1
|
Vissers FL, Balduzzi A, van Bodegraven EA, van Hilst J, Festen S, Hilal MA, Asbun HJ, Mieog JSD, Koerkamp BG, Busch OR, Daams F, Luyer M, De Pastena M, Malleo G, Marchegiani G, Klaase J, Molenaar IQ, Salvia R, van Santvoort HC, Stommel M, Lips D, Coolsen M, Bassi C, van Eijck C, Besselink MG. Correction: Prophylactic abdominal drainage or no drainage after distal pancreatectomy (PANDORINA): a study protocol of a binational multicenter randomized controlled trial. Trials 2023; 24:121. [PMID: 36803266 PMCID: PMC9940380 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-022-06957-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/22/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- F. L. Vissers
- grid.7177.60000000084992262Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - A. Balduzzi
- grid.411475.20000 0004 1756 948XDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - E. A. van Bodegraven
- grid.7177.60000000084992262Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J. van Hilst
- grid.7177.60000000084992262Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.440209.b0000 0004 0501 8269Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S. Festen
- grid.440209.b0000 0004 0501 8269Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M. Abu Hilal
- grid.430506.40000 0004 0465 4079Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK ,grid.415090.90000 0004 1763 5424Department of Surgery, Poliambulanza Hospital Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| | - H. J. Asbun
- grid.418212.c0000 0004 0465 0852Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreas Surgery, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, USA
| | - J. S. D. Mieog
- grid.10419.3d0000000089452978Department of Surgery, LUMC, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - B. Groot Koerkamp
- grid.5645.2000000040459992XDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - O. R. Busch
- grid.7177.60000000084992262Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - F. Daams
- grid.7177.60000000084992262Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M. Luyer
- grid.413532.20000 0004 0398 8384Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - M. De Pastena
- grid.411475.20000 0004 1756 948XDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - G. Malleo
- grid.411475.20000 0004 1756 948XDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - G. Marchegiani
- grid.411475.20000 0004 1756 948XDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - J. Klaase
- grid.4494.d0000 0000 9558 4598Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - I. Q. Molenaar
- grid.7692.a0000000090126352Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - R. Salvia
- grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - H. C. van Santvoort
- grid.415960.f0000 0004 0622 1269Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - M. Stommel
- grid.10417.330000 0004 0444 9382Department of Surgery, Radboud UMC, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - D. Lips
- grid.415214.70000 0004 0399 8347Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - M. Coolsen
- grid.412966.e0000 0004 0480 1382Department of Surgery, Maastricht Universitair Medisch Centrum, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - C. Bassi
- grid.411475.20000 0004 1756 948XDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - C. van Eijck
- grid.5645.2000000040459992XDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M. G. Besselink
- grid.7177.60000000084992262Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Korenblik R, van Zon JFJA, Olij B, Heil J, Dewulf MJL, Neumann UP, Olde Damink SWM, Binkert CA, Schadde E, van der Leij C, van Dam RM, van Baardewijk LJ, Barbier L, Binkert CA, Billingsley K, Björnsson B, Andorrà EC, Arslan B, Baclija I, Bemelmans MHA, Bent C, de Boer MT, Bokkers RPH, de Boo DW, Breen D, Breitenstein S, Bruners P, Cappelli A, Carling U, Robert MCI, Chan B, De Cobelli F, Choi J, Crawford M, Croagh D, van Dam RM, Deprez F, Detry O, Dewulf MJL, Díaz-Nieto R, Dili A, Erdmann JI, Font JC, Davis R, Delle M, Fernando R, Fisher O, Fouraschen SMG, Fretland ÅA, Fundora Y, Gelabert A, Gerard L, Gobardhan P, Gómez F, Guiliante F, Grünberger T, Grochola LF, Grünhagen DJ, Guitart J, Hagendoorn J, Heil J, Heise D, Herrero E, Hess G, Hilal MA, Hoffmann M, Iezzi R, Imani F, Inmutto N, James S, Borobia FJG, Jovine E, Kalil J, Kingham P, Kollmar O, Kleeff J, van der Leij C, Lopez-Ben S, Macdonald A, Meijerink M, Korenblik R, Lapisatepun W, Leclercq WKG, Lindsay R, Lucidi V, Madoff DC, Martel G, Mehrzad H, Menon K, Metrakos P, Modi S, Moelker A, Montanari N, Moragues JS, Navinés-López J, Neumann UP, Nguyen J, Peddu P, Primrose JN, Olde Damink SWM, Qu X, Raptis DA, Ratti F, Ryan S, Ridouani F, Rinkes IHMB, Rogan C, Ronellenfitsch U, Serenari M, Salik A, Sallemi C, Sandström P, Martin ES, Sarría L, Schadde E, Serrablo A, Settmacher U, Smits J, Smits MLJ, Snitzbauer A, Soonawalla Z, Sparrelid E, Spuentrup E, Stavrou GA, Sutcliffe R, Tancredi I, Tasse JC, Teichgräber U, Udupa V, Valenti DA, Vass D, Vogl TJ, Wang X, White S, De Wispelaere JF, Wohlgemuth WA, Yu D, Zijlstra IJAJ. Resectability of bilobar liver tumours after simultaneous portal and hepatic vein embolization versus portal vein embolization alone: meta-analysis. BJS Open 2022; 6:6844022. [PMID: 36437731 PMCID: PMC9702575 DOI: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrac141] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/29/2022] [Revised: 09/09/2022] [Accepted: 10/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many patients with bi-lobar liver tumours are not eligible for liver resection due to an insufficient future liver remnant (FLR). To reduce the risk of posthepatectomy liver failure and the primary cause of death, regenerative procedures intent to increase the FLR before surgery. The aim of this systematic review is to provide an overview of the available literature and outcomes on the effectiveness of simultaneous portal and hepatic vein embolization (PVE/HVE) versus portal vein embolization (PVE) alone. METHODS A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase up to September 2022. The primary outcome was resectability and the secondary outcome was the FLR volume increase. RESULTS Eight studies comparing PVE/HVE with PVE and six retrospective PVE/HVE case series were included. Pooled resectability within the comparative studies was 75 per cent in the PVE group (n = 252) versus 87 per cent in the PVE/HVE group (n = 166, OR 1.92 (95% c.i., 1.13-3.25)) favouring PVE/HVE (P = 0.015). After PVE, FLR hypertrophy between 12 per cent and 48 per cent (after a median of 21-30 days) was observed, whereas growth between 36 per cent and 67 per cent was reported after PVE/HVE (after a median of 17-31 days). In the comparative studies, 90-day primary cause of death was similar between groups (2.5 per cent after PVE versus 2.2 per cent after PVE/HVE), but a higher 90-day primary cause of death was reported in single-arm PVE/HVE cohort studies (6.9 per cent, 12 of 175 patients). CONCLUSION Based on moderate/weak evidence, PVE/HVE seems to increase resectability of bi-lobar liver tumours with a comparable safety profile. Additionally, PVE/HVE resulted in faster and more pronounced hypertrophy compared with PVE alone.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Remon Korenblik
- Correspondence to: R. K., Universiteigssingel 50 (room 5.452) 6229 ER Maastricht, The Netherlands (e-mail: ); R. M. v. D., Maastricht UMC+, Dept. of Surgery, Level 4, PO Box 5800, 6202 AZ Maastricht, The Netherlands (e-mail: )
| | - Jasper F J A van Zon
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Bram Olij
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands,GROW—Department of Surgery, School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands,Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - Jan Heil
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Maxime J L Dewulf
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Ulf P Neumann
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands,Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - Steven W M Olde Damink
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands,Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany,NUTRIM—Department of Surgery, School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Christoph A Binkert
- Department of Radiology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur, Winterthur, Switzerland
| | - Erik Schadde
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Klinik Hirslanden, Zurich, Switzerland,Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Hirslanden Klink St. Anna Luzern, Luzern, Switzerland
| | | | - Ronald M van Dam
- Correspondence to: R. K., Universiteigssingel 50 (room 5.452) 6229 ER Maastricht, The Netherlands (e-mail: ); R. M. v. D., Maastricht UMC+, Dept. of Surgery, Level 4, PO Box 5800, 6202 AZ Maastricht, The Netherlands (e-mail: )
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Vissers FL, Balduzzi A, van Bodegraven EA, van Hilst J, Festen S, Hilal MA, Asbun HJ, Mieog JSD, Koerkamp BG, Busch OR, Daams F, Luyer M, De Pastena M, Malleo G, Marchegiani G, Klaase J, Molenaar IQ, Salvia R, van Santvoort HC, Stommel M, Lips D, Coolsen M, Bassi C, van Eijck C, Besselink MG. Prophylactic abdominal drainage or no drainage after distal pancreatectomy (PANDORINA): a binational multicenter randomized controlled trial. Trials 2022; 23:809. [PMID: 36153559 PMCID: PMC9509576 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-022-06736-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/17/2022] [Accepted: 09/13/2022] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Prophylactic abdominal drainage is current standard practice after distal pancreatectomy (DP), with the aim to divert pancreatic fluid in case of a postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) aimed to prevent further complications as bleeding. Whereas POPF after pancreatoduodenectomy, by definition, involves infection due to anastomotic dehiscence, a POPF after DP is essentially sterile since the bowel is not opened and no anastomoses are created. Routine drainage after DP could potentially be omitted and this could even be beneficial because of the hypothetical prevention of drain-induced infections (Fisher, Surgery 52:205-22, 2018). Abdominal drainage, moreover, should only be performed if it provides additional safety or comfort to the patient. In clinical practice, drains cause clear discomfort. One multicenter randomized controlled trial confirmed the safety of omitting abdominal drainage but did not stratify patients according to their risk of POPF and did not describe a standardized strategy for pancreatic transection. Therefore, a large pragmatic multicenter randomized controlled trial is required, with prespecified POPF risk groups and a homogeneous method of stump closure. The objective of the PANDORINA trial is to evaluate the non-inferiority of omitting routine intra-abdominal drainage after DP on postoperative morbidity (Clavien-Dindo score ≥ 3), and, secondarily, POPF grade B/C. METHODS/DESIGN Binational multicenter randomized controlled non-inferiority trial, stratifying patients to high and low risk for POPF grade B/C and incorporating a standardized strategy for pancreatic transection. Two groups of 141 patients (282 in total) undergoing elective DP (either open or minimally invasive, with or without splenectomy). Primary outcome is postoperative rate of morbidity (Clavien-Dindo score ≥ 3), and the most relevant secondary outcome is grade B/C POPF. Other secondary outcomes include surgical reintervention, percutaneous catheter drainage, endoscopic catheter drainage, abdominal collections (not requiring drainage), wound infection, delayed gastric emptying, postpancreatectomy hemorrhage as defined by the international study group for pancreatic surgery (ISGPS) (Wente et al., Surgery 142:20-5, 2007), length of stay (LOS), readmission within 90 days, in-hospital mortality, and 90-day mortality. DISCUSSION PANDORINA is the first binational, multicenter, randomized controlled non-inferiority trial with the primary objective to evaluate the hypothesis that omitting prophylactic abdominal drainage after DP does not worsen the risk of postoperative severe complications (Wente etal., Surgery 142:20-5, 2007; Bassi et al., Surgery 161:584-91, 2017). Most of the published studies on drain placement after pancreatectomy focus on both pancreatoduodenectomy and DP, but these two entities present are associated with different complications and therefore deserve separate evaluation (McMillan et al., Surgery 159:1013-22, 2016; Pratt et al., J Gastrointest Surg 10:1264-78, 2006). The PANDORINA trial is innovative since it takes the preoperative risk on POPF into account based on the D-FRS and it warrants homogenous stump closing by using the same graded compression technique and same stapling device (de Pastena et al., Ann Surg 2022; Asbun and Stauffer, Surg Endosc 25:2643-9, 2011).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F. L. Vissers
- grid.509540.d0000 0004 6880 3010Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - A. Balduzzi
- grid.411475.20000 0004 1756 948XDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - E. A. van Bodegraven
- grid.509540.d0000 0004 6880 3010Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J. van Hilst
- grid.509540.d0000 0004 6880 3010Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.440209.b0000 0004 0501 8269Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S. Festen
- grid.440209.b0000 0004 0501 8269Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M. Abu Hilal
- grid.430506.40000 0004 0465 4079Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK ,grid.415090.90000 0004 1763 5424Department of Surgery, Poliambulanza Hospital Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| | - H. J. Asbun
- grid.418212.c0000 0004 0465 0852Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreas Surgery, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, USA
| | - J. S. D. Mieog
- grid.10419.3d0000000089452978Department of Surgery, LUMC, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - B. Groot Koerkamp
- grid.5645.2000000040459992XDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - O. R. Busch
- grid.509540.d0000 0004 6880 3010Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - F. Daams
- grid.509540.d0000 0004 6880 3010Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M. Luyer
- grid.413532.20000 0004 0398 8384Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - M. De Pastena
- grid.411475.20000 0004 1756 948XDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - G. Malleo
- grid.411475.20000 0004 1756 948XDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - G. Marchegiani
- grid.411475.20000 0004 1756 948XDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - J. Klaase
- grid.4494.d0000 0000 9558 4598Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - I. Q. Molenaar
- grid.7692.a0000000090126352Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - R. Salvia
- grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - H. C. van Santvoort
- grid.415960.f0000 0004 0622 1269Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - M. Stommel
- grid.10417.330000 0004 0444 9382Department of Surgery, Radboud UMC, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - D. Lips
- grid.415214.70000 0004 0399 8347Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - M. Coolsen
- grid.412966.e0000 0004 0480 1382Department of Surgery, Maastricht Universitair Medisch Centrum, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - C. Bassi
- grid.411475.20000 0004 1756 948XDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - C. van Eijck
- grid.5645.2000000040459992XDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M. G. Besselink
- grid.509540.d0000 0004 6880 3010Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
de Jong E, Lemmers D, Benedetti Cacciaguerra A, Bouwense S, Geurts S, Tjan-Heijnen V, Valkenburg-van Iersel L, Wilmink J, Besselink M, Abu Hilal M, de Vos-Geelen J. Oncologic management of ampullary cancer: International survey among surgical and medical oncologists. Surg Oncol 2022; 44:101841. [DOI: 10.1016/j.suronc.2022.101841] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/06/2022] [Revised: 08/12/2022] [Accepted: 08/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
|
5
|
Korenblik R, Olij B, Aldrighetti LA, Hilal MA, Ahle M, Arslan B, van Baardewijk LJ, Baclija I, Bent C, Bertrand CL, Björnsson B, de Boer MT, de Boer SW, Bokkers RPH, Rinkes IHMB, Breitenstein S, Bruijnen RCG, Bruners P, Büchler MW, Camacho JC, Cappelli A, Carling U, Chan BKY, Chang DH, Choi J, Font JC, Crawford M, Croagh D, Cugat E, Davis R, De Boo DW, De Cobelli F, De Wispelaere JF, van Delden OM, Delle M, Detry O, Díaz-Nieto R, Dili A, Erdmann JI, Fisher O, Fondevila C, Fretland Å, Borobia FG, Gelabert A, Gérard L, Giuliante F, Gobardhan PD, Gómez F, Grünberger T, Grünhagen DJ, Guitart J, Hagendoorn J, Heil J, Heise D, Herrero E, Hess GF, Hoffmann MH, Iezzi R, Imani F, Nguyen J, Jovine E, Kalff JC, Kazemier G, Kingham TP, Kleeff J, Kollmar O, Leclercq WKG, Ben SL, Lucidi V, MacDonald A, Madoff DC, Manekeller S, Martel G, Mehrabi A, Mehrzad H, Meijerink MR, Menon K, Metrakos P, Meyer C, Moelker A, Modi S, Montanari N, Navines J, Neumann UP, Peddu P, Primrose JN, Qu X, Raptis D, Ratti F, Ridouani F, Rogan C, Ronellenfitsch U, Ryan S, Sallemi C, Moragues JS, Sandström P, Sarriá L, Schnitzbauer A, Serenari M, Serrablo A, Smits MLJ, Sparrelid E, Spüntrup E, Stavrou GA, Sutcliffe RP, Tancredi I, Tasse JC, Udupa V, Valenti D, Fundora Y, Vogl TJ, Wang X, White SA, Wohlgemuth WA, Yu D, Zijlstra IAJ, Binkert CA, Bemelmans MHA, van der Leij C, Schadde E, van Dam RM. Dragon 1 Protocol Manuscript: Training, Accreditation, Implementation and Safety Evaluation of Portal and Hepatic Vein Embolization (PVE/HVE) to Accelerate Future Liver Remnant (FLR) Hypertrophy. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2022; 45:1391-1398. [PMID: 35790566 PMCID: PMC9458562 DOI: 10.1007/s00270-022-03176-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/29/2021] [Accepted: 05/08/2022] [Indexed: 12/02/2022]
Abstract
STUDY PURPOSE The DRAGON 1 trial aims to assess training, implementation, safety and feasibility of combined portal- and hepatic-vein embolization (PVE/HVE) to accelerate future liver remnant (FLR) hypertrophy in patients with borderline resectable colorectal cancer liver metastases. METHODS The DRAGON 1 trial is a worldwide multicenter prospective single arm trial. The primary endpoint is a composite of the safety of PVE/HVE, 90-day mortality, and one year accrual monitoring of each participating center. Secondary endpoints include: feasibility of resection, the used PVE and HVE techniques, FLR-hypertrophy, liver function (subset of centers), overall survival, and disease-free survival. All complications after the PVE/HVE procedure are documented. Liver volumes will be measured at week 1 and if applicable at week 3 and 6 after PVE/HVE and follow-up visits will be held at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after the resection. RESULTS Not applicable. CONCLUSION DRAGON 1 is a prospective trial to assess the safety and feasibility of PVE/HVE. Participating study centers will be trained, and procedures standardized using Work Instructions (WI) to prepare for the DRAGON 2 randomized controlled trial. Outcomes should reveal the accrual potential of centers, safety profile of combined PVE/HVE and the effect of FLR-hypertrophy induction by PVE/HVE in patients with CRLM and a small FLR. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04272931 (February 17, 2020). Toestingonline.nl: NL71535.068.19 (September 20, 2019).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Korenblik
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht Universiteitssingel 40 room 5.452, 6229 ET, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
| | - B Olij
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht Universiteitssingel 40 room 5.452, 6229 ET, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | | | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - M Ahle
- Deparment of Radiology, University Hospital, Linköping, Sweden
| | - B Arslan
- Department of Radiology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, USA
| | - L J van Baardewijk
- Department of Radiology, Maxima Medisch Centrum, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - I Baclija
- Department of Radiology, Clinic Favoriten, Vienna, Austria
| | - C Bent
- Department of Radiology, Bournemouth and Christuchurch, The Royal Bournemouth and Christchurch Hospitals, Bournemouth and Christuchurch, UK
| | - C L Bertrand
- Department of Surgery, CHU UCLouvain Namur, Namur, Belgium
| | - B Björnsson
- Department of Surgery, Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University Hospital, Linköping, Sweden
| | - M T de Boer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - S W de Boer
- Deparment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - R P H Bokkers
- Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - I H M Borel Rinkes
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - S Breitenstein
- Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur, Winterthur, Switzerland
| | - R C G Bruijnen
- Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - P Bruners
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - M W Büchler
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - J C Camacho
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - A Cappelli
- Department of Radiology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Sant'Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy
| | - U Carling
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - B K Y Chan
- Department of Surgery, Aintree University Hospitals NHS, Liverpool, UK
| | - D H Chang
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - J Choi
- Department of Surgery, Western Health Footscray, Footscray, Australia
| | - J Codina Font
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital Dr. Josep Trueta de Girona, Girona, Spain
