METHODS

A multicenter patient-blinded randomized controlled superiority trial was performed in 14 centers between April 2015 and March 2017. Adult patients with left-sided pancreatic tumors confined to the pancreas without vascular involvement were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo MIDP or ODP. Patients were blinded for type of surgery using a large abdominal dressing. The primary endpoint was time to functional recovery. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial was registered with the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR5689).

RESULTS

Time to functional recovery was 4 days [interquartile range (IQR) 3-6) in 51 patients after MIDP versus 6 days (IQR 5-8) in 57 patients after ODP (P < 0.001). The conversion rate of MIDP was 8%. Operative blood loss was less after MIDP (150 vs 400 mL; P < 0.001), whereas operative time was longer (217 vs 179 minutes; P = 0.005). The Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III complication rate was 25% versus 38% (P = 0.21). Delayed gastric emptying grade B/C was seen less often after MIDP (6% vs 20%; P = 0.04). Postoperative pancreatic fistulas grade B/C were seen in 39% after MIDP versus 23% after ODP (P = 0.07), without difference in percutaneous catheter drainage (22% vs 20%; P = 0.77). Quality of life (day 3-30) was better after MIDP as compared with ODP, and overall costs were non-significantly less after MIDP. No 90-day mortality was seen after MIDP versus 2% (n = 1) after ODP.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with left-sided pancreatic tumors confined to the pancreas, MIDP reduces time to functional recovery compared with ODP. Although the overall rate of complications was not reduced, MIDP was associated with less delayed gastric emptying and better quality of life without increasing costs.

Alternative Fistula Risk Score for Pancreatoduodenectomy (a-FRS): Design and International External Validation

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to develop an alternative fistula risk score (a-FRS) for postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreatoduodenectomy, without blood loss as a predictor.

BACKGROUND

Blood loss, one of the predictors of the original-FRS, was not a significant factor during 2 recent external validations.

METHODS

The a-FRS was developed in 2 databases: the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (18 centers) and the University Hospital Southampton NHS. Primary outcome was grade B/C POPF according to the 2005 International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definition. The score was externally validated in 2 independent databases (University Hospital of Verona and University Hospital of Pennsylvania), using both 2005 and 2016 ISGPS definitions. The a-FRS was also compared with the original-FRS.

RESULTS

For model design, 1924 patients were included of whom 12% developed POPF. Three predictors were strongly associated with POPF: soft pancreatic texture [odds ratio (OR) 2.58, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.80-3.69], small pancreatic duct diameter (per mm increase, OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.61-0.76), and high body mass index (BMI) (per kg/m increase, OR: 1.07, 95% CI: 1.04-1.11). Discrimination was adequate with an area under curve (AUC) of 0.75 (95% CI: 0.71-0.78) after internal validation, and 0.78 (0.74-0.82) after external validation. The predictive capacity of a-FRS was comparable with the original-FRS, both for the 2005 definition (AUC 0.78 vs 0.75, P = 0.03), and 2016 definition (AUC 0.72 vs 0.70, P = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The a-FRS predicts POPF after pancreatoduodenectomy based on 3 easily available variables (pancreatic texture, duct diameter, BMI) without blood loss and pathology, and was successfully validated for both the 2005 and 2016 POPF definition. The online calculator is available at www.pancreascalculator.com.

Nutritional stimulation of cholecystokinin receptors inhibits inflammation via the vagus nerve

The immune system in vertebrates senses exogenous and endogenous danger signals by way of complex cellular and humoral processes, and responds with an inflammatory reaction to combat putative attacks. A strong protective immunity is imperative to prevent invasion of pathogens; however, equivalent responses to commensal flora and dietary components in the intestine have to be avoided. The autonomic nervous system plays an important role in sensing luminal contents in the gut by way of hard-wired connections and chemical messengers, such as cholecystokinin (CCK). Here, we report that ingestion of dietary fat stimulates CCK receptors, and leads to attenuation of the inflammatory response by way of the efferent vagus nerve and nicotinic receptors. Vagotomy and administration of antagonists for CCK and nicotinic receptors significantly blunted the inhibitory effect of high-fat enteral nutrition on hemorrhagic shock-induced tumor necrosis factor-alpha and interleukin-6 release (P < 0.05). Furthermore, the protective effect of high-fat enteral nutrition on inflammation-induced intestinal permeability was abrogated by vagotomy and administration of antagonists for CCK and nicotinic receptors. These data reveal a novel neuroimmunologic pathway, controlled by nutrition, that may help to explain the intestinal hyporesponsiveness to dietary antigens, and shed new light on the functionality of nutrition.

