Search

The liquid metal shield laboratory (LiMeS-Lab) will provide the infrastructure to develop, test, and compare liquid metal divertor designs for future fusion reactors. The main research topics of LiMeS-lab will be liquid metal interactions with the substrate material of the divertor, the continuous circulation and capillary refilling of the liquid metal during intense plasma heat loading and the retention of plasma particles in the liquid metal. To facilitate the research, four new devices are in development at the Dutch Institute for Fundamental Energy Research and the Eindhoven University of Technology: LiMeS-AM: a custom metal 3D printer based on powder bed fusion; LiMeS-Wetting, a plasma device to study the wetting of liquid metals on various substrates with different surface treatments; LiMeS-PSI, a linear plasma generator specifically adapted to operate continuous liquid metal loops. Special diagnostic protection will also be implemented to perform measurements in long duration shots without being affected by the liquid metal vapor; LiMeS-TDS, a thermal desorption spectroscopy system to characterize deuterium retention in a metal vapor environment. Each of these devices has specific challenges due to the presence and deposition of metal vapors that need to be addressed in order to function. In this paper, an overview of LiMeS-Lab will be given and the conceptual designs of the last three devices will be presented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy decreases time to functional recovery compared with open distal pancreatectomy, but the cost‐effectiveness and impact on disease‐specific quality of life have yet to be established. Methods: The LEOPARD trial randomized patients to minimally invasive (robot‐assisted or laparoscopic) or open distal pancreatectomy in 14 Dutch centres between April 2015 and March 2017. Use of hospital healthcare resources, complications and disease‐specific quality of life were recorded up to 1 year after surgery. Unit costs of hospital healthcare resources were determined, and cost‐effectiveness and cost–utility analyses were performed. Primary outcomes were the costs per day earlier functional recovery and per quality‐adjusted life‐year. Results: All 104 patients who had a distal pancreatectomy (48 minimally invasive and 56 open) in the trial were included in this study. Patients who underwent a robot‐assisted procedure were excluded from the cost analysis. Total medical costs were comparable after laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy (mean difference €–427 (95 per cent bias‐corrected and accelerated confidence interval €–4700 to 3613; P = 0·839). Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy was shown to have a probability of at least 0·566 of being more cost‐effective than the open approach at a willingness‐to‐pay threshold of €0 per day of earlier recovery, and a probability of 0·676 per additional quality‐adjusted life‐year at a willingness‐to‐pay threshold of €80 000. There were no significant differences in cosmetic satisfaction scores (median 9 (i.q.r. 5·75–10) versus 7 (4–8·75); P = 0·056) and disease‐specific quality of life after minimally invasive (laparoscopic and robot‐assisted procedures) versus open distal pancreatectomy. Conclusion: Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy was at least as cost‐effective as open distal pancreatectomy in terms of time to functional recovery and quality‐adjusted life‐years. Cosmesis and quality of life were similar in the two groups 1 year after surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents a post hoc analysis of 135 laparoscopic left pancreatectomy cases, focusing on its role in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Primary outcomes of resection margin and lymph node retrieval and secondary endpoints of post-operative pancreatic fistula are discussed. Conclusions suggest the safe adoptability of a standardized laparoscopic approach to left pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Background Pancreatic cancer involving the coeliac axis is considered unresectable by most guidelines, with a median survival of 6-11 months. A subgroup of these patients can undergo distal pancreatectomy with coeliac axis resection, but consensus on the value of this procedure is lacking. The evidence for this procedure, including the impact of preoperative hepatic artery embolization and (neo)adjuvant therapy, was evaluated. Methods A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines until 27 May 2015. The primary endpoint was overall survival; secondary endpoints included morbidity and radical resection rates. Results A total of 19 retrospective studies, involving 240 patients, were included. The methodological quality of the studies ranged from poor to moderate. A radical resection was reported in 74·5 per cent (152 of 204), major morbidity in 27 per cent (26 of 96), ischaemic morbidity in 9·0 per cent (21 of 223) and 90-day mortality in 3·5 per cent (4 of 113). Overall, 35·5 per cent of patients (55 of 155) underwent preoperative hepatic artery embolization without an apparent beneficial impact on ischaemic morbidity. Overall, 15·7 per cent (29 of 185) had neoadjuvant and 51·0 per cent (75 of 147) had adjuvant therapy. There was a difference in survival between patient series where less than half of patients had (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy and series where more than half were receiving this treatment: case-weighted median overall survival was 16 (range 9-48) versus 18 (10-26) months respectively ( P = 0·002). Overall median survival for the whole study population was 14·4 (range 9-48) months. Conclusion Distal pancreatectomy with coeliac axis resection seems a valuable option for selected patients with pancreatic cancer involving the coeliac axis with acceptable morbidity and mortality, and a median survival of 18 months when combined with (neo)adjuvant therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We describe a case of intra-arterial treatment (IAT) of acute posterior circulation occlusion in a patient with a persistent primitive trigeminal artery (PPTA). The patient presented with an acute left sided hemiparesis and loss of consciousness (Glasgow coma score of 5). Computed tomography angiography showed an acute occlusion of the right internal carotid artery (ICA), the PPTA, distal basilar artery (BA), right posterior cerebral artery (PCA), and right superior cerebellar artery (SCA). Stent-retriever assisted thrombectomy was not considered possible through the hypoplastic proximal BA. After passage of the proximal ICA occlusion, the right PCA and SCA were recanalized through the PPTA, with a single thrombectomy procedure. Ten days after intervention patient was discharged scoring optimal EMV with only a mild facial and left hand paresis remaining. PPTA is a persistent embryological carotid–basilar connection. Knowledge of existing (embryonic) variants in neurovascular anatomy is essential when planning and performing acute neurointerventional procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Distal pancreatectomy is the standard curative treatment for symptomatic benign, premalignant, and malignant disease of the pancreatic body and tail. The most obvious benefits of a laparoscopic approach to distal pancreatectomy include earlier recovery and shorter hospital stay. Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy should be attempted in case of benign disease. Spleen preservation can be achieved preferably by preserving the splenic vessels (Kimura technique), but also by resecting the splenic vessels and maintaining vascularity through the short gastric vessels and left gastroepiploic artery (Warshaw technique). Several studies have suggested a higher rate of spleen preservation with laparoscopy. The radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy has become mainstay for treating pancreatic cancer and can be performed laparoscopically as well. Evidence on the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for cancer is scarce. Despite the obvious advantages of laparoscopic surgery, postoperative morbidity remains relatively high, mainly because of the high incidence of pancreatic fistula. For decades, surgeons have tried to prevent these fistulas but to date no strategy has been confirmed to be effective in 2 consecutive randomized studies. Pragmatic multicenter studies focusing on technical aspects of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy are lacking and should be encouraged. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]