| | - M Crawford
- Department of Surgery, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, Australia
| | - D Croagh
- Department of Surgery, Monash Health, Clayton, Australia
| | - E Cugat
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Germans Trias I Pujol, Badalona, Spain
| | - R Davis
- Department of Radiology, Aintree University Hospitals NHS, Liverpool, UK
| | - D W De Boo
- Department of Radiology, Monash Health, Clayton, Australia
| | - F De Cobelli
- Department of Radiology, Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | | | - O M van Delden
- Department of Radiology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M Delle
- Department of Radiology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - O Detry
- Department of Surgery, CHU de Liège, Liège, Belgium
| | - R Díaz-Nieto
- Department of Surgery, Aintree University Hospitals NHS, Liverpool, UK
| | - A Dili
- Department of Surgery, CHU UCLouvain Namur, Namur, Belgium
| | - J I Erdmann
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - O Fisher
- Department of Surgery, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, Australia
| | - C Fondevila
- Department of Surgery, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Å Fretland
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - F Garcia Borobia
- Department of Surgery, Hospital Parc Taulí de Sabadell, Sabadell, Spain
| | - A Gelabert
- Department of Radiology, Hospital Parc Taulí de Sabadell, Sabadell, Spain
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital Mútua Terassa, Terassa, Spain
| | - L Gérard
- Department of Radiology, CHU de Liège, Liège, Belgium
| | - F Giuliante
- Department of Surgery, Gemelli University Hospital Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - P D Gobardhan
- Department of Surgery, Amphia, Breda, The Netherlands
| | - F Gómez
- Department of Radiology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - T Grünberger
- Department of Surgery, HPB Center Vienna Health Network, Clinic Favoriten, Vienna, Austria
| | - D J Grünhagen
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medisch Centrum, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J Guitart
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital Mútua Terassa, Terassa, Spain
| | - J Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - J Heil
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - D Heise
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - E Herrero
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Mútua Terassa, Terassa, Spain
| | - G F Hess
- Department of Surgery, Clarunis University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland
| | - M H Hoffmann
- Department of Radiology, St. Clara Spital, Basel, Switzerland
| | - R Iezzi
- Department of Radiology, Gemelli University Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | - F Imani
- Department of Radiology, Amphia, Breda, The Netherlands
| | - J Nguyen
- Department of Radiology, Western Health Footscray, Footscray, Australia
| | - E Jovine
- Department of Surgery, Ospedale Maggiore di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - J C Kalff
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - G Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers Location VU, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - T P Kingham
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - J Kleeff
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Halle (Saale), Halle, Germany
| | - O Kollmar
- Department of Surgery, Clarunis University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland
| | - W K G Leclercq
- Department of Surgery, Maxima Medisch Centrum, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - S Lopez Ben
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Dr. Josep Trueta de Girona, Girona, Spain
| | - V Lucidi
- Department of Surgery, Hôpital Erasme, Brussels, Belgium
| | - A MacDonald
- Department of Radiology, Oxford University Hospital NHS, Oxford, UK
| | - D C Madoff
- Department of Radiology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, USA
| | - S Manekeller
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - G Martel
- Department of Surgery, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Canada
| | - A Mehrabi
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - H Mehrzad
- Department of Radiology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham NHS, Birmingham, UK
| | - M R Meijerink
- Department of Radiology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers Location VU, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - K Menon
- Department of Surgery, King's College Hospital NHS, London, UK
| | - P Metrakos
- Department of Surgery, McGill University Health Centre, Montréal, Canada
| | - C Meyer
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - A Moelker
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus Medisch Centrum, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S Modi
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital Southampton NHS, Southampton, UK
| | - N Montanari
- Department of Radiology, Ospedale Maggiore Di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - J Navines
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Germans Trias I Pujol, Badalona, Spain
| | - U P Neumann
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - P Peddu
- Department of Radiology, King's College Hospital NHS, London, UK
| | - J N Primrose
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS, Southampton, UK
| | - X Qu
- Department of Radiology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fundan University, Shanghai, China
| | - D Raptis
- Department of Surgery, Royal Free Hospital NHS, London, UK
| | - F Ratti
- Department of Surgery, Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - F Ridouani
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA
| | - C Rogan
- Department of Radiology, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, Australia
| | - U Ronellenfitsch
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Halle (Saale), Halle, Germany
| | - S Ryan
- Department of Radiology, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Canada
| | - C Sallemi
- Department of Radiology, Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - J Sampere Moragues
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital Germans Trias I Pujol, Badalona, Spain
| | - P Sandström
- Department of Surgery, Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University Hospital, Linköping, Sweden
| | - L Sarriá
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital Miguel Servet, Saragossa, Spain
| | - A Schnitzbauer
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - M Serenari
- Department of Surgery, General Surgery and Transplant Unit, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero- Universitaria di Bologna, Sant'Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy
| | - A Serrablo
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Miguel Servet, Saragossa, Spain
| | - M L J Smits
- Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - E Sparrelid
- Department of Surgery, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - E Spüntrup
- Department of Radiology, Klinikum Saarbrücken gGmbH, Saarbrücken, Germany
| | - G A Stavrou
- Department of Surgery, Klinikum Saarbrücken gGmbH, Saarbrücken, Germany
| | - R P Sutcliffe
- Department of Surgery, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham NHS, Birmingham, UK
| | - I Tancredi
- Department of Radiology, Hôpital Erasme, Brussels, Belgium
| | - J C Tasse
- Department of Radiology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, USA
| | - V Udupa
- Department of Surgery, Oxford University Hospital NHS, Oxford, UK
| | - D Valenti
- Department of Radiology, McGill University Health Centre, Montréal, Canada
| | - Y Fundora
- Department of Surgery, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - T J Vogl
- Department of Radiology, University Hosptital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - X Wang
- Department of Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fundan University, Shanghai, China
| | - S A White
- Department of Surgery, Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - W A Wohlgemuth
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital Halle (Saale), Halle, Germany
| | - D Yu
- Department of Radiology, Royal Free Hospital NHS, London, UK
| | - I A J Zijlstra
- Department of Radiology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers Location VU, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - C A Binkert
- Department of Radiology, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur, Winterthur, Switzerland
| | - M H A Bemelmans
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - C van der Leij
- Deparment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - E Schadde
- Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur, Winterthur, Switzerland
- Department of Surgery, Rush University Medical Center Chicago, Chicago, USA
| | - R M van Dam
- GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht Universiteitssingel 40 room 5.452, 6229 ET, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Lof S, Besselink MG, Abu Hilal M. Author response to: Risk of conversion to open surgery during robotic and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and effect on outcomes: international propensity score-matched comparison study. Br J Surg 2021; 108:e381. [PMID: 34661614 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znab254] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2021] [Accepted: 06/21/2021] [Indexed: 11/14/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- S Lof
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Poliambulanza Foundation Hospital, Brescia, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Görgec B, Hansen I, Kemmerich G, Syversveen T, Abu Hilal M, Belt EJT, Bisschops RHC, Bollen TL, Bosscha K, Burgmans MC, Cappendijk V, De Boer MT, D'Hondt M, Edwin B, Gielkens H, Grünhagen DJ, Gillardin P, Gobardhan PD, Hartgrink HH, Horsthuis K, Kok NFM, Kint PAM, Kruimer JWH, Leclercq WKG, Lips DJ, Lutin B, Maas M, Marsman HA, Morone M, Pennings JP, Peringa J, Te Riele WW, Vermaas M, Wicherts D, Willemssen FEJA, Zonderhuis BM, Bossuyt PMM, Swijnenburg RJ, Fretland ÅA, Verhoef C, Besselink MG, Stoker J. Clinical added value of MRI to CT in patients scheduled for local therapy of colorectal liver metastases (CAMINO): study protocol for an international multicentre prospective diagnostic accuracy study. BMC Cancer 2021; 21:1116. [PMID: 34663243 PMCID: PMC8524830 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-08833-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2021] [Accepted: 10/04/2021] [Indexed: 01/16/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Abdominal computed tomography (CT) is the standard imaging method for patients with suspected colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) in the diagnostic workup for surgery or thermal ablation. Diffusion-weighted and gadoxetic-acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the liver is increasingly used to improve the detection rate and characterization of liver lesions. MRI is superior in detection and characterization of CRLM as compared to CT. However, it is unknown how MRI actually impacts patient management. The primary aim of the CAMINO study is to evaluate whether MRI has sufficient clinical added value to be routinely added to CT in the staging of CRLM. The secondary objective is to identify subgroups who benefit the most from additional MRI. METHODS In this international multicentre prospective incremental diagnostic accuracy study, 298 patients with primary or recurrent CRLM scheduled for curative liver resection or thermal ablation based on CT staging will be enrolled from 17 centres across the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, and Italy. All study participants will undergo CT and diffusion-weighted and gadoxetic-acid enhanced MRI prior to local therapy. The local multidisciplinary team will provide two local therapy plans: first, based on CT-staging and second, based on both CT and MRI. The primary outcome measure is the proportion of clinically significant CRLM (CS-CRLM) detected by MRI not visible on CT. CS-CRLM are defined as liver lesions leading to a change in local therapeutical management. If MRI detects new CRLM in segments which would have been resected in the original operative plan, these are not considered CS-CRLM. It is hypothesized that MRI will lead to the detection of CS-CRLM in ≥10% of patients which is considered the minimal clinically important difference. Furthermore, a prediction model will be developed using multivariable logistic regression modelling to evaluate the predictive value of patient, tumor and procedural variables on finding CS-CRLM on MRI. DISCUSSION The CAMINO study will clarify the clinical added value of MRI to CT in patients with CRLM scheduled for local therapy. This study will provide the evidence required for the implementation of additional MRI in the routine work-up of patients with primary and recurrent CRLM for local therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION The CAMINO study was registered in the Netherlands National Trial Register under number NL8039 on September 20th 2019.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- B Görgec
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - I Hansen
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.,The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
| | - G Kemmerich
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - T Syversveen
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Poliambulanza Foundation Hospital, Brescia, Italy
| | - E J T Belt
- Department of Surgery, Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Dordrecht, The Netherlands
| | - R H C Bisschops
- Department of Radiology, Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Dordrecht, The Netherlands
| | - T L Bollen
- Department of Radiology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - K Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands
| | - M C Burgmans
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - V Cappendijk
- Department of Radiology, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands
| | - M T De Boer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - M D'Hondt
- Department of Digestive and Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgery, Groeninge Hospital, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - B Edwin
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.,The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
| | - H Gielkens
- Department of Radiology, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - D J Grünhagen
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.,Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - P Gillardin
- Department of Radiology, Hospital Oost-Limburg, Genk, Belgium
| | - P D Gobardhan
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands
| | - H H Hartgrink
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - K Horsthuis
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - N F M Kok
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - P A M Kint
- Department of Radiology, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands
| | - J W H Kruimer
- Department of Radiology, Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, The Netherlands
| | - W K G Leclercq
- Department of Surgery, Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, The Netherlands
| | - D J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - B Lutin
- Department of Radiology, Groeninge Hospital, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - M Maas
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - H A Marsman
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M Morone
- Department of Radiology, Poliambulanza Foundation Hospital, Brescia, Italy
| | - J P Pennings
- Department of Radiology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - J Peringa
- Department of Radiology, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - W W Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - M Vermaas
- Department of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den IJssel, The Netherlands
| | - D Wicherts
- Department of Surgery, Hospital Oost-Limburg, Genk, Belgium
| | - F E J A Willemssen
- Department of Radiology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - B M Zonderhuis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - P M M Bossuyt
- Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - R J Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Å A Fretland
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.,The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
| | - C Verhoef
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.,Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J Stoker
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
van Hilst J, de Graaf N, Abu Hilal M, Besselink MG. ASO Visual Abstract: The Landmark Series-Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Resection. Ann Surg Oncol 2021. [PMID: 33876363 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-021-09789-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- J van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - N de Graaf
- Fondazione Poliambulanza Instituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy.,Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Instituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Görgec B, Fichtinger RS, Ratti F, Aghayan D, Van der Poel MJ, Al-Jarrah R, Armstrong T, Cipriani F, Fretland ÅA, Suhool A, Bemelmans M, Bosscha K, Braat AE, De Boer MT, Dejong CHC, Doornebosch PG, Draaisma WA, Gerhards MF, Gobardhan PD, Hagendoorn J, Kazemier G, Klaase J, Leclercq WKG, Liem MS, Lips DJ, Marsman HA, Mieog JSD, Molenaar QI, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Nota CL, Patijn GA, Rijken AM, Slooter GD, Stommel MWJ, Swijnenburg RJ, Tanis PJ, Te Riele WW, Terkivatan T, Van den Tol PMP, Van den Boezem PB, Van der Hoeven JA, Vermaas M, Edwin B, Aldrighetti LA, Van Dam RM, Abu Hilal M, Besselink MG. Comparing practice and outcome of laparoscopic liver resection between high-volume expert centres and nationwide low-to-medium volume centres. Br J Surg 2021; 108:983-990. [PMID: 34195799 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znab096] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2020] [Revised: 08/28/2020] [Accepted: 02/18/2021] [Indexed: 01/24/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Based on excellent outcomes from high-volume centres, laparoscopic liver resection is increasingly being adopted into nationwide practice which typically includes low-medium volume centres. It is unknown how the use and outcome of laparoscopic liver resection compare between high-volume centres and low-medium volume centres. This study aimed to compare use and outcome of laparoscopic liver resection in three leading European high-volume centres and nationwide practice in the Netherlands. METHOD An international, retrospective multicentre cohort study including data from three European high-volume centres (Oslo, Southampton and Milan) and all 20 centres in the Netherlands performing laparoscopic liver resection (low-medium volume practice) from January 2011 to December 2016. A high-volume centre is defined as a centre performing >50 laparoscopic liver resections per year. Patients were retrospectively stratified into low, moderate- and high-risk Southampton difficulty score groups. RESULTS A total of 2425 patients were included (1540 high-volume; 885 low-medium volume). The median annual proportion of laparoscopic liver resection was 42.9 per cent in high-volume centres and 7.2 per cent in low-medium volume centres. Patients in the high-volume centres had a lower conversion rate (7.4 versus 13.1 per cent; P < 0.001) with less intraoperative incidents (9.3 versus 14.6 per cent; P = 0.002) as compared to low-medium volume centres. Whereas postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were similar in the two groups, a lower reintervention rate (5.1 versus 7.2 per cent; P = 0.034) and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (3 versus 5 days; P < 0.001) were observed in the high-volume centres as compared to the low-medium volume centres. In each Southampton difficulty score group, the conversion rate was lower and hospital stay shorter in high-volume centres. The rate of intraoperative incidents did not differ in the low-risk group, whilst in the moderate-risk and high-risk groups this rate was lower in high-volume centres (absolute difference 6.7 and 14.2 per cent; all P < 0.004). CONCLUSION High-volume expert centres had a sixfold higher use of laparoscopic liver resection, less conversions, and shorter hospital stay, as compared to a nationwide low-medium volume practice. Stratification into Southampton difficulty score risk groups identified some differences but largely outcomes appeared better for high-volume centres in each risk group.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- B Görgec
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.,Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza - Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy
| | - R S Fichtinger
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, the Netherlands and RWTH Aachen, Germany
| | - F Ratti
- Hepatobiliary Surgery Division, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - D Aghayan
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.,The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway.,Institute of Clinical Medicine, Medical Faculty, University of Oslo, Norway
| | - M J Van der Poel
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - R Al-Jarrah
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - T Armstrong
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - F Cipriani
- Hepatobiliary Surgery Division, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Å A Fretland
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.,The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