Learning Curve and Associated Morbidity of Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: A Retrospective Multicenter Study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the morbidity that is associated with the learning curve of minimally invasive esophagectomy.

BACKGROUND

Although learning curves have been described, it is currently unknown how much extra morbidity is associated with the learning curve of technically challenging surgical procedures.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data were retrospectively analyzed of all consecutive patients undergoing minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy in 4 European expert centers. The primary outcome parameter was anastomotic leakage. Secondary outcome parameters were operative time and textbook outcome ("optimal outcome"). Learning curves were plotted using weighted moving average and CUSUM analysis was used to determine after how many cases the plateau was reached. Learning associated morbidity was calculated with area under the curve analysis.

RESULTS

This study included 646 patients. Three of the 4 hospitals reached the plateau of 8% anastomotic leakage. The length of the learning curve was 119 cases. The mean incidence of anastomotic leakage decreased from 18.8% during the learning phase to 4.5% after the plateau had been reached (P < 0.001). Thirty-six extra patients (10.1% of all patients operated on during the learning curve) experienced learning associated anastomotic leakage, that could have been avoided if patients were operated by surgeons who had completed the learning curve. The incidence of textbook outcome increased from 28% to 53% and the mean operative time decreased from 344 minutes to 270 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

A considerable number of 36 extra patients (10.1%) experienced learning associated anastomotic leakage. More research is urgently needed to investigate how learning associated morbidity can be reduced to increase patient safety during learning curves.

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage or sigmoidectomy for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis: a multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, open-label trial

BACKGROUND

Case series suggest that laparoscopic peritoneal lavage might be a promising alternative to sigmoidectomy in patients with perforated diverticulitis. We aimed to assess the superiority of laparoscopic lavage compared with sigmoidectomy in patients with purulent perforated diverticulitis, with respect to overall long-term morbidity and mortality.

METHODS

We did a multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, open-label trial in 34 teaching hospitals and eight academic hospitals in Belgium, Italy, and the Netherlands (the Ladies trial). The Ladies trial is split into two groups: the LOLA group comparing laparoscopic lavage with sigmoidectomy and the DIVA group comparing Hartmann's procedure with sigmoidectomy plus primary anastomosis. The DIVA section of this trial is still underway but here we report the results of the LOLA section. Patients with purulent perforated diverticulitis were enrolled for LOLA, excluding patients with faecal peritonitis, aged older than 85 years, with high-dose steroid use (≥20 mg daily), and haemodynamic instability. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1:1; stratified by age [<60 years vs ≥60 years]) using secure online computer randomisation to laparoscopic lavage, Hartmann's procedure, or primary anastomosis in a parallel design after diagnostic laparoscopy. Patients were analysed according to a modified intention-to-treat principle and were followed up after the index operation at least once in the outpatient setting and after sigmoidoscopy and stoma reversal, according to local protocols. The primary endpoint was a composite endpoint of major morbidity and mortality within 12 months. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01317485.

FINDINGS

Between July 1, 2010, and Feb 22, 2013, 90 patients were randomly assigned in the LOLA section of the Ladies trial when the study was terminated by the data and safety monitoring board because of an increased event rate in the lavage group. Two patients were excluded for protocol violations. The primary endpoint occurred in 30 (67%) of 45 patients in the lavage group and 25 (60%) of 42 patients in the sigmoidectomy group (odds ratio 1·28, 95% CI 0·54-3·03, p=0·58). By 12 months, four patients had died after lavage and six patients had died after sigmoidectomy (p=0·43).

INTERPRETATION

Laparoscopic lavage is not superior to sigmoidectomy for the treatment of purulent perforated diverticulitis.

FUNDING

Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development.

Defining Benchmarks for Transthoracic Esophagectomy: A Multicenter Analysis of Total Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy in Low Risk Patients

OBJECTIVE

To define "best possible" outcomes in total minimally invasive transthoracic esophagectomy (ttMIE).

BACKGROUND

TtMIE, performed by experts in patients with low comorbidity, may serve as a benchmark procedure for esophagectomy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From a cohort of 1057 ttMIE, performed over a 5-year period in 13 high-volume centers for esophageal surgery, we selected a study group of 334 patients (31.6%) that fulfilled criteria of low comorbidity (American Society of Anesthesiologists score ≤2, WHO/ECOG score ≤1, age ≤65 years, body mass index 19-29 kg/m). Endpoints included postoperative morbidity measured by the Clavien-Dindo classification and the comprehensive complication index. Benchmark values were defined as the 75th percentile of the median outcome parameters of the participating centers to represent best achievable results.