| | - A Suhool
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - M Bemelmans
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, the Netherlands and RWTH Aachen, Germany
| | - K Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands
| | - A E Braat
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - M T De Boer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - C H C Dejong
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, the Netherlands and RWTH Aachen, Germany
| | - P G Doornebosch
- Department of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den IJssel, the Netherlands
| | - W A Draaisma
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, the Netherlands
| | - M F Gerhards
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - P D Gobardhan
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, the Netherlands
| | - J Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - G Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J Klaase
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - W K G Leclercq
- Department of Surgery, Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, the Netherlands
| | - M S Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - D J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - H A Marsman
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J S D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Q I Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - C L Nota
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - G A Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala, Zwolle, the Netherlands
| | - A M Rijken
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, the Netherlands
| | - G D Slooter
- Department of Surgery, Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, the Netherlands
| | - M W J Stommel
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - R J Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - P J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - W W Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - T Terkivatan
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - P M P Van den Tol
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - P B Van den Boezem
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - J A Van der Hoeven
- Department of Surgery, Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Dordrecht, the Netherlands
| | - M Vermaas
- Department of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den IJssel, the Netherlands
| | - B Edwin
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.,The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway.,Institute of Clinical Medicine, Medical Faculty, University of Oslo, Norway
| | - L A Aldrighetti
- Hepatobiliary Surgery Division, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - R M Van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, the Netherlands and RWTH Aachen, Germany.,GROW - School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,Department of General and Visceral Surgery, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.,Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza - Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Lof S, van der Heijde N, Abuawwad M, Al-Sarireh B, Boggi U, Butturini G, Capretti G, Coratti A, Casadei R, D'Hondt M, Esposito A, Ferrari G, Fusai G, Giardino A, Groot Koerkamp B, Hackert T, Kamarajah S, Kauffmann EF, Keck T, Marudanayagam R, Nickel F, Manzoni A, Pessaux P, Pietrabissa A, Rosso E, Salvia R, Soonawalla Z, White S, Zerbi A, Besselink MG, Abu Hilal M. Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: multicentre analysis. Br J Surg 2021; 108:188-195. [PMID: 33711145 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znaa039] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/13/2020] [Revised: 09/03/2020] [Accepted: 09/15/2020] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The role of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy is still unclear, and whether robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) offers benefits over laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is unknown because large multicentre studies are lacking. This study compared perioperative outcomes between RDP and LDP. METHODS A multicentre international propensity score-matched study included patients who underwent RDP or LDP for any indication in 21 European centres from six countries that performed at least 15 distal pancreatectomies annually (January 2011 to June 2019). Propensity score matching was based on preoperative characteristics in a 1 : 1 ratio. The primary outcome was the major morbidity rate (Clavien-Dindo grade IIIa or above). RESULTS A total of 1551 patients (407 RDP and 1144 LDP) were included in the study. Some 402 patients who had RDP were matched with 402 who underwent LDP. After matching, there was no difference between RDP and LDP groups in rates of major morbidity (14.2 versus 16.5 per cent respectively; P = 0.378), postoperative pancreatic fistula grade B/C (24.6 versus 26.5 per cent; P = 0.543) or 90-day mortality (0.5 versus 1.3 per cent; P = 0.268). RDP was associated with a longer duration of surgery than LDP (median 285 (i.q.r. 225-350) versus 240 (195-300) min respectively; P < 0.001), lower conversion rate (6.7 versus 15.2 per cent; P < 0.001), higher spleen preservation rate (81.4 versus 62.9 per cent; P = 0.001), longer hospital stay (median 8.5 (i.q.r. 7-12) versus 7 (6-10) days; P < 0.001) and lower readmission rate (11.0 versus 18.2 per cent; P = 0.004). CONCLUSION The major morbidity rate was comparable between RDP and LDP. RDP was associated with improved rates of conversion, spleen preservation and readmission, to the detriment of longer duration of surgery and hospital stay.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Lof
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - N van der Heijde
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M Abuawwad
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - B Al-Sarireh
- Department of Surgery, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, UK
| | - U Boggi
- Division of General and Transplant surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - G Butturini
- Department of Surgery, Pederzoli Hospital, Peschiera, Italy
| | - G Capretti
- Pancreatic Surgery, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy
| | - A Coratti
- Department of Surgical Oncology and Robotics, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy
| | - R Casadei
- Department of Surgery, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy
| | - M D'Hondt
- Department of Digestive and Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgery, AZ Groeninge Hospital, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - A Esposito
- Department of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - G Ferrari
- Department of Oncological and Minimally Invasive Surgery, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy
| | - G Fusai
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - A Giardino
- Department of Surgery, Pederzoli Hospital, Peschiera, Italy
| | - B Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - T Hackert
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - S Kamarajah
- Department of Surgery, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK
| | - E F Kauffmann
- Division of General and Transplant surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - T Keck
- Clinic for Surgery, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany
| | - R Marudanayagam
- Department of Surgery, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK
| | - F Nickel
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - A Manzoni
- Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza - Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy
| | - P Pessaux
- Department of Digestive and Endocrine Surgery, Nouvel Hôpital Civil - IHU Strasbourg, Institute of Image-Guided Surgery, Strasbourg, France
| | - A Pietrabissa
- Department of Surgery, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo and University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
| | - E Rosso
- Department of Surgery, Elsan Pôle Santé Sud, Le Mans, France
| | - R Salvia
- Department of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Z Soonawalla
- Department of Surgery, Oxford University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK
| | - S White
- Department of Surgery, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK
| | - A Zerbi
- Pancreatic Surgery, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
- Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza - Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Lof S, Vissers FL, Klompmaker S, Berti S, Boggi U, Coratti A, Dokmak S, Fara R, Festen S, D'Hondt M, Khatkov I, Lips D, Luyer M, Manzoni A, Rosso E, Saint-Marc O, Besselink MG, Abu Hilal M. Risk of conversion to open surgery during robotic and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and effect on outcomes: international propensity score-matched comparison study. Br J Surg 2021; 108:80-87. [PMID: 33640946 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znaa026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2020] [Revised: 04/23/2020] [Accepted: 09/09/2020] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) is increasingly being performed because of perceived patient benefits. Whether conversion of MIPD to open pancreatoduodenectomy worsens outcome, and which risk factors are associated with conversion, is unclear. METHODS This was a post hoc analysis of a European multicentre retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing MIPD (2012-2017) in ten medium-volume (10-19 MIPDs annually) and four high-volume (at least 20 MIPDs annually) centres. Propensity score matching (1 : 1) was used to compare outcomes of converted and non-converted MIPD procedures. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for conversion, with results presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95 per cent confidence intervals (c.i). RESULTS Overall, 65 of 709 MIPDs were converted (9.2 per cent) and the overall 30-day mortality rate was 3.8 per cent. Risk factors for conversion were tumour size larger than 40 mm (OR 2.7, 95 per cent c.i.1.0 to 6.8; P = 0.041), pancreatobiliary tumours (OR 2.2, 1.0 to 4.8; P = 0.039), age at least 75 years (OR 2.0, 1.0 to 4.1; P = 0.043), and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (OR 5.2, 2.5 to 10.7; P < 0.001). Medium-volume centres had a higher risk of conversion than high-volume centres (15.2 versus 4.1 per cent, P < 0.001; OR 4.1, 2.3 to 7.4, P < 0.001). After propensity score matching (56 converted MIPDs and 56 completed MIPDs) including risk factors, rates of complications with a Clavien-Dindo grade of III or higher (32 versus 34 per cent; P = 0.841) and 30-day mortality (12 versus 6 per cent; P = 0.274) did not differ between converted and non-converted MIPDs. CONCLUSION Risk factors for conversion during MIPD include age, large tumour size, tumour location, laparoscopic approach, and surgery in medium-volume centres. Although conversion during MIPD itself was not associated with worse outcomes, the outcome in these patients was poor in general which should be taken into account during patient selection for MIPD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Lof
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.,Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - F L Vissers
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S Klompmaker
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S Berti
- Department of Surgery, Sant'Andrea Hospital La Spezia, La Spezia, Italy
| | - U Boggi
- Department of Surgery, Universitá di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - A Coratti
- Department of Oncology and Robotic Surgery, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy
| | - S Dokmak
- Department of Surgery, Hospital of Beaujon, Clichy, France
| | - R Fara
- Department of Surgery, Hôpital Européen Marseille, Marseille, France
| | - S Festen
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M D'Hondt
- Department of Digestive and Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgery, Groeninge Hospital, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - I Khatkov
- Department of Surgery, Moscow Clinical Scientific Centre, Moscow, Russia
| | - D Lips
- Department of Gastro-intestinal and Oncological Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - M Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - A Manzoni
- Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy
| | - E Rosso
- Department of Surgery, Pôle Santé Sud, Le Mans, France
| | - O Saint-Marc
- Department of Surgery, Centre Hospitalier Regional d'Orleans, Orleans, France
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.,Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Jones LR, Zwart MJW, Molenaar IQ, Koerkamp BG, Hogg ME, Hilal MA, Besselink MG. Robotic Pancreatoduodenectomy: Patient Selection, Volume Criteria, and Training Programs. Scand J Surg 2021; 109:29-33. [PMID: 32192422 DOI: 10.1177/1457496920911815] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION There has been a rapid development in minimally invasive pancreas surgery in recent years. The most recent innovation is robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. Several studies have suggested benefits as compared to the open or laparoscopic approach. This review provides an overview of studies concerning patient selection, volume criteria, and training programs for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy and identified knowledge gaps regarding barriers for safe implementation of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS A Pubmed search was conducted concerning patient selection, volume criteria, and training programs in robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. RESULTS A total of 20 studies were included. No contraindications were found in patient selection for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. The consensus and the Miami guidelines advice is a minimum annual volume of 20 robotic pancreatoduodenectomy procedures per center, per year. One training program was identified which describes superior outcomes after the training program and shortening of the learning curve in robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. CONCLUSION Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy is safe and feasable for all indications when performed by specifically trained surgeons working in centers who can maintain a minimum volume of 20 robotic pancreatoduodenectomy procedures per year. Large proficiency-based training program for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy seem essential to facilitate a safe implementation and future research on robotic pancreatoduodenectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L R Jones
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy.,Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M J W Zwart
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - I Q Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - B Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M E Hogg
- Department of Surgery, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - M A Hilal
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Balduzzi A, van Hilst J, Korrel M, Lof S, Al-Sarireh B, Alseidi A, Berrevoet F, Björnsson B, van den Boezem P, Boggi U, Busch OR, Butturini G, Casadei R, van Dam R, Dokmak S, Edwin B, Sahakyan MA, Ercolani G, Fabre JM, Falconi M, Forgione A, Gayet B, Gomez D, Koerkamp BG, Hackert T, Keck T, Khatkov I, Krautz C, Marudanayagam R, Menon K, Pietrabissa A, Poves I, Cunha AS, Salvia R, Sánchez-Cabús S, Soonawalla Z, Hilal MA, Besselink MG. Laparoscopic versus open extended radical left pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: an international propensity-score matched study. Surg Endosc 2021; 35:6949-6959. [PMID: 33398565 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-020-08206-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/06/2020] [Accepted: 12/02/2020] [Indexed: 10/22/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A radical left pancreatectomy in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) may require extended, multivisceral resections. The role of a laparoscopic approach in extended radical left pancreatectomy (ERLP) is unclear since comparative studies are lacking. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes after laparoscopic vs open ERLP in patients with PDAC. METHODS An international multicenter propensity-score matched study including patients who underwent either laparoscopic or open ERLP (L-ERLP; O-ERLP) for PDAC was performed (2007-2015). The ISGPS definition for extended resection was used. Primary outcomes were overall survival, margin negative rate (R0), and lymph node retrieval. RESULTS Between 2007 and 2015, 320 patients underwent ERLP in 34 centers from 12 countries (65 L-ERLP vs. 255 O-ERLP). After propensity-score matching, 44 L-ERLP could be matched to 44 O-ERLP. In the matched cohort, the conversion rate in L-ERLP group was 35%. The L-ERLP R0 resection rate (matched cohort) was comparable to O-ERLP (67% vs 48%; P = 0.063) but the lymph node yield was lower for L-ERLP than O-ERLP (median 11 vs 19, P = 0.023). L-ERLP was associated with less delayed gastric emptying (0% vs 16%, P = 0.006) and shorter hospital stay (median 9 vs 13 days, P = 0.005), as compared to O-ERLP. Outcomes were comparable for additional organ resections, vascular resections (besides splenic vessels), Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III complications, or 90-day mortality (2% vs 2%, P = 0.973). The median overall survival was comparable between both groups (19 vs 20 months, P = 0.571). Conversion did not worsen outcomes in L-ERLP. CONCLUSION The laparoscopic approach may be used safely in selected patients requiring ERLP for PDAC, since morbidity, mortality, and overall survival seem comparable, as compared to O-ERLP. L-ERLP is associated with a high conversion rate and reduced lymph node yield but also with less delayed gastric emptying and a shorter hospital stay, as compared to O-ERLP.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Balduzzi
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef, 91100 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. .,General and Pancreatic Surgery, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.
| | - J van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef, 91100 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M Korrel
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef, 91100 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S Lof
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef, 91100 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - B Al-Sarireh
- Department of Surgery, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, UK
| | - A Alseidi
- Department of Surgery, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, USA
| | - F Berrevoet
- Department of General and HPB Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - B Björnsson
- Department of Surgery in Linköping, Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
| | - P van den Boezem
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - U Boggi
- Department of Surgery, Universitá di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - O R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef, 91100 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - G Butturini
- Department of Surgery, Pederzoli Hospital, Peschiera, Italy
| | - R Casadei
- Department of Surgery, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy
| | - R van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - S Dokmak
- Department of Surgery, Hospital of Beaujon, Clichy, France
| | - B Edwin
- Department of Surgery, Oslo University Hospital and Institute for Clinical Medicine, Oslo, Norway
| | - M A Sahakyan
- Department of Surgery, Oslo University Hospital and Institute for Clinical Medicine, Oslo, Norway.,Department of Surgery N1, Yerevan State Medical University After M. Heratsi, Yerevan, Armenia
| | - G Ercolani
- Department of General Surgery and Oncologic Surgery, Morgagni-Pierantoni Hospital, AUSL Romagna Forlì, Forlì, Italy.,Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - J M Fabre
- Department of Surgery, Hopital Saint Eloi, Montpellier, France
| | - M Falconi
- San Raffaele Hospital Pancreas Translational & Clinical Research Center, San Raffaele Hospital, Università Vita-Salute, Milan, Italy
| | - A Forgione
- Department of Surgery, Niguarda Ca' Granda Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - B Gayet
- Department of Surgery, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France
| | - D Gomez
- Department of Surgery, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Nottingham, UK
| | | | - T Hackert
- Department of Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - T Keck
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein UKSH Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - I Khatkov
- Department of Surgery, Moscow Clinical Scientific Center, Moscow, Russian Federation
| | - C Krautz
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
| | - R Marudanayagam
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - K Menon
- Department of Surgery, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - A Pietrabissa
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Pavia, Pavia, Italy
| | - I Poves
- Department of Surgery, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain
| | - A Sa Cunha
- Department of Surgery, Hôpital Paul-Brousse, Villejuif, France
| | - R Salvia
- General and Pancreatic Surgery, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - S Sánchez-Cabús
- Department of Surgery, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Z Soonawalla
- Department of Surgery, Oxford University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK. .,Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy. .,HPB and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Southampton University, Southampton, UK.