RESULTS

Benchmark patients were predominantly male (82.9%) with a median age of 58 years (53-62). High intrathoracic (Ivor Lewis) and cervical esophagogastrostomy (McKeown) were performed in 188 (56.3%) and 146 (43.7%) patients, respectively. Median (IQR) ICU and hospital stay was 0 (0-2) and 12 (9-18) days, respectively. 56.0% of patients developed at least 1 complication, and 26.9% experienced major morbidity (≥grade III), mostly related to pulmonary complications (25.7%), anastomotic leakage (15.9%), and cardiac events (13.5%). Benchmark values at 30 days after hospital discharge were ≤55.7% and ≤30.8% for overall and major complications, ≤18.0% for readmission, ≤3.1% for positive resection margins, and ≥23 for lymph node yield. Benchmarks at 30 and 90 days were ≤1.0% and ≤4.6% for mortality, and ≤40.8 and ≤42.8 for the comprehensive complication index, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This outcome analysis of patients with low comorbidity undergoing ttMIE may serve as a reference to evaluate surgical performance in major esophageal resection.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer (LOGICA): A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

The oncological efficacy and safety of laparoscopic gastrectomy are under debate for the Western population with predominantly advanced gastric cancer undergoing multimodality treatment.

METHODS

In 10 experienced upper GI centers in the Netherlands, patients with resectable (cT1-4aN0-3bM0) gastric adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned to either laparoscopic or open gastrectomy. No masking was performed. The primary outcome was hospital stay. Analyses were performed by intention to treat. It was hypothesized that laparoscopic gastrectomy leads to shorter hospital stay, less postoperative complications, and equal oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

Between 2015 and 2018, a total of 227 patients were randomly assigned to laparoscopic (n = 115) or open gastrectomy (n = 112). Preoperative chemotherapy was administered to 77 patients (67%) in the laparoscopic group and 87 patients (78%) in the open group. Median hospital stay was 7 days (interquartile range, 5-9) in both groups (P = .34). Median blood loss was less in the laparoscopic group (150 v 300 mL, P < .001), whereas mean operating time was longer (216 v 182 minutes, P < .001). Both groups did not differ regarding postoperative complications (44% v 42%, P = .91), in-hospital mortality (4% v 7%, P = .40), 30-day readmission rate (9.6% v 9.1%, P = 1.00), R0 resection rate (95% v 95%, P = 1.00), median lymph node yield (29 v 29 nodes, P = .49), 1-year overall survival (76% v 78%, P = .74), and global health-related quality of life up to 1 year postoperatively (mean differences between + 1.5 and + 3.6 on a 1-100 scale; 95% CIs include zero).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic gastrectomy did not lead to a shorter hospital stay in this Western multicenter randomized trial of patients with predominantly advanced gastric cancer. Postoperative complications and oncological efficacy did not differ between laparoscopic gastrectomy and open gastrectomy.

Reduction of postoperative ileus by early enteral nutrition in patients undergoing major rectal surgery: prospective, randomized, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The current trend in postoperative nutrition is to promote a normal oral diet as early as possible. However, postoperative ileus is a frequent and common problem after major abdominal surgery. This study was designed to investigate whether early enteral nutrition (EEN), as a bridge to a normal diet, can reduce postoperative ileus.

METHODS

Patients undergoing major rectal surgery for locally advanced primary or recurrent rectal carcinoma (after neoadjuvant (chemo)-radiation, with or without intraoperative radiotherapy) were randomly assigned to EEN (n = 61) or early parenteral nutrition (EPN, n = 62) in addition to an oral diet. Early nutrition was started 8 hours after surgery. Early parenteral nutrition was given as control nutrition to obtain caloric equivalence and minimize confounding. The primary endpoint was time to first defecation; secondary outcomes were morbidity, other ileus symptoms, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar for both groups. In intention-to-treat analysis, the time to first defecation was significantly shorter in the enteral nutrition arm than in the control arm (P = 0.04). Moreover, anastomotic leakage occurred significantly less frequently in the enteral group (1 patient) compared with parenteral supplementation (9 patients, P = 0.009). Mean length of stay in the enteral group was 13.4 ± 2.2 days versus 16.7 ± 2.3 days in the parenteral group (P = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Early enteral nutrition is safe and associated with significantly less ileus. Early enteral nutrition is associated with less anastomotic leakage in patients undergoing extensive rectal surgery.