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef, 91100 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Azijli K, Lieveld A, van der Horst S, de Graaf N, Kootte RS, Heijmans MW, van de Ven PM, Peters E, Heijmans J, Terragnoli P, Natalini G, Abu Hilal M, de Rooij T, Nanayakkara P. Predicting poor outcome in patients with suspected COVID-19 presenting to the Emergency Department (COVERED) - Development, internal and external validation of a prediction model. Acute Med 2021; 20:4-14. [PMID: 33749689] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A recent systematic review recommends against the use of any of the current COVID-19 prediction models in clinical practice. To enable clinicians to appropriately profile and treat suspected COVID-19 patients at the emergency department (ED), externally validated models that predict poor outcome are desperately needed. OBJECTIVE Our aims were to identify predictors of poor outcome, defined as mortality or ICU admission within 30 days, in patients presenting to the ED with a clinical suspicion of COVID-19, and to develop and externally validate a prediction model for poor outcome. METHODS In this prospective, multi-center study, we enrolled suspected COVID-19 patients presenting at the EDs of two hospitals in the Netherlands. We used backward logistic regression to develop a prediction model. We used the area under the curve (AUC), Brier score and pseudo-R2 to assess model performance. The model was externally validated in an Italian cohort. RESULTS We included 1193 patients between March 12 and May 27 2020, of whom 196 (16.4%) had a poor outcome. We identified 10 predictors of poor outcome: current malignancy (OR 2.774; 95%CI 1.682-4.576), systolic blood pressure (OR 0.981; 95%CI 0.964-0.998), heart rate (OR 1.001; 95%CI 0.97-1.028), respiratory rate (OR 1.078; 95%CI 1.046-1.111), oxygen saturation (OR 0.899; 95%CI 0.850-0.952), body temperature (OR 0.505; 95%CI 0.359-0.710), serum urea (OR 1.404; 95%CI 1.198-1.645), C-reactive protein (OR 1.013; 95%CI 1.001-1.024), lactate dehydrogenase (OR 1.007; 95%CI 1.002-1.013) and SARS-CoV-2 PCR result (OR 2.456; 95%CI 1.526-3.953). The AUC was 0.86 (95%CI 0.83-0.89), with a Brier score of 0.32 and, and R2 of 0.41. The AUC in the external validation in 500 patients was 0.70 (95%CI 0.65-0.75). CONCLUSION The COVERED risk score showed excellent discriminatory ability, also in an external validation. It may aid clinical decision making, and improve triage at the ED in health care environments with high patient throughputs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K Azijli
- Section Emergency Medicine, Emergency Department, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute
| | - Awe Lieveld
- Section General & Acute Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute
| | - Sfb van der Horst
- Section General & Acute Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute
| | - N de Graaf
- Department of Surgery and Department of Accident & Emergency, Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - R S Kootte
- Section Acute Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Amsterdam UMC
| | | | | | - Ejg Peters
- Section General & Acute Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute
| | - J Heijmans
- Section Acute Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Amsterdam UMC
| | - P Terragnoli
- Department of Accident & Emergency, Fondazione Poliambulanza, Instituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy
| | - G Natalini
- Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine, Fondazione Poliambulanza Instituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery and Department of Accident & Emergency, Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - T de Rooij
- Section General & Acute Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute
| | - Pwb Nanayakkara
- Section General & Acute Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Balduzzi A, van der Heijde N, Alseidi A, Dokmak S, Kendrick ML, Polanco PM, Sandford DE, Shrikhande SV, Vollmer CM, Wang SE, Zeh HJ, Hilal MA, Asbun HJ, Besselink MG. Risk factors and outcomes of conversion in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2020; 406:597-605. [PMID: 33301071 PMCID: PMC8106568 DOI: 10.1007/s00423-020-02043-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/30/2020] [Accepted: 11/20/2020] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
Purpose The reported conversion rates for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) range widely from 2 to 38%. The identification of risk factors for conversion may help surgeons during preoperative planning and patient counseling. Moreover, the impact of conversion on outcomes of MIDP is unknown. Methods A systematic review was conducted as part of the 2019 Miami International Evidence-Based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR). The PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched for studies concerning conversion to open surgery in MIDP. Results Of the 828 studies screened, eight met the eligibility criteria, resulting in a combined dataset including 2592 patients after MIDP. The overall conversion rate was 17.1% (range 13.0–32.7%) with heterogeneity between studies associated with the definition of conversion adopted. Only one study divided conversion into elective and emergency conversion. The main indications for conversion were vascular involvement (23.7%), concern for oncological radicality (21.9%), and bleeding (18.9%). The reported risk factors for conversion included a malignancy as an indication for surgery, the proximity of the tumor to vascular structures in preoperative imaging, higher BMI or visceral fat, and multi-organ resection or extended resection. Contrasting results were seen in terms of blood loss and length of stay in comparing converted MIDP and completed MIDP patients. Conclusion The identified risk factors for conversion from this study can be used for patient selection and counseling. Surgeon experience should be considered when contemplating MIDP for a complex patient. Future studies should divide conversion into elective and emergency conversion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Balduzzi
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - N van der Heijde
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital, Southampton, UK.,Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - A Alseidi
- Department of Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - S Dokmak
- Department of Surgery, Beaujon Hospital, Paris, France
| | - M L Kendrick
- Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - P M Polanco
- Department of Surgery, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - D E Sandford
- Department of Surgery, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - S V Shrikhande
- Department of Surgery, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
| | - C M Vollmer
- Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - S E Wang
- Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China
| | - H J Zeh
- Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital, Southampton, UK.,Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - H J Asbun
- Hepatobiliary and Pancreas, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, FL, USA
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
van der Heijde N, Balduzzi A, Alseidi A, Dokmak S, Polanco PM, Sandford D, Shrikhande SV, Vollmer C, Wang SE, Besselink MG, Asbun H, Abu Hilal M. The role of older age and obesity in minimally invasive and open pancreatic surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Pancreatology 2020; 20:1234-1242. [PMID: 32782197 DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2020.06.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/11/2020] [Revised: 06/14/2020] [Accepted: 06/18/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to assess the impact of older age (≥70 years) and obesity (BMI ≥30) on surgical outcomes of minimally invasive pancreatic resections (MIPR). Subsequently, open pancreatic resections or MIPR were compared for elderly and/or obese patients. METHODS A systematic review was conducted as part of the 2019 Miami International Evidence-Based Guidelines on MIPR (IG-MIPR). Study quality assessment was according to The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). A meta-analysis was performed to assess the impact of MIPR or open pancreatic resections in elderly patients. RESULTS After screening 682 studies, 13 observational studies with 4629 patients were included. Elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) had less blood loss (117 mL, p < 0.001) and a shorter hospital stay (3.5 days p < 0.001) than elderly patients undergoing open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) B/C, major complication and reoperation rate were not significantly different in elderly patients undergoing either laparoscopic or open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD). One study compared robot PD with OPD in obese patients, indicating that patients with robotic surgery had less blood loss (mean 250 ml vs 500 ml, p = 0.001), shorter operative time (mean 381 min vs 428 min, p = 0.003), and lower rate of POPF B/C (13% vs 28%, p = 0.039). CONCLUSION The current available limited evidence does not suggest that MIPR is contraindicated in elderly or obese patients. Additionally, outcomes in MIPR are equal or more beneficial compared to the open approach when applied in these patient groups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N van der Heijde
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital, Southampton, United Kingdom; Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - A Balduzzi
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - A Alseidi
- Department of Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, USA
| | - S Dokmak
- Department of Surgery, Beaujon Hospital, Paris, France
| | - P M Polanco
- Department of Surgery, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA
| | - D Sandford
- Department of Surgery, Washington University, St. Louis, USA
| | - S V Shrikhande
- Department of Surgery, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
| | - C Vollmer
- Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, USA
| | - S E Wang
- Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang Ming University, National Yang Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - H Asbun
- Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, FL, USA
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital, Southampton, United Kingdom.
| | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Kamarajah SK, Bundred J, Manas D, Jiao LR, Hilal MA, White SA. Robotic Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Liver Resections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Scand J Surg 2020; 110:290-300. [PMID: 32762406 DOI: 10.1177/1457496920925637] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Theoretical advantages of robotic surgery compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery include improved instrument dexterity, 3D visualization, and better ergonomics. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine advantages of robotic surgery over laparoscopic surgery in patients undergoing liver resections. METHOD A systematic literature search was conducted for studies comparing robotic assisted or totally laparoscopic liver resection. Meta-analysis of intraoperative (operative time, blood loss, transfusion rate, conversion rate), oncological (R0 resection rates), and postoperative (bile leak, surgical site infection, pulmonary complications, 30-day and 90-day mortality, length of stay, 90-day readmission and reoperation rates) outcomes was performed using a random effects model. RESULT Twenty-six non-randomized studies including 2630 patients (950 robotic and 1680 laparoscopic) were included, of which 20% had major robotic liver resection and 14% had major laparoscopic liver resection. Intraoperatively, robotic liver resection was associated with significantly less blood loss (mean: 286 vs 301 mL, p < 0.001) but longer operating time (mean: 281 vs 221 min, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in conversion rates or transfusion rates between robotic liver resection and laparoscopic liver resection. Postoperatively, there were no significant differences in overall complications, bile leaks, and length of hospital stay between robotic liver resection and laparoscopic liver resection. However, robotic liver resection was associated with significantly lower readmission rates than laparoscopic liver resection (odds ratio: 0.43, p = 0.005). CONCLUSION Robotic liver resection appears to offer some advantages compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery, although both techniques appear equivalent. Importantly, the quality of evidence is generally limited to cohort studies and a high-quality randomized trial comparing both techniques is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S K Kamarajah
- Department of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic and Transplant Surgery, Department of Surgery, The Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.,Institute of Cellular Medicine, University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - J Bundred
- College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - D Manas
- Institute of Cellular Medicine, University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - L R Jiao
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, HPB Surgical Unit, Imperial College, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, London, UK
| | - M A Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - S A White
- Department of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic and Transplant Surgery, Department of Surgery, The Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.,Institute of Cellular Medicine, University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Korrel M, Lof S, van Hilst J, Alseidi A, Boggi U, Busch OR, van Dieren S, Edwin B, Fuks D, Hackert T, Keck T, Khatkov I, Malleo G, Poves I, Sahakyan MA, Bassi C, Abu Hilal M, Besselink MG. Predictors for Survival in an International Cohort of Patients Undergoing Distal Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 2020; 28:1079-1087. [PMID: 32583198 PMCID: PMC7801299 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-020-08658-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/08/2019] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Background Surgical factors, including resection of Gerota’s fascia, R0-resection, and lymph node yield, may be associated with survival after distal pancreatectomy (DP) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), but evidence from large multicenter studies is lacking. This study aimed to identify predictors for overall survival after DP for PDAC, especially those related to surgical technique. Patients and Methods Data from an international retrospective cohort including patients from 11 European countries and the USA who underwent DP for PDAC (2007–2015) were analyzed. Cox proportional hazard analyses were performed and included Gerota’s fascia resection, R0 resection, lymph node ratio, extended resection, and a minimally invasive approach. Results Overall, 1200 patients from 34 centers with median follow-up of 15 months [interquartile range (IQR) 5–31 months] and median survival period of 30 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 27–33 months] were included. Gerota’s fascia resection [hazard ratio (HR) 0.74; p = 0.019], R0 resection (HR 0.70; p = 0.006), and decreased lymph node ratio (HR 0.28; p < 0.001) were associated with improved overall survival, whereas extended resection (HR 1.75; p < 0.001) was associated with worse overall survival. A minimally invasive approach did not improve survival as compared with an open approach (HR 1.14; p = 0.350). Adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 0.67; p = 0.003) was also associated with improved overall survival. Conclusions This international cohort identified Gerota’s fascia resection, R0 resection, and decreased lymph node ratio as factors associated with improved overall survival during DP for PDAC. Surgeons should strive for R0 resection and adequate lymphadenectomy and could also consider Gerota’s fascia resection in their routine surgical approach. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1245/s10434-020-08658-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Korrel
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S Lof
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,Department of General Surgery, Instituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - J van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, OLVG Oost, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - A Alseidi
- Division of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Endocrine Surgery, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - U Boggi
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - O R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S van Dieren
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - B Edwin
- Department of HPB Surgery, The Intervention Center, Institute for Clinical Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - D Fuks
- Department of Surgery, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France
| | - T Hackert
- Department of Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - T Keck
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - I Khatkov
- Department of Surgery, Moscow Clinical Scientific Center, Moscow, Russian Federation
| | - G Malleo
- Department of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - I Poves
- Department of Surgery, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain
| | - M A Sahakyan
- Department of HPB Surgery, The Intervention Center, Institute for Clinical Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.,Department of Surgery N1, Yerevan State Medical University After M. Heratsi, Yerevan, Armenia
| | - C Bassi
- Department of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of General Surgery, Instituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy.