Risk of anastomotic leakage with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

With the implementation of multimodal analgesia regimens in fast-track surgery programmes, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are being prescribed routinely. However, doubts have been raised concerning the safety of NSAIDs in terms of anastomotic healing.

METHODS

Data on patients who had undergone primary colorectal anastomosis at two teaching hospitals between January 2008 and December 2010 were analysed retrospectively. Exact use of NSAIDs was recorded. Rates of anastomotic leakage were compared between groups and corrected for known risk factors in both univariable and multivariable analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 795 patients were divided into four groups according to NSAID use: no NSAIDs (471 patients), use of non-selective NSAIDs (201), use of selective cyclo-oxygenase (COX) 2 inhibitors (79), and use of both selective and non-selective NSAIDs (44). The overall leak rate was 9.9 per cent (10.0 per cent for right colonic, 8.7 per cent for left colonic and 12.4 per cent for rectal anastomoses). Known risk factors such as smoking and use of steroids were not significantly associated with anastomotic leakage. Stapled anastomosis was identified as an independent predictor of leakage in multivariable analysis (odds ratio (OR) 2.22, 95 per cent confidence interval 1.30 to 3.80; P = 0.003). Patients on NSAIDs had higher anastomotic leakage rates than those not on NSAIDs (13.2 versus 7.6 per cent; OR 1.84, 1.13 to 2.98; P = 0.010). This effect was mainly due to non-selective NSAIDs (14.5 per cent; OR 2.13, 1.24 to 3.65; P = 0.006), not selective COX-2 inhibitors (9 per cent; OR 1.16, 0.49 to 2.75; P = 0.741). The overall mortality rate was 4.2 per cent, with no significant difference between groups (P = 0.438).

CONCLUSION

Non-selective NSAIDs may be associated with anastomotic leakage.

Hartmann's procedure versus sigmoidectomy with primary anastomosis for perforated diverticulitis with purulent or faecal peritonitis (LADIES): a multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, open-label, superiority trial

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have suggested that sigmoidectomy with primary anastomosis is superior to Hartmann's procedure. The likelihood of stoma reversal after primary anastomosis has been reported to be higher and reversal seems to be associated with lower morbidity and mortality. Although promising, results from these previous studies remain uncertain because of potential selection bias. Therefore, this study aimed to assess outcomes after Hartmann's procedure versus sigmoidectomy with primary anastomosis, with or without defunctioning ileostomy, for perforated diverticulitis with purulent or faecal peritonitis (Hinchey III or IV disease) in a randomised trial.

METHODS

A multicentre, randomised, open-label, superiority trial was done in eight academic hospitals and 34 teaching hospitals in Belgium, Italy, and the Netherlands. Patients aged between 18 and 85 years who presented with clinical signs of general peritonitis and suspected perforated diverticulitis were eligible for inclusion if plain abdominal radiography or CT scan showed diffuse free air or fluid. Patients with Hinchey I or II diverticulitis were not eligible for inclusion. Patients were allocated (1:1) to Hartmann's procedure or sigmoidectomy with primary anastomosis, with or without defunctioning ileostomy. Patients were enrolled by the surgeon or surgical resident involved, and secure online randomisation software was used in the operating room or by the trial coordinator on the phone. Random and concealed block sizes of two, four, or six were used, and randomisation was stratified by age (<60 and ≥60 years). The primary endpoint was 12-month stoma-free survival. Patients were analysed according to a modified intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the Netherlands Trial Register, number NTR2037, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01317485.

FINDINGS

Between July 1, 2010, and Feb 22, 2013, and June 9, 2013, and trial termination on June 3, 2016, 133 patients (93 with Hinchey III disease and 40 with Hinchey IV disease) were randomly assigned to Hartmann's procedure (68 patients) or primary anastomosis (65 patients). Two patients in the Hartmann's group were excluded, as was one in the primary anastomosis group; the modified intention-to-treat population therefore consisted of 66 patients in the Hartmann's procedure group (46 with Hinchey III disease, 20 with Hinchey IV disease) and 64 in the primary anastomosis group (46 with Hinchey III disease, 18 with Hinchey IV disease). In 17 (27%) of 64 patients assigned to primary anastomosis, no stoma was constructed. 12-month stoma-free survival was significantly better for patients undergoing primary anastomosis compared with Hartmann's procedure (94·6% [95% CI 88·7-100] vs 71·7% [95% CI 60·1-83·3], hazard ratio 2·79 [95% CI 1·86-4·18]; log-rank p<0·0001). There were no significant differences in short-term morbidity and mortality after the index procedure for Hartmann's procedure compared with primary anastomosis (morbidity: 29 [44%] of 66 patients vs 25 [39%] of 64, p=0·60; mortality: two [3%] vs four [6%], p=0·44).

INTERPRETATION

In haemodynamically stable, immunocompetent patients younger than 85 years, primary anastomosis is preferable to Hartmann's procedure as a treatment for perforated diverticulitis (Hinchey III or Hinchey IV disease).

FUNDING

Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development.

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.

Peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal origin: Incidence, prognosis and treatment options

Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) is one manifestation of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). Tumor growth on intestinal surfaces and associated fluid accumulation eventually result in bowel obstruction and incapacitating levels of ascites, which profoundly affect the quality of life for affected patients. PC appears resistant to traditional 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy, and surgery was formerly reserved for palliative purposes only. In the absence of effective treatment, the historical prognosis for these patients was extremely poor, with an invariably fatal outcome. These poor outcomes likely explain why PC secondary to CRC has received little attention from oncologic researchers. Thus, data are lacking regarding incidence, clinical disease course, and accurate treatment evaluation for patients with PC. Recently, population-based studies have revealed that PC occurs relatively frequently among patients with CRC. Risk factors for developing PC have been identified: right-sided tumor, advanced T-stage, advanced N-stage, poor differentiation grade, and younger age at diagnosis. During the past decade, both chemotherapeutical and surgical treatments have achieved promising results in these patients. A chance for long-term survival or even cure may now be offered to selected patients by combining radical surgical resection with intraperitoneal instillation of heated chemotherapy. This combined procedure has become known as hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. This editorial outlines recent advancements in the medical and surgical treatment of PC and reviews the most recent information on incidence and prognosis of this disease. Given recent progress, treatment should now be considered in every patient presenting with PC.

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.

Routes for early enteral nutrition after esophagectomy. A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Early enteral feeding following surgery can be given orally, via a jejunostomy or via a nasojejunal tube. However, the best feeding route following esophagectomy is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the best route for enteral nutrition following esophagectomy regarding anastomotic leakage, pneumonia, percentage meeting the nutritional requirements, weight loss, complications of tube feeding, mortality, patient satisfaction and length of hospital stay.

DESIGN

A systematic literature review following PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines.

RESULTS

There were 17 eligible studies on early oral intake, jejunostomy or nasojejunal tube feeding. Only one nonrandomized study (N = 133) investigated early oral feeding specifically following esophagectomy. Early oral feeding was associated with a reduced length of stay with delayed oral feeding, without increased complication rates. Postoperative nasojejunal tube feeding was not significantly different from jejunostomy tube feeding regarding complications or catheter efficacy in the only randomised trial on this subject (N = 150). Jejunostomy tube feeding outcome was reported in 12 non-comparative studies (N = 3293). It was effective in meeting short-term nutritional requirements, but major tube-related complications necessitated relaparotomy in 0-2.9% of patients. In three non-comparative studies (N = 135) on nasojejunal tube feeding only minor complications were reported, data on nutritional outcome was lacking. Data on patient satisfaction and long-term nutritional outcome were not found for any of the feeding routes investigated.

CONCLUSION

It is unclear what the best route for early enteral nutrition is after esophagectomy. Especially data regarding early oral intake are scarce, and phase 2 trials are needed for further investigation.

REGISTRATION

International prospective register of systematic reviews, CRD42013004032.

Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (LEOPARD-2): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Data from observational studies suggest that minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) is superior to open pancreatoduodenectomy regarding intraoperative blood loss, postoperative morbidity, and length of hospital stay, without increasing total costs. However, several case-matched studies failed to demonstrate superiority of MIPD, and large registry studies from the USA even suggested increased mortality for MIPDs performed in low-volume (<10 MIPDs annually) centers. Randomized controlled multicenter trials are lacking but clearly required. We hypothesize that time to functional recovery is shorter after MIPD compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy, even in an enhanced recovery setting.