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
19
|
Abu Hilal M, Besselink MG, Lemmers DHL, Taylor MA, Triboldi A. Early look at the future of healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic. Br J Surg 2020; 107:e197. [PMID: 32383161 PMCID: PMC7267408 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.11666] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2020] [Accepted: 04/07/2020] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- M Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Instituto Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - D H L Lemmers
- Department of Surgery, Instituto Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy.,Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M A Taylor
- Department of HPB Surgery, Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, UK
| | - A Triboldi
- Department of Surgery, Instituto Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Moekotte AL, Malleo G, van Roessel S, Bonds M, Halimi A, Zarantonello L, Napoli N, Dreyer SB, Wellner UF, Bolm L, Mavroeidis VK, Robinson S, Khalil K, Ferraro D, Mortimer MC, Harris S, Al-Sarireh B, Fusai GK, Roberts KJ, Fontana M, White SA, Soonawalla Z, Jamieson NB, Boggi U, Alseidi A, Shablak A, Wilmink JW, Primrose JN, Salvia R, Bassi C, Besselink MG, Abu Hilal M. Gemcitabine-based adjuvant chemotherapy in subtypes of ampullary adenocarcinoma: international propensity score-matched cohort study. Br J Surg 2020; 107:1171-1182. [PMID: 32259295 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.11555] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/17/2019] [Revised: 12/14/2019] [Accepted: 01/23/2020] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Whether patients who undergo resection of ampullary adenocarcinoma have a survival benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy is currently unknown. The aim of this study was to compare survival between patients with and without adjuvant chemotherapy after resection of ampullary adenocarcinoma in a propensity score-matched analysis. METHODS An international multicentre cohort study was conducted, including patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for ampullary adenocarcinoma between 2006 and 2017, in 13 centres in six countries. Propensity scores were used to match patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy with those who did not, in the entire cohort and in two subgroups (pancreatobiliary/mixed and intestinal subtypes). Survival was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analyses. RESULTS Overall, 1163 patients underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for ampullary adenocarcinoma. After excluding 187 patients, median survival in the remaining 976 patients was 67 (95 per cent c.i. 56 to 78) months. A total of 520 patients (53·3 per cent) received adjuvant chemotherapy. In a propensity score-matched cohort (194 patients in each group), survival was better among patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy than in those who did not (median survival not reached versus 60 months respectively; P = 0·051). A survival benefit was seen in patients with the pancreatobiliary/mixed subtype; median survival was not reached in patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy and 32 months in the group without chemotherapy (P = 0·020). Patients with the intestinal subtype did not show any survival benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. CONCLUSION Patients with resected ampullary adenocarcinoma may benefit from gemcitabine-based adjuvant chemotherapy, but this effect may be reserved for those with the pancreatobiliary and/or mixed subtype.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A L Moekotte
- Departments of Surgery, Southampton, UK.,Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - G Malleo
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - S van Roessel
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M Bonds
- Department of Surgery, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - A Halimi
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Division of Surgery, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - L Zarantonello
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Division of Surgery, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - N Napoli
- Department of Surgery, Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy
| | - S B Dreyer
- Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.,West of Scotland Pancreatic Unit, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK
| | - U F Wellner
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - L Bolm
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - V K Mavroeidis
- Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK
| | - S Robinson
- Department of Surgery, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - K Khalil
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - D Ferraro
- Department of Surgery, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - M C Mortimer
- Department of Surgery, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, UK
| | - S Harris
- Medical Statistics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - B Al-Sarireh
- Department of Surgery, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, UK
| | - G K Fusai
- Department of Surgery, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - K J Roberts
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - M Fontana
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - S A White
- Department of Surgery, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Z Soonawalla
- Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK
| | - N B Jamieson
- Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.,West of Scotland Pancreatic Unit, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK
| | - U Boggi
- Department of Surgery, Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy
| | - A Alseidi
- Department of Surgery, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - A Shablak
- Departments of Medical Oncology, University Hospital of Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - J W Wilmink
- Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - R Salvia
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - C Bassi
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Departments of Surgery, Southampton, UK.,Department of Surgery, Istituto Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Lof S, Moekotte AL, Al-Sarireh B, Ammori B, Aroori S, Durkin D, Fusai GK, French JJ, Gomez D, Marangoni G, Marudanayagam R, Soonawalla Z, Sutcliffe R, White SA, Abu Hilal M. Multicentre observational cohort study of implementation and outcomes of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. Br J Surg 2019; 106:1657-1665. [PMID: 31454072 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.11292] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2019] [Revised: 05/29/2019] [Accepted: 05/30/2019] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is increasingly being performed as an alternative to open surgery. Whether the implementation and corresponding learning curve of LDP have an impact on patient outcome is unknown. The aim was to investigate the temporal trends in practice across UK centres. METHODS This was a retrospective multicentre observational cohort study of LDP in 11 tertiary referral centres in the UK between 2006 and 2016. The learning curve was analysed by pooling data for the first 15 consecutive patients who had LDP and examining trends in surgical outcomes in subsequent patients. RESULTS In total, 570 patients underwent LDP, whereas 888 underwent open resection. For LDP the median duration of operation was 240 min, with 200 ml blood loss. The conversion rate was 12·1 per cent. Neuroendocrine tumours (26·7 per cent) and mucinous cystic neoplasms (19·7 per cent) were commonest indications. The proportion of LDPs increased from 24·4 per cent in 2006-2009 (P1) to 46·0 per cent in 2014-2016 (P3) (P < 0·001). LDP was increasingly performed for patients aged 70 years or more (16 per cent in P1 versus 34·4 per cent in P3; P = 0·002), pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (6 versus 19·1 per cent; P = 0·005) and advanced malignant tumours (27 versus 52 per cent; P = 0·016). With increasing experience, there was a trend for a decrease in blood transfusion rate (14·1 per cent for procedures 1-15 to 3·5 per cent for procedures 46-75; P = 0·008), ICU admissions (32·7 to 19·2 per cent; P = 0·021) and median duration of hospital stay (7 (i.q.r. 5-9) to 6 (4-7) days; P = 0·002). After 30 procedures, a decrease was noted in rates of both overall morbidity (57·7 versus 42·2 per cent for procedures 16-30 versus 46-75 respectively; P = 0·009) and severe morbidity (18·8 versus 9·7 per cent; P = 0·031). CONCLUSION LDP has increased as a treatment option for lesions of the distal pancreas as indications for the procedure have expanded. Perioperative outcomes improved with the number of procedures performed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Lof
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - A L Moekotte
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - B Al-Sarireh
- Department of Surgery, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, UK
| | - B Ammori
- Department of Surgery, University of Manchester and Salford University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - S Aroori
- Department of Surgery, Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Plymouth, UK
| | - D Durkin
- Department of Surgery, Royal Stoke University Hospital, Stoke-on-Trent, UK
| | - G K Fusai
- Hepatopancreatobiliary and Liver Transplant Unit, Royal Free London, London, UK
| | - J J French
- Department of Surgery, Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - D Gomez
- Department of Surgery, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK
| | - G Marangoni
- Department of Surgery, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UK
| | | | - Z Soonawalla
- Department of Surgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK
| | - R Sutcliffe
- Department of Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK
| | - S A White
- Department of Surgery, Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
22
|
Berardi G, Aghayan D, Fretland ÅA, Elberm H, Cipriani F, Spagnoli A, Montalti R, Ceelen WP, Aldrighetti L, Abu Hilal M, Edwin B, Troisi RI. Multicentre analysis of the learning curve for laparoscopic liver resection of the posterosuperior segments. Br J Surg 2019; 106:1512-1522. [PMID: 31441944 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.11286] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/09/2019] [Revised: 04/12/2019] [Accepted: 05/27/2019] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic liver resection demands expertise and a long learning curve. Resection of the posterosuperior segments is challenging, and there are no data on the learning curve. The aim of this study was to evaluate the learning curve for laparoscopic resection of the posterosuperior segments. METHODS A cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis of the difficulty score for resection was undertaken using patient data from four specialized centres. Risk-adjusted CUSUM analysis of duration of operation, blood loss and conversions was performed, adjusting for the difficulty score of the procedures. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to identify the completion of the learning curve. RESULTS According to the CUSUM analysis of 464 patients, the learning curve showed an initial decrease in the difficulty score followed by an increase and, finally, stabilization. More patients with cirrhosis or previous surgery were operated in the latest phase of the learning curve. A smaller number of wedge resections and a larger number of anatomical resections were performed progressively. Dissection using a Cavitron ultrasonic surgical aspirator and the Pringle manoeuvre were used more frequently with time. Risk-adjusted CUSUM analysis showed a progressive decrease in operating time. Blood loss initially increased slightly, then stabilized and finally decreased over time. A similar trend was found for conversions. The learning curve was estimated to be 40 procedures for wedge and 65 for anatomical resections. CONCLUSION The learning curve for laparoscopic liver resection of the posterosuperior segments consists of a stepwise process, during which accurate patient selection is key.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- G Berardi
- Department of Human Structure and Repair, Faculty of Medicine, Ghent University, Belgium
| | - D Aghayan
- Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
| | - Å A Fretland
- Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
| | - H Elberm
- Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgical Unit, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - F Cipriani
- Hepatobiliary Surgery, Department of Surgery, San Raffaele Hospital Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - A Spagnoli
- Department of Statistical Sciences, Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - R Montalti
- Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, Federico II University, Naples, Italy
| | - W P Ceelen
- Department of Human Structure and Repair, Faculty of Medicine, Ghent University, Belgium
| | - L Aldrighetti
- Hepatobiliary Surgery, Department of Surgery, San Raffaele Hospital Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgical Unit, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - B Edwin
- Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
- Institute of Clinical Medicine, Medical Faculty, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - R I Troisi
- Department of Human Structure and Repair, Faculty of Medicine, Ghent University, Belgium
- Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, Federico II University, Naples, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
van Rosmalen BV, Klompenhouwer AJ, de Graeff JJ, Haring MPD, de Meijer VE, Rifai L, Dokmak S, Rawashdeh A, Abu Hilal M, de Jong MC, Dejong CHC, Doukas M, de Man RA, IJzermans JNM, van Delden OM, Verheij J, van Gulik TM. Safety and efficacy of transarterial embolization of hepatocellular adenomas. Br J Surg 2019; 106:1362-1371. [PMID: 31313827 PMCID: PMC6771810 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.11213] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/08/2019] [Revised: 02/26/2019] [Accepted: 03/25/2019] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Hepatocellular adenoma (HCA) larger than 5 cm in diameter has an increased risk of haemorrhage and malignant transformation, and is considered an indication for resection. As an alternative to resection, transarterial embolization (TAE) may play a role in prevention of complications of HCA, but its safety and efficacy are largely unknown. The aim of this study was to assess outcomes and postembolization effects of selective TAE in the management of HCA. METHODS This retrospective, multicentre cohort study included patients aged at least 18 years, diagnosed with HCA and treated with TAE. Patient characteristics, 30-day complications, tumour size before and after TAE, symptoms before and after TAE, and need for secondary interventions were analysed. RESULTS Overall, 59 patients with a median age of 33.5 years were included from six centres; 57 of the 59 patients were women. Median tumour size at time of TAE was 76 mm. Six of 59 patients (10 per cent) had a major complication (cyst formation or sepsis), which could be resolved with minimal therapy, but prolonged hospital stay. Thirty-four patients (58 per cent) were symptomatic at presentation. There were no significant differences in symptoms before TAE and symptoms evaluated in the short term (within 3 months) after TAE (P = 0·134). First follow-up imaging was performed a median of 5·5 months after TAE and showed a reduction in size to a median of 48 mm (P < 0·001). CONCLUSION TAE is safe, can lead to adequate size reduction of HCA and, offers an alternative to resection in selected patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- B V van Rosmalen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, location AMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - A J Klompenhouwer
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J Jaap de Graeff
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, location AMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M P D Haring
- Division of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - V E de Meijer
- Division of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - L Rifai
- Division of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Beaujon Hospital, University of Paris, Clichy, France
| | - S Dokmak
- Division of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Beaujon Hospital, University of Paris, Clichy, France
| | - A Rawashdeh
- Division of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Division of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK
| | - M C de Jong
- Division of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - C H C Dejong
- Department of Surgery and School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - M Doukas
- Department of Pathology, Erasmus MC University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - R A de Man
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J N M IJzermans
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - O M van Delden
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, location AMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J Verheij
- Department of Pathology, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, location AMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - T M van Gulik
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, location AMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
24
|
van der Poel MJ, Barkhatov L, Fuks D, Berardi G, Cipriani F, Aljaiuossi A, Lainas P, Dagher I, D'Hondt M, Rotellar F, Besselink MG, Aldrighetti L, Troisi RI, Gayet B, Edwin B, Abu Hilal M. Multicentre propensity score-matched study of laparoscopic versus open repeat liver resection for colorectal liver metastases. Br J Surg 2019; 106:783-789. [PMID: 30706451 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.11096] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/08/2018] [Revised: 10/11/2018] [Accepted: 11/27/2018] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Repeat liver resection is often the best treatment option for patients with recurrent colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Repeat resections can be complex, however, owing to adhesions and altered liver anatomy. It remains uncertain whether the advantages of a laparoscopic approach are upheld in this setting. The aim of this retrospective, propensity score-matched study was to compare the short-term outcome of laparoscopic (LRLR) and open (ORLR) repeat liver resection. METHODS A multicentre retrospective propensity score-matched study was performed including all patients who underwent LRLRs and ORLRs for CRLM performed in nine high-volume centres from seven European countries between 2000 and 2016. Patients were matched based on propensity scores in a 1 : 1 ratio. Propensity scores were calculated based on 12 preoperative variables, including the approach to, and extent of, the previous liver resection. Operative outcomes were compared using paired tests. RESULTS Overall, 425 repeat liver resections were included. Of 271 LRLRs, 105 were matched with an ORLR. Baseline characteristics were comparable after matching. LRLR was associated with a shorter duration of operation (median 200 (i.q.r. 123-273) versus 256 (199-320) min; P < 0·001), less intraoperative blood loss (200 (50-450) versus 300 (100-600) ml; P = 0·077) and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (5 (3-8) versus 6 (5-8) days; P = 0·028). Postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were similar after LRLR and ORLR. CONCLUSION LRLR for CRLM is feasible in selected patients and may offer advantages over an open approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M J van der Poel
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.,Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - L Barkhatov
- Interventional Centre and Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
| | - D Fuks
- Department of Digestive Disease, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France
| | - G Berardi
- Department of General and Hepatobiliary Surgery, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - F Cipriani
- Hepatobiliary Surgery Division, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - A Aljaiuossi
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - P Lainas
- Department of Surgery, Antoine Béclère Hospital, Paris, France
| | - I Dagher
- Department of Surgery, Antoine Béclère Hospital, Paris, France
| | - M D'Hondt
- Department of Digestive and Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgery, Groeninge Hospital, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - F Rotellar
- Department of General and Abdominal Surgery, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - L Aldrighetti
- Hepatobiliary Surgery Division, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - R I Troisi
- Department of General and Hepatobiliary Surgery, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - B Gayet
- Department of Digestive Disease, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France
| | - B Edwin
- Interventional Centre and Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Keane MG, Shamali A, Nilsson LN, Antila A, Millastre Bocos J, Marijinissen Van Zanten M, Verdejo Gil C, Maisonneuve P, Vaalavuo Y, Hoskins T, Robinson S, Ceyhan GO, Abu Hilal M, Pereira SP, Laukkarinen J, Del Chiaro M. Risk of malignancy in resected pancreatic mucinous cystic neoplasms. Br J Surg 2018; 105:439-446. [PMID: 29488646 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.10787] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/05/2017] [Revised: 08/12/2017] [Accepted: 11/16/2017] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pancreatic mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCNs) are rare mucin-producing cystic tumours defined by the presence of ovarian-type stroma. MCNs have a malignant potential and thus surgery is frequently performed. The aim of this cohort study was to define better the criteria for surgical resection in patients with MCN. METHODS This multicentre retrospective study included all resected MCNs between 2003 and 2015 in participating centres. Lesions without ovarian-type stroma were excluded. Patient characteristics, preoperative findings, histopathology findings and follow-up data were recorded. RESULTS The study included 211 patients; their median age was 53 (range 18-82) years, and 202 (95·7 per cent) were women. Median preoperative tumour size was 55 (range 12-230) mm. Thirty-four of the 211 (16·1 per cent) were malignant, and high-grade dysplasia (HGD) was found in a further 13 (6·2 per cent). One-third of MCNs in men were associated with invasive cancer, compared with 15·3 per cent in women. Five cases of malignant transformation occurred in MCNs smaller than 4 cm. All cases of malignancy or HGD were associated with symptoms or features of concern on preoperative cross-sectional imaging. In multivariable analysis, raised carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (odds ratio (OR) 10·54, 95 per cent c.i. 2·85 to 218·23; P < 0·001), tumour size (OR 4·23, 3·02 to 11·03; P = 0·001), mural nodules (OR 3·55, 1·31 to 20·55; P = 0·002) and weight loss (OR 3·40, 2·34 to 12·34; P = 0·034) were independent factors predictive of malignant transformation. CONCLUSIONS Small indeterminate MCNs with no symptoms or features of concern may safely be observed as they have a low risk of malignant transformation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M G Keane
- Institute for Liver and Digestive Health, University College London, London
| | - A Shamali
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital, Southampton, UK
| | - L N Nilsson
- Department of Surgery, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - A Antila
- Department of Gastroenterology and Alimentary Tract Surgery, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland
| | - J Millastre Bocos
- Department of Gastroenterology, Miguel Servet University Hospital, Zaragoza, Spain
| | | | - C Verdejo Gil
- Department of Gastroenterology, Ciudad Real University Hospital, Ciudad Real, Spain
| | | | - Y Vaalavuo
- Department of Gastroenterology and Alimentary Tract Surgery, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland
| | - T Hoskins
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - S Robinson
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - G O Ceyhan
- Surgical Clinic, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital, Southampton, UK
| | - S P Pereira
- Institute for Liver and Digestive Health, University College London, London
| | - J Laukkarinen
- Department of Gastroenterology and Alimentary Tract Surgery, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland
| | - M Del Chiaro
- Department of Surgery, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Khedr MEMS, Abdelmotelb AM, Bedwell TA, Shtaya A, Alzoubi MN, Abu Hilal M, Khakoo SI. Vasoactive intestinal peptide induces proliferation of human hepatocytes. Cell Prolif 2018; 51:e12482. [PMID: 30028555 DOI: 10.1111/cpr.12482] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/04/2018] [Accepted: 05/04/2018] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Proliferation of hepatocytes in vitro can be stimulated by growth factors such as epidermal growth factor (EGF), but the role of vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP) remains unclear. We have investigated the effect of VIP on maintenance and proliferation of human hepatocytes. MATERIALS AND METHODS Human hepatocytes were isolated from liver specimens obtained from patients undergoing liver surgery. Treatment with VIP or EGF was started 24 h after plating and continued for 3 or 5 d. DNA replication was investigated by Bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU) incorporation and cell viability detected by MTT assay. Cell lysate was analysed by western blotting and RT-PCR. Urea and albumin secretion into the culture supernatants were measured. RESULTS VIP increased DNA replication in hepatocytes in a dose-dependant manner, with a peak response at day 3 of treatment. VIP treatment was associated with an increase in mRNA expression of antigen identified by monoclonal antibody Ki-67 (MKI-67) and Histone Cluster 3 (H3) genes. Western blotting analysis showed that VIP can induce a PKA/B-Raf dependant phosphorylation of extracellular signal-regulated kinases (ERK). Although EGF can maintain hepatocyte functions up to day 5, no marked efffect was found with VIP. CONCLUSIONS VIP induces proliferation of human hepatocytes with little or no effect on hepatocyte differentiation. Further investigation of the role of VIP is required to determine if it may ultimately support therapeutic approaches of liver disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M E M S Khedr
- Clinical and Experimental Sciences Academic Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.,Faculty of Medicine, Suez Canal University, Ismailia, Egypt
| | - A M Abdelmotelb
- Clinical and Experimental Sciences Academic Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.,Faculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt
| | - T A Bedwell
- Clinical and Experimental Sciences Academic Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - A Shtaya
- St George's University of London, London, UK
| | - M N Alzoubi
- Clinical and Experimental Sciences Academic Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.,University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan.,Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Clinical and Experimental Sciences Academic Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.,Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - S I Khakoo
- Clinical and Experimental Sciences Academic Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.,Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust, Southampton, UK
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Halls MC, Berardi G, Cipriani F, Barkhatov L, Lainas P, Harris S, D'Hondt M, Rotellar F, Dagher I, Aldrighetti L, Troisi RI, Edwin B, Abu Hilal M. Development and validation of a difficulty score to predict intraoperative complications during laparoscopic liver resection. Br J Surg 2018; 105:1182-1191. [DOI: 10.1002/bjs.10821] [Citation(s) in RCA: 78] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/23/2017] [Revised: 12/04/2017] [Accepted: 12/13/2017] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Previous studies have demonstrated that patient, surgical, tumour and operative variables affect the complexity of laparoscopic liver resections. However, current difficulty scoring systems address only tumour factors. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a predictive model for the risk of intraoperative complications during laparoscopic liver resections.