METHODS/DESIGN

LEOPARD-2 is a randomized controlled, parallel-group, patient-blinded, multicenter, phase 2/3, superiority trial in centers that completed the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group LAELAPS-2 training program for laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy or LAELAPS-3 training program for robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and have performed ≥ 20 MIPDs. A total of 136 patients with symptomatic benign, premalignant, or malignant disease will be randomly assigned to undergo minimally invasive or open pancreatoduodenectomy in an enhanced recovery setting. After the first 40 patients (phase 2), the data safety monitoring board will assess safety outcomes (not blinded for treatment allocation) and decide on continuation to phase 3. Patients from phase 2 will then be included in phase 3. The primary outcome measure is time (days) to functional recovery. All patients will be blinded for the surgical approach, at least until postoperative day 5, but preferably until functional recovery has been attained. Secondary outcome measures are operative and postoperative outcomes, including clinically relevant complications, mortality, quality of life, and costs.

DISCUSSION

The LEOPARD-2 trial is designed to assess whether MIPD reduces time to functional recovery, as compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy in an enhanced recovery setting.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Register, NTR5689 . Registered on 2 March 2016.

Outcomes of a Multicenter Training Program in Laparoscopic Pancreatoduodenectomy (LAELAPS-2)

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to assess feasibility and outcomes of a multicenter training program in laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD).

BACKGROUND

Whereas expert centers have reported promising outcomes of LPD, nationwide analyses have raised concerns on its safety, especially during the learning curve. Multicenter, structured LPD training programs reporting outcomes including the first procedures are lacking. No LPD had been performed in the Netherlands before this study.

METHODS

During 2014-2016, 8 surgeons from 4 high-volume centers completed the Longitudinal Assessment and Realization of Laparoscopic Pancreatic Surgery (LAELAPS-2) training program in LPD, including detailed technique description, video training, and proctoring. In all centers, LPD was performed by 2 surgeons with extensive experience in pancreatic and laparoscopic surgery. Outcomes of all LPDs were prospectively collected.

RESULTS

In total, 114 patients underwent LPD. Median pancreatic duct diameter was 3 mm [interquartile range (IQR = 2-4)] and pancreatic texture was soft in 74% of patients. The conversion rate was 11% (n = 12), median blood loss 350 mL (IQR = 200-700), and operative time 375 minutes (IQR = 320-431). Grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula occurred in 34% of patients, requiring catheter drainage in 22% and re-operation in 2%. A Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III complication occurred in 43% of patients. Median length of hospital stay was 15 days (IQR = 9-25). Overall, 30-day and 90-day mortality were both 3.5%. Outcomes were similar for the first and second part of procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

This LPD training program was feasible and ensured acceptable outcomes during the learning curve in all centers. Future studies should determine whether such a training program is applicable in other settings and assess the added value of LPD.

Colorectal anastomotic leakage: aspects of prevention, detection and treatment

All colorectal surgeons are faced from time to time with anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery. This complication has been studied extensively without a significant reduction of incidence over the last 30 years. New techniques of prevention, by innovative anastomotic techniques should improve results in the future, but standardization and "teachability" should be guaranteed. Risk scoring enables intra-operative decision-making whether to restore continuity or deviate. Early detection can lead to reduction in delay of diagnosis as long as a standard system is used. For treatment options, no firm evidence is available, but future studies could focus on repair and saving of the anastomosis on the one hand or anastomotical breakdown and definitive colostomy on the other hand.

Incidence, prognosis, and possible treatment strategies of peritoneal carcinomatosis of pancreatic origin: a population-based study

OBJECTIVES

Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) is an important cause of morbidity and mortality among patients with pancreatic cancer. In an era where therapeutic options for PC of multiple origins are emerging, our aim was to provide population-based data on incidence, treatment, and prognosis of PC of pancreatic origin.

METHODS

All patients with a condition diagnosed as nonendocrine pancreatic cancer between 1995 and 2009 in the area of the Eindhoven Cancer Registry were included.

RESULTS

In total, 2924 patients had a diagnosis of pancreatic cancer of which 265 patients (9%) presented with synchronous PC. An increasing trend could be noted in patients treated with chemotherapy in more recent years (11% in 1995-1999 and 22% in 2005-2009; P = 0.060). Median survival in patients presenting with PC was only 6 weeks (95% confidence interval, 5-7 weeks) and did not improve over time, contrasting improvements among patients with nonmetastasized disease (19-30 weeks) and patients with metastasized disease confined to the liver (8-12 weeks).

CONCLUSION

Prognosis of patients with pancreatic cancer presenting with PC remains extremely poor. Treatment options are scarce and, given the magnitude of the problem, efforts should be undertaken to develop effective treatments in experimental and clinical studies.

Strain-specific effects of probiotics on gut barrier integrity following hemorrhagic shock

Probiotic therapy modulates the composition of the intestinal flora and inhibits the inflammatory response. These properties may be of benefit in the preservation of gut barrier integrity after injury or stress. In this study, we examined the effect of two Lactobacillus strains selected for their pathogen exclusion properties on intestinal barrier integrity following hemorrhagic shock. Additionally, the responsiveness of the macrophage cell line RAW 264.7 to combined exposure to Lactobacillus DNA or oligodeoxynucleotides containing CpG motifs (CpG-ODN) and endotoxin was assessed by measuring tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-alpha) release. Rats were administered lactobacilli (5 x 10(9) CFU) or vehicle for 7 days and were subjected subsequently to hemorrhagic shock by withdrawal of 2.1 ml blood/100 g tissue. Levels of plasma endotoxin, bacterial translocation to distant organs, and filamentous actin (F-actin) in the ileum were determined 24 h later. Rats treated with Lactobacillus rhamnosus showed reduced levels of plasma endotoxin (8 +/- 2 pg/ml versus 24 +/- 4 pg/ml; P = 0.01), bacterial translocation (2 CFU/gram versus 369 CFU/gram; P < 0.01), and disruption of F-actin distribution following hemorrhagic shock compared with nontreated control rats. In contrast, pretreatment with Lactobacillus fermentum had no substantial effect on gut barrier integrity. Interestingly, DNA preparations from both lactobacilli reduced endotoxin-induced TNF-alpha release dose dependently, whereas CpG-ODN increased TNF-alpha release. In conclusion, the pathogen exclusion properties of both Lactobacillus strains and the reduction of endotoxin-induced inflammation by their DNA in vitro are not prerequisites for a beneficial effect of probiotic therapy on gut barrier function following hemorrhagic shock. Although pretreatment with Lactobacillus spp. may be useful to preserve gut barrier integrity following severe hypotension, a thorough assessment of specific strains seems to be essential.

Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy versus palliative systemic chemotherapy in stomach cancer patients with peritoneal dissemination, the study protocol of a multicentre randomised controlled trial (PERISCOPE II)

BACKGROUND

At present, palliative systemic chemotherapy is the standard treatment in the Netherlands for gastric cancer patients with peritoneal dissemination. In contrast to lymphatic and haematogenous dissemination, peritoneal dissemination may be regarded as locoregional spread of disease. Administering cytotoxic drugs directly into the peritoneal cavity has an advantage over systemic chemotherapy since high concentrations can be delivered directly into the peritoneal cavity with limited systemic toxicity. The combination of a radical gastrectomy with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has shown promising results in patients with gastric cancer in Asia. However, the results obtained in Asian patients cannot be extrapolated to Western patients. The aim of this study is to compare the overall survival between patients with gastric cancer with limited peritoneal dissemination and/or tumour positive peritoneal cytology treated with palliative systemic chemotherapy, and those treated with gastrectomy, CRS and HIPEC after neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy.

METHODS

In this multicentre randomised controlled two-armed phase III trial, 106 patients will be randomised (1:1) between palliative systemic chemotherapy only (standard treatment) and gastrectomy, CRS and HIPEC (experimental treatment) after 3-4 cycles of systemic chemotherapy.Patients with gastric cancer are eligible for inclusion if (1) the primary cT3-cT4 gastric tumour including regional lymph nodes is considered to be resectable, (2) limited peritoneal dissemination (Peritoneal Cancer Index < 7) and/or tumour positive peritoneal cytology are confirmed by laparoscopy or laparotomy, and (3) systemic chemotherapy was given (prior to inclusion) without disease progression.

DISCUSSION

The PERISCOPE II study will determine whether gastric cancer patients with limited peritoneal dissemination and/or tumour positive peritoneal cytology treated with systemic chemotherapy, gastrectomy, CRS and HIPEC have a survival benefit over patients treated with palliative systemic chemotherapy only.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov NCT03348150 ; registration date November 2017; first enrolment November 2017; expected end date December 2022; trial status: Ongoing.