Methods
The prospectively maintained databases of seven European tertiary referral liver centres were compiled. Data from two-thirds of the patients were used for development and one-third for validation of the model. Intraoperative complications were based on a modified Satava classification. Using the methodology of the Framingham Heart Study, developed to identify risk factors that contribute to the development of cardiovascular disease, factors found to predict intraoperative complications independently were assigned points, and grouped into low-, moderate-, high- and extremely high-risk groups based on the likelihood of intraoperative complications.
Results
A total of 2856 patients were included. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, lesion type and size, classification of resection and previous open liver resection were found to be independent predictors of intraoperative complications. Patients with intraoperative complications had a longer duration of hospital stay (5 versus 4 days; P < 0·001), higher complication rates (32·5 versus 15·5 per cent; P < 0·001), and higher 30-day (3·0 versus 0·3 per cent; P < 0·001) and 90-day (3·8 versus 0·8 per cent; P < 0·001) mortality rates than those who did not. The model was able to predict intraoperative complications (area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) 0·677, 95 per cent c.i. 0·647 to 0·706) as well as postoperative 90-day mortality (AUC 0·769, 0·681 to 0·858).
Conclusion
This comprehensive scoring system, based on patient, surgical and tumour factors, and developed and validated using a large multicentre European database, helped estimate the risk of intraoperative complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M C Halls
- Department of Hepato-Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - G Berardi
- Department of General and Hepatobiliary Surgery, Liver Transplantation, Ghent University Hospital Medical School, Ghent, Belgium
| | - F Cipriani
- Department of Hepato-Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - L Barkhatov
- Intervention Centre and Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, and Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - P Lainas
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Antoine-Béclère Hospital, Paris, France
| | - S Harris
- Department of Public Health Sciences and Medical Statistics, Faulty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - M D'Hondt
- Department of Digestive and Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Groeninge Hospital, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - F Rotellar
- Department of General Surgery, University of Navarra Hospital, Pamplona, Spain
| | - I Dagher
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Antoine-Béclère Hospital, Paris, France
| | - L Aldrighetti
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - R I Troisi
- Department of General and Hepatobiliary Surgery, Liver Transplantation, Ghent University Hospital Medical School, Ghent, Belgium
| | - B Edwin
- Intervention Centre and Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, and Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of Hepato-Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Tanno L, Mayo D, Mills S, Takhar A, Cave J, Nolan L, Stedman B, Sundram FX, Abu Hilal M, Connor H, Pearce N, Armstrong T. Proactive multi-modality treatment of Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumours (PNETs): Potential survival benefits. Pancreatology 2018; 18:304-312. [PMID: 29433805 DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2017.12.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/20/2017] [Revised: 11/15/2017] [Accepted: 12/11/2017] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES Primary and metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (PNET) can be treated with combination of surgery, locoregional and systemic therapy. Survival benefits from individual treatments have been well reported, however, the combined outcome from multimodal treatments are not well described in the literature. We report outcomes in a cohort of PNET patients treated with proactive, multimodality therapy. METHODS 106 patients were identified from a single tertiary referral centre prospective database. Outcomes of treatment were studied, with the primary end point being death from any cause. RESULTS Median follow-up was 71 months and overall 5-year survival of 62%. In patients with stage I-III disease (51 patients) estimated 5-year survival was 90%. Median survival in patients with stage IV disease was 51 months with an estimated 5-year survival of 40% in this group. A total of 80 patients (75%) had surgery of which 16% suffered complications requiring intervention. There was no perioperative mortality. CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrates that proactive multimodal treatment is safe and may confer a survival benefit to patients in this cohort compared to historical data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L Tanno
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Wessex NET Group ENETS Centre of Excellence, University Hospital Southampton, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, United Kingdom.
| | - D Mayo
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Wessex NET Group ENETS Centre of Excellence, University Hospital Southampton, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, United Kingdom
| | - S Mills
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Wessex NET Group ENETS Centre of Excellence, University Hospital Southampton, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, United Kingdom
| | - A Takhar
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Wessex NET Group ENETS Centre of Excellence, University Hospital Southampton, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, United Kingdom
| | - J Cave
- Department of Oncology, Wessex NET Group ENETS Centre of Excellence, University Hospital Southampton, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, United Kingdom
| | - L Nolan
- Department of Oncology, Wessex NET Group ENETS Centre of Excellence, University Hospital Southampton, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, United Kingdom
| | - B Stedman
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Wessex NET Group ENETS Centre of Excellence, University Hospital Southampton, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, United Kingdom
| | - F X Sundram
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Wessex NET Group ENETS Centre of Excellence, University Hospital Southampton, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, United Kingdom
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Wessex NET Group ENETS Centre of Excellence, University Hospital Southampton, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, United Kingdom
| | - H Connor
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Wessex NET Group ENETS Centre of Excellence, University Hospital Southampton, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, United Kingdom
| | - N Pearce
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Wessex NET Group ENETS Centre of Excellence, University Hospital Southampton, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, United Kingdom
| | - T Armstrong
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Wessex NET Group ENETS Centre of Excellence, University Hospital Southampton, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Hilal MA, Borai EH. Hazardous parameters associated with natural radioactivity exposure from black sand. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2017; 92:245-250. [PMID: 29277438 DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2017.12.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2017] [Revised: 12/12/2017] [Accepted: 12/14/2017] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Black sand samples collected from Baltim beaches (Kafr El-Sheikh governorate) in Egypt on the Mediterranean Sea shore were analyzed radiometrically and evaluated using a nondestructive gamma ray spectroscopic techniques. The natural radionuclides of 226Ra, 232Th and 40K in the black sand samples were identified and quantified. It is found that the activity concentrations for 226Ra, 232Th and 40K in different eleven sites (S1S11) were found within the ranges of 28-322, 91-308 and 81-339 Bq/kg, respectively. Moreover, different radiological hazardous parameters (absorbed dose rate, annual effective dose equivalent, radium activity, annual gonadal dose equivalent and excess lifetime cancer risk) were calculated. The results show that these values are greater than the permissible values due to increasing the activity concentrations of the primordial radionuclides 226Ra, 232Th and 40K. The dose rate for radiation emitted at 1 m from the surface of land was measured directly and the results shown that all sites emit radiation doses more than the international permissible value (57 nGy/h) especially at three sites which around 340 nGy/h. These values are important to establish baseline levels of this environmental radioactivity to detect any upcoming change for the local population and resorts people. The relatively high dose rate will be considered as a spa for the physical therapy such as treatment of some skin diseases and rheumatoid.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M A Hilal
- Department of Analytical Chemistry and Control, Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center (HLWMC), Atomic Energy Authority, 13759 Cairo, Egypt.
| | - E H Borai
- Department of Analytical Chemistry and Control, Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center (HLWMC), Atomic Energy Authority, 13759 Cairo, Egypt
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Ravikumar R, Sabin C, Abu Hilal M, Al-Hilli A, Aroori S, Bond-Smith G, Bramhall S, Coldham C, Hammond J, Hutchins R, Imber C, Preziosi G, Saleh A, Silva M, Simpson J, Spoletini G, Stell D, Terrace J, White S, Wigmore S, Fusai G. Impact of portal vein infiltration and type of venous reconstruction in surgery for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Br J Surg 2017; 104:1539-1548. [PMID: 28833055 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.10580] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2016] [Revised: 12/29/2016] [Accepted: 04/04/2017] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) recommends operative exploration and resection of pancreatic cancers in the presence of reconstructable mesentericoportal axis involvement. However, there is no consensus on the ideal method of vascular reconstruction. The effect of depth of tumour invasion of the vessel wall on outcome is also unknown. METHODS This was a retrospective cohort study of pancreaticoduodenectomy with vein resection for T3 adenocarcinoma of the head of the pancreas across nine centres. Outcome measures were overall survival based on the impact of the depth of tumour infiltration of the vessel wall, and morbidity, in-hospital mortality and overall survival between types of venous reconstruction: primary closure, end-to-end anastomosis and interposition graft. RESULTS A total of 229 patients underwent portal vein resection; 129 (56·3 per cent) underwent primary closure, 64 (27·9 per cent) had an end-to-end anastomosis and 36 (15·7 per cent) an interposition graft. There was no difference in overall morbidity (26 (20·2 per cent), 14 (22 per cent) and 9 (25 per cent) respectively; P = 0·817) or in-hospital mortality (6 (4·7 per cent), 2 (3 per cent) and 2 (6 per cent); P = 0·826) between the three groups. One hundred and six patients (47·5 per cent) had histological evidence of vein involvement; 59 (26·5 per cent) had superficial invasion (tunica adventitia) and 47 (21·1 per cent) had deep invasion (tunica media or intima). Median survival was 18·8 months for patients who had primary closure, 27·6 months for those with an end-to-end anastomosis and 13·0 months among patients with an interposition graft. There was no significant difference in median survival between patients with superficial, deep or no histological vein involvement (20·8, 21·3 and 13·3 months respectively; P = 0·111). Venous tumour infiltration was not associated with decreased overall survival on multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION In this study, there was no difference in morbidity between the three modes of venous reconstruction, and overall survival was similar regardless of tumour infiltration of the vein.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Ravikumar
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) and Liver Transplant Surgery, Royal Free Hospital, London, UK
| | - C Sabin
- Research Department of Infection and Population Health, Royal Free Campus, University College London, London, UK
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of HPB Surgery, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK
| | - A Al-Hilli
- Department of HPB Surgery, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK
| | - S Aroori
- Department of HPB Surgery, Plymouth Hospitals, Plymouth, UK
| | - G Bond-Smith
- Department of HPB Surgery, Royal London Hospital, London, UK
| | - S Bramhall
- Liver Unit, University Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - C Coldham
- Liver Unit, University Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - J Hammond
- Department of HPB, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, UK
| | - R Hutchins
- Department of HPB Surgery, Royal London Hospital, London, UK
| | - C Imber
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) and Liver Transplant Surgery, Royal Free Hospital, London, UK
| | - G Preziosi
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) and Liver Transplant Surgery, Royal Free Hospital, London, UK
| | - A Saleh
- Department of HPB and Transplantation, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - M Silva
- Department of HPB Surgery, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - J Simpson
- Department of HPB, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, UK
| | - G Spoletini
- Department of HPB Surgery, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - D Stell
- Department of HPB Surgery, Plymouth Hospitals, Plymouth, UK
| | - J Terrace
- Department of HPB and Liver Transplant Surgery, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - S White
- Department of HPB and Transplantation, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - S Wigmore
- Department of HPB and Liver Transplant Surgery, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - G Fusai
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) and Liver Transplant Surgery, Royal Free Hospital, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Scuderi V, Barkhatov L, Montalti R, Ratti F, Cipriani F, Pardo F, Tranchart H, Dagher I, Rotellar F, Abu Hilal M, Edwin B, Vivarelli M, Aldrighetti L, Troisi RI. Outcome after laparoscopic and open resections of posterosuperior segments of the liver. Br J Surg 2017; 104:751-759. [PMID: 28194774 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.10489] [Citation(s) in RCA: 69] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/13/2016] [Revised: 09/02/2016] [Accepted: 12/14/2016] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic resection of posterosuperior (PS) segments of the liver is hindered by limited visualization and curvilinear resection planes. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes after open and laparoscopic liver resections of PS segments. METHODS Patients who underwent minor open liver resection (OLR) and laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) between 2006 and 2014 were identified from the institutional databases of seven tertiary referral European hepatobiliary surgical units. Propensity score-matched analysis was used to match groups for known confounders. Perioperative outcomes including complications were assessed using the Dindo-Clavien classification, and the comprehensive complication index was calculated. Survival was analysed with the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS Some 170 patients underwent OLR and 148 had LLR. After propensity score-matched analysis, 86 patients remained in both groups. Overall postoperative complication rates were significantly higher after OLR compared with LLR: 28 versus 14 per cent respectively (P = 0·039). The mean(s.d.) comprehensive complication index was higher in the OLR group, although the difference was not statistically significant (26·7(16·6) versus 18·3(8·0) in the LLR group; P = 0·108). The mean(s.d.) duration of required analgesia and the median (range) duration of postoperative hospital stay were significantly shorter in the LLR group: 3·0(1·1) days versus 1·6(0·8) days in the OLR group (P < 0·001), and 6 (3-44) versus 4 (1-11) days (P < 0·001), respectively. The 3-year recurrence-free survival rates for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (37 per cent for OLR versus 30 per cent for LLR; P = 0·534) and those with colorectal liver metastases (36 versus 36 per cent respectively; P = 0·440) were not significantly different between the groups. CONCLUSION LLR of tumours in PS segments is feasible in selected patients. LLR is associated with fewer complications and does not compromise survival compared with OLR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- V Scuderi
- Department of General, Hepatobiliary and Liver Transplantation Surgery, Ghent University Hospital and Medical School, Ghent, Belgium
| | - L Barkhatov
- The Intervention Centre, Department of Hepatic, Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital and Institute of Clinical Medicine, Oslo University, Oslo, Norway
| | - R Montalti
- Hepatobiliary and Abdominal Transplantation Surgery, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Polytechnic University of Marche, Ancona, Italy
| | - F Ratti
- Hepatobiliary Surgery, Department of Surgery, San Raffaele Hospital Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - F Cipriani
- Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgical Unit, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - F Pardo
- Hepatic, Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplant Unit, General and Digestive Surgery, University Clinic of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
| | - H Tranchart
- Department of Digestive Minimally Invasive Surgery, Antoine Béclère Hospital, Paris-Saclay University, Clamart, France
| | - I Dagher
- Department of Digestive Minimally Invasive Surgery, Antoine Béclère Hospital, Paris-Saclay University, Clamart, France
| | - F Rotellar
- Hepatic, Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplant Unit, General and Digestive Surgery, University Clinic of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgical Unit, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - B Edwin
- The Intervention Centre, Department of Hepatic, Pancreatic and Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital and Institute of Clinical Medicine, Oslo University, Oslo, Norway
| | - M Vivarelli
- Hepatobiliary and Abdominal Transplantation Surgery, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Polytechnic University of Marche, Ancona, Italy
| | - L Aldrighetti
- Hepatobiliary Surgery, Department of Surgery, San Raffaele Hospital Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - R I Troisi
- Department of General, Hepatobiliary and Liver Transplantation Surgery, Ghent University Hospital and Medical School, Ghent, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Hamed MM, Hilal MA, Borai EH. Chemical distribution of hazardous natural radionuclides during monazite mineral processing. J Environ Radioact 2016; 162-163:166-171. [PMID: 27262430 DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvrad.2016.05.028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/26/2016] [Revised: 05/04/2016] [Accepted: 05/25/2016] [Indexed: 06/05/2023]
Abstract
It is very important to calculate the radioactivity concentration for low-grade monazite ore (50%) and different other materials produced as results of chemical processing stages to avoid the risk to workers. Chemical processing of low-grade monazite pass through different stages, washing by hydrochloric acid and digested with sulfuric acid and influence of pH on the precipitation of rare earth elements has been studied. The radioactivity concentrations of 238U(226Ra) and 232Th as well as 40K were calculated in crude low-grade ore and found to be 54,435 ± 3138, 442,105 ± 29,200 and 5841 ± 345 Bq/kg, respectively. These values are greatly higher than the exempt levels 25 Bq/kg. After chemical digestion of the ore, the results demonstrated that un-reacted material contains significant radioactivity reached to approximately 8, 13 and 23% for 238U, 232Th and 40K, respectively. The results show that 60% of 232Th are located in the digested white slurry with small portions of 238U and 40K. Most of 238U radioactivity is extracted in the green phosphoric acid which produced from conversion of P2O5 by H2SO4 into phosphoric acid. The average values of the Raeq for monazite ore, un-reacted black precipitate, white precipitate, brown precipitate and crystalline material samples were calculated and found to be 687,095 ± 44,921, 85,068 ± 5339, 388,381 ± 22,088, 313,046 ± 17,923 and 4531 ± 338 Bq/kg, respectively. The calculated values of Raeq are higher than the average world value (it must be less than 370 Bq/kg). Finally the external hazardous, internal hazardous and Iγr must be less than unity. This means that specific radiation protection program must be applied and implemented during monazite processing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mostafa M Hamed
- Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center, Atomic Energy Authority, P.O. Box 13759, Cairo, Egypt
| | - M A Hilal
- Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center, Atomic Energy Authority, P.O. Box 13759, Cairo, Egypt.