Variation in hospital mortality after pancreatoduodenectomy is related to failure to rescue rather than major complications: a nationwide audit

BACKGROUND

In the mandatory nationwide Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit, rates of major complications and Failure to Rescue (FTR) after pancreatoduodenectomy between low- and high-mortality hospitals are compared, and independent predictors for FTR investigated.

METHODS

Patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy in 2014 and 2015 in The Netherlands were included. Hospitals were divided into quartiles based on mortality rates. The rate of major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥3) and death after a major complication (FTR) were compared between these quartiles. Independent predictors for FTR were identified by multivariable logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Out of 1.342 patients, 391 (29%) developed a major complication and in-hospital mortality was 4.2%. FTR occurred in 56 (14.3%) patients. Mortality was 0.9% in the first hospital quartile (4 hospitals, 327 patients) and 8.1% in the fourth quartile (5 hospitals, 310 patients). The rate of major complications increased by 40% (25.7% vs 35.2%) between the first and fourth hospital quartile, whereas the FTR rate increased by 560% (3.6% vs 22.9%). Independent predictors of FTR were male sex (OR = 2.1, 95%CI 1.2-3.9), age >75 years (OR = 4.3, 1.8-10.2), BMI ≥30 (OR = 2.9, 1.3-6.6), histopathological diagnosis of periampullary cancer (OR = 2.0, 1.1-3.7), and hospital volume <30 (OR = 3.9, 1.6-9.6).

CONCLUSIONS

Variations in mortality between hospitals after pancreatoduodenectomy were explained mainly by differences in FTR, rather than the incidence of major complications.

Improved Functional Results After Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: Intrathoracic Versus Cervical Anastomosis

BACKGROUND

Both cervical esophagogastric anastomosis (CEA) and intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis (IEA) are used to restore gastrointestinal integrity following minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). No prospective randomized data on functional outcome, postoperative morbidity, and mortality between these techniques are currently available.

METHODS

A comparison was conducted including all consecutive patients with esophageal carcinoma of the distal esophagus or gastroesophageal junction undergoing MIE with CEA or MIE with IEA from October 2009 to July 2014 in 3 high-volume esophageal cancer centers. Functional outcome, postoperative morbidity, and mortality were analyzed.

RESULTS

MIE with CEA was performed in 146 patients and MIE with IEA in 210 patients. The incidence of recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy was 14.4% after CEA and 0% after IEA (p < 0.001). Dysphagia, dumping, and regurgitation were reported less frequently after IEA compared with CEA (p < 0.05). Dilatation of benign strictures occurred in 43.8% after CEA and this was 6.2% after IEA (p < 0.001). If a benign stricture was identified, it was dilated a median of 4 times in the CEA group and only once in the IEA group (p < 0.001). Anastomotic leakage for which reoperation was required occurred in 8.2% after CEA and in 11.4% after IEA (not significant). Median ICU stay, hospital stay, in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, and 90-day mortality were similar between the groups (not significant).

CONCLUSIONS

MIE with IEA was associated with better functional results than MIE with CEA with less dysphagia, less benign anastomotic strictures requiring fewer dilatations, and a lower incidence of recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy. Other postoperative morbidity and mortality did not differ between the groups.

Challenges in diagnosing mesenteric ischemia

Early identification of acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) is challenging. The wide variability in clinical presentation challenges providers to make an early accurate diagnosis. Despite major diagnostic and treatment advances over the past decades, mortality remains high. Arterial embolus and superior mesenteric artery thrombosis are common causes of AMI. Non-occlusive causes are less common, but vasculitis may be important, especially in younger people. Because of the unclear clinical presentation and non-specific laboratory findings, low clinical suspicion may lead to loss of valuable time. During this diagnostic delay, progression of ischemia to transmural bowel infarction with peritonitis and septicemia may further worsen patient outcomes. Several diagnostic modalities are used to assess possible AMI. Multi-detector row computed tomographic angiography is the current gold standard. Although computed tomographic angiography leads to an accurate diagnosis in many cases, early detection is a persistent problem. Because early diagnosis is vital to commence treatment, new diagnostic strategies are needed. A non-invasive simple biochemical test would be ideal to increase clinical suspicion of AMI and would improve patient selection for radiographic evaluation. Thus, AMI could be diagnosed earlier with follow-up computed tomographic angiography or high spatial magnetic resonance imaging. Experimental in vitro and in vivo studies show promise for alpha glutathione S transferase and intestinal fatty acid binding protein as markers for AMI. Future research must confirm the clinical utility of these biochemical markers in the diagnosis of mesenteric ischemia.