| | - E H Borai
- Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center, Atomic Energy Authority, P.O. Box 13759, Cairo, Egypt
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Cipriani F, Rawashdeh M, Stanton L, Armstrong T, Takhar A, Pearce NW, Primrose J, Abu Hilal M. Propensity score-based analysis of outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal metastases. Br J Surg 2016; 103:1504-12. [PMID: 27484847 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.10211] [Citation(s) in RCA: 89] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/10/2015] [Revised: 03/25/2016] [Accepted: 04/13/2016] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND There is a need for high-level evidence regarding the added value of laparoscopic (LLR) compared with open (OLR) liver resection. The aim of this study was to compare the surgical and oncological outcomes of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) undergoing LLR and OLR using propensity score matching to minimize bias. METHODS This was a single-centre retrospective study using a prospective database of patients undergoing liver resection for CRLM between August 2004 and April 2015. Co-variates selected for matching included: number and size of lesions, tumour location, extent and number of resections, phase of surgical experience, location and lymph node status of primary tumour, perioperative chemotherapy, unilobar or bilobar disease, synchronous or metachronous disease. Prematching and postmatching analyses were compared. Surgical and oncological outcomes were analysed. RESULTS Some 176 patients undergoing LLR and 191 having OLR were enrolled. After matching, 133 patients from each group were compared. At prematching analysis, patients in the LLR group showed a longer overall survival (OS) and higher R0 rate than those in the OLR group (P = 0·047 and P = 0·030 respectively). Postmatching analyses failed to confirm these results, showing similar OS and R0 rate between the LLR and OLR group (median OS: 55·2 versus 65·3 months respectively, hazard ratio 0·70 (95 per cent c.i. 0·42 to 1·05; P = 0·082); R0 rate: 92·5 versus 86·5 per cent, P = 0·186). The 5-year OS rate was 62·5 (95 per cent c.i. 45·5 to 71·5) per cent) for OLR and 64·3 (48·2 to 69·5) per cent for LLR. Longer duration of surgery, lower blood loss and morbidity, and shorter postoperative stay were found for LLR on postmatching analysis. CONCLUSION Propensity score matching showed that LLR for CRLM may provide R0 resection rates and long-term OS comparable to those for OLR, with lower blood loss and morbidity, and shorter postoperative hospital stay.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Cipriani
- Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgical Unit, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - M Rawashdeh
- Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgical Unit, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - L Stanton
- Southampton Clinical Trials Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - T Armstrong
- Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgical Unit, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - A Takhar
- Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgical Unit, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - N W Pearce
- Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgical Unit, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - J Primrose
- Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgical Unit, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgical Unit, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Abu Hilal M, Richardson JRC, de Rooij T, Dimovska E, Al-Saati H, Besselink MG. Laparoscopic radical 'no-touch' left pancreatosplenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: technique and results. Surg Endosc 2015; 30:3830-8. [PMID: 26675941 PMCID: PMC4992023 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-015-4685-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/06/2015] [Accepted: 11/14/2015] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
Background Laparoscopic left pancreatectomy has been well described for benign pancreatic lesions, but its role in pancreatic adenocarcinoma remains open to debate. We report our results adopting a laparoscopic technique that obeys established oncologic principles of open distal pancreatosplenectomy. Methods This is a post hoc analysis of a prospectively kept database of 135 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic left pancreatectomy, performed across two sites in the UK and the Netherlands (07/2007–07/2015 Southampton and 10/2013–07/2015 Amsterdam). Primary outcomes were resection margin and lymph node retrieval. Secondary endpoints were other perioperative outcomes, including post-operative pancreatic fistula. Definition of radical resection was distance tumour to resection margin >1 mm. All patients underwent ‘laparoscopic radical left pancreatosplenectomy’ (LRLP) which involves ‘hanging’ the pancreas including Gerota’s fascia, followed by clockwise dissection, including formal lymphadenectomy. Results LRLP for pancreatic adenocarcinoma was performed in 25 patients. Seven of the 25 patients (28 %) had extended resections, including the adrenal gland (n = 3), duodenojejunal flexure (n = 2) or transverse mesocolon (n = 3). Mean age was 68 years (54–81). Conversion rate was 0 %, mean operative time 240 min and mean blood loss 340 ml. Median intensive/high care and hospital stay were 1 and 5 days, respectively. Clavien–Dindo score 3+ complication rate was 12 % and ISGPF grade B/C pancreatic fistula rate 28 %; 90-day (or in-hospital) mortality was 0 %. The pancreatic resection margin was clear in all patients, and the posterior margin was involved (<1 mm) in 6 patients, meaning an overall R0 resection rate of 76 %. No resection margin was microscopically involved. Median nodal sample was 15 nodes (3–26). With an average follow-up of 17.2 months, 1-year survival was 88 %. Conclusions A standardised laparoscopic approach to pancreatic adenocarcinoma in the left pancreas can be adopted safely. Our study shows that these results can be reproduced across multiple sites using the same technique.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Abu Hilal
- University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, E Level, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, UK.
| | - J R C Richardson
- University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, E Level, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, UK
| | - T de Rooij
- Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - E Dimovska
- University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, E Level, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, UK
| | - H Al-Saati
- University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, E Level, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, UK
| | - M G Besselink
- University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, E Level, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, UK.,Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Elberm H, Ravikumar R, Sabin C, Abu Hilal M, Al-Hilli A, Aroori S, Bond-Smith G, Bramhall S, Coldham C, Hammond J, Hutchins R, Imber C, Preziosi G, Saleh A, Silva M, Simpson J, Spoletini G, Stell D, Terrace J, White S, Wigmore S, Fusai G. Outcome after pancreaticoduodenectomy for T3 adenocarcinoma: A multivariable analysis from the UK Vascular Resection for Pancreatic Cancer Study Group. European Journal of Surgical Oncology (EJSO) 2015; 41:1500-7. [PMID: 26346183 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2015.08.158] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/25/2015] [Revised: 07/30/2015] [Accepted: 08/04/2015] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Most resectable pancreatic cancers are classified as T3, including those involving the porto-mesenteric vein. Survival and perioperative morbidity for venous resection have been found to be comparable to standard resection. We investigate factors associated with short and long term outcomes in pancreaticoduodenectomy with (PDVR) and without (PD) venous resection exclusively for T3 adenocarcinoma of the head of the pancreas. METHODS This is a UK multicenter retrospective cohort study assessing outcomes in patients undergoing PD and PDVR. All consecutive patients with T3 only adenocarcinoma of the head of the pancreas undergoing surgery between December 1998 and June 2011 were included. Multivariable logistic and proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to determine the association between the surgical groups and in-hospital mortality (IHM) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS 1070 patients were included of whom 840 (78.5%) had PD and 230 (21.5%) had PDVR. Factors independently associated with IHM were a high creatinine (aHR 1.14, p = 0.02), post-operative bleeding (aHR 2.86, p = 0.04) and a re-laparotomy (aHR 8.42, p = 0.0001). For OS, multivariable analyses identified R1 resection margin status (aHR 1.22, p = 0.01), N1 nodal status (aHR 1.92, p = 0.0001), perineural invasion (aHR 1.37, p = 0.002), tumour size >20mm (aHR 0.63, p = 0.0001) and a relaparotomy (aHR 1.84, p = 0.0001) to be independently associated with overall mortality. CONCLUSION This study on T3 adenocarcinoma of the head of the pancreas suggests that IHM is strongly associated with perioperative complications whilst OS is affected by histological parameters. Detailed pre-operative disease evaluation and advances in oncological treatment have the potential to improve OS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- H Elberm
- Department of HPB and Liver Transplant Surgery, Royal Free Hospital, London, UK.
| | - R Ravikumar
- Department of HPB and Liver Transplant Surgery, Royal Free Hospital, London, UK
| | - C Sabin
- Research Department of Infection and Population Health, UCL, Royal Free Campus, UK
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of HPB Surgery, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK
| | - A Al-Hilli
- Department of HPB Surgery, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK
| | - S Aroori
- Department of HPB Surgery, Plymouth Hospitals, Plymouth, UK
| | - G Bond-Smith
- Department of HPB Surgery, Royal London Hospital, London, UK
| | - S Bramhall
- Liver Unit, University Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - C Coldham
- Liver Unit, University Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - J Hammond
- Department of HPB, Nottingham University Hospitals, UK
| | - R Hutchins
- Department of HPB Surgery, Royal London Hospital, London, UK
| | - C Imber
- Department of HPB and Liver Transplant Surgery, Royal Free Hospital, London, UK
| | - G Preziosi
- Department of HPB and Liver Transplant Surgery, Royal Free Hospital, London, UK
| | - A Saleh
- Department of HPB and Transplantation, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle, UK
| | - M Silva
- Department of HPB Surgery, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - J Simpson
- Department of HPB, Nottingham University Hospitals, UK
| | - G Spoletini
- Department of HPB Surgery, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - D Stell
- Department of HPB Surgery, Plymouth Hospitals, Plymouth, UK
| | - J Terrace
- Department of HPB and Liver Transplant Surgery, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, UK
| | - S White
- Department of HPB and Transplantation, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle, UK
| | - S Wigmore
- Department of HPB and Liver Transplant Surgery, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, UK
| | - G Fusai
- Department of HPB and Liver Transplant Surgery, Royal Free Hospital, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Hilal MA, El Afifi EM, Nayl AA. Investigation of some factors affecting on release of radon-222 from phosphogypsum waste associated with phosphate ore processing. J Environ Radioact 2015; 145:40-47. [PMID: 25863719 DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvrad.2015.03.030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/17/2015] [Revised: 03/24/2015] [Accepted: 03/25/2015] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
The aim of this study is oriented to investigate the influence of some physicochemical factors such as radium distribution, grain size, moisture content and chemical constituents on releases of radon-222 from the accumulated phosphogypsum (PG) waste. The emanation fraction, activity concentration in the pore and the surface exhalation rate of radon-222 in the bulk PG waste are 34.5 ± 0.3%, 238.6 ± 7.8 kBq m(-3) and 213 ± 6.9 mBq m(-2) s(-1), respectively. These values were varied and enhanced slightly in the fine grain sizes (F1 < 0.125 mm) by a factor of 1.05 folds compared to the bulk residue. It was also found that release of radon from residue PG waste was controlled positively by radium (Ra-226), calcium (CaSO4) and strontium (SrO). About 67% of radon release attributed to the grain size below 0.5 mm, while 33% due to the large grain size above 0.5 mm. The emanation fraction of Rn-222 is increased with moisture content and the maximum emanation is ∼43% of moisture of 3-8%. It reduced slowly with the continuous increase in moisture till 20%. Due to PG waste in situ can be enhancing the background to the surround workers and/or public. Therefore, the environmental negative impacts due to release of Rn-222 can be minimized by legislation to restrict its civil uses, or increasing its moisture to ∼10%, or by the particle size separation of the fine fraction containing the high levels of Ra-226 followed by a suitable chemical treatment or disposal; whereas the low release amount can be diluted and used in cement industry, roads or dam construction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M A Hilal
- Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center (HLWMC), Atomic Energy Authority of Egypt, Post Code No. 13759 Abu Zaabal, Cairo, Egypt
| | - E M El Afifi
- Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center (HLWMC), Atomic Energy Authority of Egypt, Post Code No. 13759 Abu Zaabal, Cairo, Egypt.
| | - A A Nayl
- Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center (HLWMC), Atomic Energy Authority of Egypt, Post Code No. 13759 Abu Zaabal, Cairo, Egypt; Chemistry Department, College of Science, Aljouf University, Skaka, Saudi Arabia
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Solaini L, Jamieson NB, Metcalfe M, Abu Hilal M, Soonawalla Z, Davidson BR, McKay C, Kocher HM. Outcome after surgical resection for duodenal adenocarcinoma in the UK. Br J Surg 2015; 102:676-81. [PMID: 25776995 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.9791] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/24/2014] [Revised: 11/21/2014] [Accepted: 01/20/2015] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Factors influencing long-term outcome after surgical resection for duodenal adenocarcinoma are unclear. METHODS A prospectively created database was reviewed for patients undergoing surgery for duodenal adenocarcinoma in six UK hepatopancreaticobiliary centres from 2000 to 2013. Factors influencing overall survival and disease-free survival (DFS) were identified by regression analysis. RESULTS Resection with curative intent was performed in 150 (84·3 per cent) of 178 patients. The postoperative morbidity rate for these patients was 40·0 per cent and the in-hospital mortality rate was 3·3 per cent. Patients who underwent resection had a better median survival than those who had a palliative surgical procedure (84 versus 8 months; P < 0·001). The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates for patients who underwent resection were 83·9, 66·7 and 51·2 per cent respectively. Median DFS was 53 months, and 1- and 3-year DFS rates were 80·8 and 56·5 per cent respectively. Multivariable analysis revealed that node status (hazard ratio 1·73, 95 per cent c.i. 1·07 to 2·79; P = 0·006) and lymphovascular invasion (hazard ratio 3·49, 1·83 to 6·64; P = 0·003) were associated with overall survival. CONCLUSION Resection of duodenal adenocarcinoma in specialist centres is associated with good long-term survival. Lymphovascular invasion and nodal metastases are independent prognostic indicators.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L Solaini
- Barts and the London HPB Centre, Royal London Hospital
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
38
|
Coles SR, Besselink MG, Serin KR, Alsaati H, Di Gioia P, Samim M, Pearce NW, Abu Hilal M. Total laparoscopic management of lesions involving liver segment 7. Surg Endosc 2015; 29:3190-5. [DOI: 10.1007/s00464-014-4052-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/22/2014] [Accepted: 12/16/2014] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
|
39
|
Shelat VG, Serin K, Samim M, Besselink MG, Al Saati H, Gioia PD, Pearce NW, Abu Hilal M. Outcomes of repeat laparoscopic liver resection compared to the primary resection. World J Surg 2014; 38:3175-80. [PMID: 25138071 DOI: 10.1007/s00268-014-2728-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 47] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Repeat laparoscopic liver resection (R-LLR) can be technically challenging. Data on this topic are scarce and many investigators would question its feasibility and outcomes. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the safety, feasibility, oncological efficiency and outcomes of R-LLR. METHODS We reviewed a prospectively collected database of 403 patients undergoing 422 laparoscopic liver resections (LLRs) from August 2003 to August 2013. Data of 19 patients undergoing R-LLR were analyzed and compared to the primary resection (P-LLR) in these patients. Demographic and clinical data were studied. A subgroup analysis was done for minor resections. RESULTS Twenty R-LLRs were performed in 19 patients (female 58 %; mean age: 57.5 years; age range: 23-79 years). Colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) were the commonest indication for R-LLR (60 %), followed by neuroendocrine tumor liver metastases (NETLM) (20 %) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (10 %). The majority (90 %) of resections were for malignant disease (18/20). There were three conversions (15 %), and two patients developed complications (10 %). The operative time (p = 0.005) and blood loss (p = 0.03) were both significantly greater in R-LLR compared to P-LLR, whereas length of stay (median 4 days; p = 0.30) and complications (p = 0.58) did not differ between the groups. R0 resection rates for P-LLR and R-LLR were 95 and 90 %, respectively (p = 0.73). CONCLUSIONS Repeat LLR is safe, feasible, and can be performed with minimal morbidity. It appears to be technically more challenging than P-LLR, but without any increase in complications or length of hospital stay.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- V G Shelat
- University Hospital Southampton, NHS Foundation Trust, E Level, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO166YD, UK
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
40
|
Hilal MA, Attallah MF, Mohamed GY, Fayez-Hassan M. Evaluation of radiation hazard potential of TENORM waste from oil and natural gas production. J Environ Radioact 2014; 136:121-6. [PMID: 24949581 DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvrad.2014.05.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/24/2014] [Revised: 05/22/2014] [Accepted: 05/24/2014] [Indexed: 05/08/2023]
Abstract
In this study, a potential radiation hazard from TENORM sludge wastes generated during exploration and extraction processes of oil and gas was evaluated. The activity concentration of natural radionuclides (238)U, (226)Ra and (232)Th were determined in TENORM sludge waste. It was found that sludge waste from oil and gas industry is one of the major sources of (226)Ra in the environment. Therefore, some preliminary chemical treatment of sludge waste using Triton X-100 was also investigated to reduce the radioactivity content as well as the risk of radiation hazard from TENORM wastes. The activity concentrations of (226)Ra and (228)Ra in petroleum sludge materials before and after chemical treatment were measured using gamma-ray spectrometry. The average values of the activity concentrations of (226)Ra and (228)Ra measured in the original samples were found as 8908 Bq kg(-1) and 933 Bq kg(-1), respectively. After chemical treatment of TENORM samples, the average values of the activity concentrations of (226)Ra and (228)Ra measured in the samples were found as 7835 Bq kg(-1) and 574 Bq kg(-1), respectively. Activity concentration index, internal index, absorbed gamma dose rate and the corresponding effective dose rate were estimated for untreated and treated samples.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M A Hilal
- Analytical Chemistry and Control Department, Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center (HLWMC), Atomic Energy Authority, Post Office No. 13759, Cairo, Egypt
| | - M F Attallah
- Analytical Chemistry and Control Department, Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center (HLWMC), Atomic Energy Authority, Post Office No. 13759, Cairo, Egypt.
| | - Gehan Y Mohamed
- Experimental Nuclear Physics Department, Nuclear Research Center (NRC), Atomic Energy Authority, Post Office No. 13759, Cairo 13759, Egypt.
| | - M Fayez-Hassan
- Experimental Nuclear Physics Department, Nuclear Research Center (NRC), Atomic Energy Authority, Post Office No. 13759, Cairo 13759, Egypt
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
El-Reefy HI, Badran HM, Sharshar T, Hilal MA, Elnimr T. Factors affecting the distribution of natural and anthropogenic radionuclides in the coastal Burullus Lake. J Environ Radioact 2014; 134:35-42. [PMID: 24657852 DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvrad.2014.02.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/18/2013] [Revised: 02/20/2014] [Accepted: 02/23/2014] [Indexed: 06/03/2023]
Abstract
In the present study, measurements of naturally occurring radioactive materials and (137)Cs activity in sediment were conducted for locations covering the entire Burullus Lake in order to gather information about radionuclides mobility and distribution. Low-background γ-spectrometry was employed to determine the activity concentrations of water and sediment samples. The activity concentrations of (226)Ra and (232)Th are close to uniform distribution in the lake environment. Among the different physical and chemical characteristics measured for water and sediment, only salinity and total organic matter content have the potential to affect the mobility of (137)Cs and (40)K. The results suggest that these two radionuclides are attached to different mobile particulates. Increasing salinity tends to strengthen the adsorption of (137)Cs and solubilization of (40)K in sediment. On the other hand, sediment with high organic matter content traps (137)Cs and (40)K associated particulates to bottom sediment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- H I El-Reefy
- Hot Laboratories Center, Atomic Energy Authority, Cairo, Egypt
| | - H M Badran
- Physics Department, Faculty of Science, Tanta University, Tanta 31527, Egypt; Physics Department, Faculty of Science, Taif University, Al-Hawiya, Taif 21974, Saudi Arabia.
| | - T Sharshar
- Physics Department, Faculty of Science, Taif University, Al-Hawiya, Taif 21974, Saudi Arabia; Physics Department, Faculty of Science, Kafrelsheikh University, Kafr El-Sheikh, Egypt
| | - M A Hilal
- Hot Laboratories Center, Atomic Energy Authority, Cairo, Egypt
| | - T Elnimr
- Physics Department, Faculty of Science, Tanta University, Tanta 31527, Egypt
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Ravikumar R, White S, Hilal MA, Bramhall S, Wigmore S, Sabin C, Imber C, Fusai G. 23. Portal vein resection in locally advanced pancreatic cancer – A UK multicentre review. Eur J Surg Oncol 2012. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2012.06.023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/27/2022] Open
|
43
|
Attallah MF, Borai EH, Hilal MA, Shehata FA, Abo-Aly MM. Utilization of different crown ethers impregnated polymeric resin for treatment of low level liquid radioactive waste by column chromatography. J Hazard Mater 2011; 195:73-81. [PMID: 21908104 DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2011.08.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/02/2011] [Revised: 08/02/2011] [Accepted: 08/04/2011] [Indexed: 05/31/2023]
Abstract
The main goal of this study was to find a novel impregnated resin as an alternative for the conventional resin (KY-2 and AN-31) used for low and intermediate level liquid radioactive waste treatment. Novel impregnated ion exchangers namely, poly (acrylamide-acrylic acid-acrylonitril)-N,N'-methylenedi-acrylamide-4,4'(5')di-t-butylbenzo 18 crown 6 [P(AM-AA-AN)-DAM/DtBB18C6], poly (acrylamide-acrylic acid-acrylonitril)-N,N'-methylenediacrylamide-dibenzo 18 crown 6 [P(AM-AA-AN)-DAM/DB18C6], and poly (acrylamide-acrylic acid-acrylonitril)-N,N'-methylenediacrylamide-18 crown 6 [P(AM-AA-AN)-DAM/18C6] were prepared and their removal efficiency of some radionuclides was investigated. Preliminary batch experiments were performed in order to study the influence of the different derivatives of 18 crown 6 on the characteristic removal performance. Separation of (134)Cs, (60)Co, (65)Zn and ((152+154))Eu radionuclides from low level liquid radioactive waste was investigated by using column chromatography with P(AM-AA-AN)-DAM/DtBB18C6 and metal salt solutions traced with the corresponding radionuclides. Breakthrough data was obtained in a fixed bed column at room temperature (298K) using different bed heights and flow rates. The breakthrough capacities were found to be 94.7, 83.3, 58.7, 43.1 (mg/g) for (60)Co, (65)Zn, (134)Cs, and ((152+154))Eu, respectively. Pre-concentration and separation of all radionuclides under study have been carried out using different concentration of nitric and/or oxalic acids.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M F Attallah
- Analytical Chemistry and Control Department, Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center, Atomic Energy Authority, Post Code 13759, Abu Zaabal, Cairo, Egypt.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
44
|
Abu Hilal M, Underwood T, Zuccaro M, Primrose J, Pearce N. Short- and medium-term results of totally laparoscopic resection for colorectal liver metastases. Br J Surg 2010; 97:927-33. [PMID: 20474003 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.7034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 89] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic surgery for primary colorectal cancer is now commonplace but the uptake of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) has been slow, mainly owing to doubts regarding safety, feasibility and oncological efficiency. METHODS Prospectively collected data of all patients treated for CRLM between 2004 and 2009 were reviewed retrospectively. The database was analysed for operative details, hospital stay, postoperative results and medium-term survival. RESULTS Over 5 years, 135 patients underwent liver surgery for CRLM. For laparoscopic procedures, the median duration of operation was 220 min and median blood loss was 363 ml; a mean tumour-free resection margin of 17.0 mm was achieved (more than 1 cm in 76 per cent), and no port-site metastasis or surgical-site recurrence was observed. The procedure was converted to open surgery in six patients (two for bleeding). Overall survival for the laparoscopic group approached 90 per cent with median follow-up of 22 months. CONCLUSION In this series totally laparoscopic CRLM resection had good short- and medium-term results in terms of mortality, morbidity, resection margins, local recurrence or port-site metastasis, and survival. Compared with contemporaneous open experience, the laparoscopic approach was safe and effective in a highly selected consecutive series.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Abu Hilal
- Hepatobiliary-pancreatic and Laparoscopic Surgical Unit, Southampton University Hospital, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
45
|
El Afifi EM, Hilal MA, Attallah MF, El-Reefy SA. Characterization of phosphogypsum wastes associated with phosphoric acid and fertilizers production. J Environ Radioact 2009; 100:407-412. [PMID: 19272681 DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvrad.2009.01.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2008] [Revised: 11/19/2008] [Accepted: 01/23/2009] [Indexed: 05/27/2023]
Abstract
The present work is directed to characterize the phosphogypsum (PG) wastes associated with phosphoric acid produced by the wet process in industrial facility for the production of fertilizers and chemicals in Egypt. The PG waste samples were characterized in terms of spectroscopic analysis (X-ray diffraction, X-ray fluorescence, IR spectra) and radiometric analysis (gamma- and alpha-measurements). The gamma-ray measurements showed that the average activity concentrations are 140+/-12.6, 459+/-36.7, 323+/-28.4, 8.3+/-0.76 and 64.3+/-4.1 Bq/kg for U-238, Ra-226, Pb-210, Th-232 and K-40, respectively. The alpha-particle measurements of uranium isotopes showed that the average activity concentrations of U-238, U-235 and U-234 were 153+/-9.8, 7+/-0.38, 152+/-10.4 Bq/kg, respectively. The average radiochemical recovery (%) of the destructive alpha-particle measurements is approximately 70% with a resolution (FWHM) of approximately 30 keV. Activity ratios of U-238/Ra-226 and U-238/Pb-210 were less than unity (i.e., <1) and equal to 0.31+/-0.02 and 0.47+/-0.16, respectively. The isotopic ratios of U-238/U-235 and U-238/U-234 (in PG and PR samples) were close to the normal values of approximately 21.7 and approximately 1, respectively and are not affected by the wet processing of phosphate rock (PR). The obtained results of PG waste samples were compared with phosphate rock (PR) samples. The radiation hazard indices are namely, radium activity index (Ra-Eq>370 Bq/kg), total absorbed gamma dose rate (D(gamma r)>5 nGy/h) and radon emanation fraction (Rn-EF>20%). Uncertainty of the sample counting was 95% confidence level of sigma. The results indicated the necessity to find suitable routes to decrease and/or redistribute the radionuclide of environmental interest (i.e., Ra-226) in PG wastes, consequently to reduce its radiation impacts in the surrounding environment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E M El Afifi
- Department of Analytical and Environmental Control, Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center (HLWMC), Atomic Energy Authority, Post Office No. 13759, Abu Zabaal, Cairo, Egypt
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
46
|
El Afifi EM, Awwad NS, Hilal MA. Sequential chemical treatment of radium species in TENORM waste sludge produced from oil and natural gas production. J Hazard Mater 2009; 161:907-912. [PMID: 18514402 DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.04.036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2007] [Revised: 04/10/2008] [Accepted: 04/11/2008] [Indexed: 05/26/2023]
Abstract
This paper is dedicated to the treatment of sludge occurring in frame of the Egyptian produced from oil and gas production. The activity levels of three radium isotopes: Ra-226 (of U-series), Ra-228 and Ra-224 (of Th-series) in the solid TENORM waste (sludge) were first evaluated and followed by a sequential treatment for all radium species (fractions) presented in TENORM. The sequential treatment was carried out based on two approaches 'A' and 'B' using different chemical solutions. The results obtained indicate that the activity levels of all radium isotopes (Ra-226, Ra-228 and Ra-224) of the environmental interest in the TENORM waste sludge were elevated with regard to exemption levels established by IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), International basic safety standards for the protection against ionizing radiation and for the safety of radiation sources. GOV/2715/Vienna, 1994]. Each approach of the sequential treatment was performed through four steps using different chemical solutions to reduce the activity concentration of radium in a large extent. Most of the leached radium was found as an oxidizable Ra species. The actual removal % leached using approach B was relatively efficient compared to A. It is observed that the actual removal percentages (%) of Ra-226, Ra-228 and Ra-224 using approach A are 78+/-2.8, 64.8+/-4.1 and 76.4+/-5.2%, respectively. Whereas in approach A, the overall removal % of Ra-226, Ra-228 and Ra-228 was increased to approximately 91+/-3.5, 87+/-4.1 and 90+/-6.2%, respectively.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E M El Afifi
- Analytical Chemistry and Environmental Control Department, Hot Laboratories and Waste Management Center (HLWMC), Atomic Energy Authority, Post Office No. 13759, Cairo, Egypt
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
47
|
Abu Hilal M, Harb A, Zeidan B, Steadman B, Primrose JN, Pearce NW. Hepatic splenosis mimicking HCC in a patient with hepatitis C liver cirrhosis and mildly raised alpha feto protein; the important role of explorative laparoscopy. World J Surg Oncol 2009; 7:1. [PMID: 19123935 PMCID: PMC2630926 DOI: 10.1186/1477-7819-7-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/28/2008] [Accepted: 01/05/2009] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Splenosis is a heterotropic implantation of splenic fragments onto exposed vascularised peritoneal and intrathoracic surfaces, following splenic injury or elective splenectomy. Case presentation A 60 year old cirrhotic patient was referred to us with a hepatic mass, suspected to be HCC in a cirrhotic liver. A computerized tomography scan (CT) demonstrated a cirrhotic liver with a 2 × 2.7 cm focal hypervascular nodule, lying peripherally at the junction of segment 7 and 8. Diagnostic laparoscopy demonstrated a 3 cm exofitic dark brown splenunculus attached to the diaphragm and indenting the surface of segment 7 of the liver. The lesion was easily resected laparoscopically and shaved from the live surface with no need for a liver resection. The histopathological assessment confirmed the diagnosis of splenunculus, with no evidence of neoplasia. Conclusion Hepatic splenosis is not a rare event and should be suspected in patients with a history of splenic trauma or splenectomy. Correct diagnosis is essential and will determine subsequent management plans. In doubtful cases laparoscopic investigation can offere essential information and should be part of the standard protocol for investigating suspected splenosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Abu Hilal
- Hepatobiliary-Pancreatic and Laparoscopic Surgical Unit, Southampton University Hospital, Southampton, UK.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
48
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy (LLLS) is procedure with potential for future transformation into a primarily laparoscopic procedure where surgeons can safely develop laparoscopic experience and gain proficiency. METHODS Between August 2004 and December 2007, 80 patients underwent laparoscopic liver resections in our unit, 30 of these were left lateral sectionectomies. The indications for surgery were both oncological and non-oncological. RESULTS 30 LLLS were performed. Median operative time and median postoperative hospital stay group were 180 (40-340) min and 4 (1-6) days, respectively, and were noted to fall significantly between the first (15 patients) and second parts of this series. The median free resection margin was 11 (1.5-30) mm and median perioperative blood loss was 80 (25-800) ml. Two minor complications were observed with no mortality and no conversions to open. CONCLUSION LLLS is a feasible, safe and efficient procedure, associated with a quick, smooth learning curve. We report our technique illustrating methods and particulars which would be of great help to surgeons developing new laparoscopic liver services.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Abu Hilal
- Hepatobiliary-Pancreatic and Laparoscopic Surgical Unit, Southampton University Hospital, Southampton, UK.
| | | |
Collapse
|
49
|
Abu Hilal M, McPhail MJW, Zeidan B, Zeidan S, Hallam MJ, Armstrong T, Primrose JN, Pearce NW. Laparoscopic versus open left lateral hepatic sectionectomy: A comparative study. Eur J Surg Oncol 2008; 34:1285-8. [PMID: 18316171 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2008.01.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 94] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2007] [Accepted: 01/18/2008] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic liver surgery has been difficult to popularize. High volume liver centres have identified left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) as a procedure with potential for transformation into a primarily laparoscopic procedure where surgeons can safely gain proficiency. METHODS Forty-four patients underwent either laparoscopic (LLLS) or open (OLLS) left lateral sectionectomy (of segments II/III) for focal lesions at Southampton General Hospital. RESULTS OLLS and LLLS groups were matched for age, sex and tumour types resected. Median operative time in the LLLS group was 180 (40-340) min and 155 (110-330) min in the OLLS group (p=0.885) with median intra-operative blood loss in the LLLS group 80 (25-800) ml versus a larger 470 (100-3000) ml; p=0.002 for patients receiving OLLS. Post-operative stay was also shorter in the LLLS group (3.5 (1-6) days) compared to the OLLS group (7 (3-12) days; p<0.001). Resection margin was not different in the two groups (11 (1.5-30) mm (LLLS) versus 12 (4-40) mm (OLLS); p=1) and neither was the complication rate (13% for LLLS versus 25% for OLLS; p=0.541). There were no conversions to open in the LLLS group and no deaths in either group at 90 days. Between the first and second 12 LLLS the median operative time fell from 240 (70-340) min to 120 (40-120) min; p=0.005 as well as median post-operative hospital stay from 4.5 (2-6) days to 2 (1-4) days, p=0.001. CONCLUSION LLLS is a viable alternative to OLLS with potential improvements in intra-operative blood loss and shorter hospital stay without adversely affecting successful resection or complication rates. Larger prospective studies are required to explore this new avenue in laparoscopic liver surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Abu Hilal
- Hepatobiliary-Pancreatic and Laparoscopic Surgical Unit, Southampton University Hospital, Southampton, London SO16 6YD, UK.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
50
|
Abu Hilal M, Hallam MJ, Zeidan BA, Pearce NW. Management of a ruptured pseudoaneurysm of common hepatic artery following pancreaticoduodenectomy. ScientificWorldJournal 2007; 7:1658-62. [PMID: 17982600 PMCID: PMC5901184 DOI: 10.1100/tsw.2007.249] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Postoperative pseudoaneurysm formation is one of the most feared complications of pancreatic leak following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Surgical repair may be compromised due to a persistent enzymatic insult on the repaired vessel; therefore, preventive measures should be adopted. We report a case of ruptured hepatic artery pseudoaneurysm occurring 12 days following PD in a patient with a postoperative pancreatic fistula. Emergency surgery revealed that the pseudoaneurysm was situated at the point of surgical transfixation of the gastroduodenal artery. The pseudoaneurysm was successfully managed by under-running of the bleeding point combined with the direct application of hemostatic products to the bleeding surface (TachoSil and Tisseel to act as a barrier from the pancreatic secretions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Abu Hilal
- Hepato Pancreatico Biliary Surgery Unit, Southampton General Hospital, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, UK.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|