Search

Simple Summary: Pancreatic cancer has a poor prognosis, even in patients that can be surgically treated with curative intent. An interesting subgroup of resected pancreatic cancers are those associated with pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCN), since overall survival might differ from pancreatic cancer not associated with PCN. Although several single-center studies published conflicting data on this topic, nationwide studies are lacking. In this nationwide, registry-based study, we aimed to compare the overall survival between patients with PCN-associated pancreatic cancers to those with pancreatic cancer not associated with PCN. We found that 12% of resected pancreatic cancers patients were PCN-associated. Overall survival was better in patients with PCN-associated pancreatic cancer as compared to those not associated with PCN. Future prospective studies should focus on the impact of these findings, such as the impact of (neo)adjuvant treatment regimens in this specific patient group. Background: Outcome after resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma associated with pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCN-PDAC) might differ from PDAC not associated with PCN. This nationwide, registry-based study aimed to compare the overall survival (OS) in these patients. Methods: Data from consecutive patients after pancreatic resection for PDAC between 2013 and 2018 were matched with the corresponding pathology reports. Primary outcome was OS for PCN-PDAC and PDAC including 1-year and 5-year OS. Cox regression analysis was used to correct for prognostic factors (e.g., pT-stage, pN-stage, and vascular invasion). Results: In total, 1994 patients underwent resection for PDAC including 233 (12%) with PCN-PDAC. Median estimated OS was better in patients with PCN-PDAC (34.5 months [95%CI 25.6 to 43.5]) as compared to PDAC not associated with PCN (18.2 months [95%CI 17.3 to 19.2]; hazard ratio 0.53 [95%CI 0.44–0.63]; p < 0.001). The difference in OS remained after correction for prognostic factors (adjusted hazard ratio 1.58 [95%CI 1.32−1.90]; p < 0.001). Conclusions: This nationwide registry-based study showed that 12% of resected PDAC were PCN-associated. Patients with PCN-PDAC had better OS as compared to PDAC not associated with PCN. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Endoscopic papillectomy (EP) is considered a relatively safe and minimally invasive treatment for papillary adenomas. In the literature a significant risk for local recurrence is described. The aim of this study was to evaluate long-term recurrence rates and time-to-recurrence. Additionally, risk factors for recurrence, malignancy and adverse events were studied.Methods: This is a retrospective study in consecutive patients with papillary adenomas who underwent EP in two tertiary referral hospitals between 2001 and 2018. Primary outcome was recurrence in patients with at least 1-year endoscopic follow-up. Secondary outcomes were surgery free survival, adverse events, and mortality within 30 days after the index procedure.Results: A total of 259 patients were found eligible [median age 66 years, 130 male (50.2%)]. Forty-three patients were known with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) (16.6%). At least 1-year endoscopic follow-up was available in 154 patients with a total follow-up of 586 person-years and median of 40 months [interquartile range (IQR) 25-75]. Recurrence occurred in 24 cases (15.6%) of which 8 were known with FAP, leading to a recurrence incidence rate of 4.1 per 100 person-years with a median time-to-recurrence of 29 months (IQR 14.75-59.5). Fifty-three patients underwent at least 5-year follow-up, in 6 (11.3%) of them recurrence was encountered after 5 years of which four were known with FAP. No risk factors for recurrence could be identified. Adverse events occurred in 50/259 patients (19.3%). One patient died within 30 days after the procedure. Papillary stenosis occurred in 19/259 (7.3%) of the patients. There were no cases of malignant degeneration during follow-up.Conclusions: Recurrence after EP occurs in a significant proportion of patients and occurs even 5 years after EP. This emphasizes the need for long-term follow-up. We advise to consider at least 5-year follow-up in case of a sporadic adenoma, unless comorbidity makes follow-up clinically irrelevant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background:  The optimal timing of resection after decompression of left-sided obstructive colon cancer is unknown. Revised expert-based guideline recommendations have shifted from an interval of 5 - 10 days to approximately 2 weeks following self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement, and recommendations after decompressing stoma are lacking. We aimed to evaluate the recommended bridging intervals after SEMS and explore the timing of resection after decompressing stoma.Methods:  This nationwide study included patients registered between 2009 and 2016 in the prospective, mandatory Dutch ColoRectal Audit. Additional data were collected through patient records in 75 hospitals. Only patients who underwent either SEMS placement or decompressing stoma as a bridge to surgery were selected. Technical SEMS failure and unsuccessful decompression within 48 hours were exclusion criteria.Results:  510 patients were included (182 SEMS, 328 decompressing stoma). Median bridging interval was 23 days (interquartile range [IQR] 13 - 31) for SEMS and 36 days (IQR 22 - 65) for decompressing stoma. Following SEMS placement, no significant differences in post-resection complications, hospital stay, or laparoscopic resections were observed with resection after 11 - 17 days compared with 5 - 10 days. Of SEMS-related complications, 48 % occurred in patients operated on beyond 17 days. Compared with resection within 14 days, an interval of 14 - 28 days following decompressing stoma resulted in significantly more laparoscopic resections, more primary anastomoses, and shorter hospital stays. No impact of bridging interval on mortality, disease-free survival, or overall survival was demonstrated.Conclusions:  Based on an overview of the data with balancing of surgical outcomes and timing of adverse events, a bridging interval of approximately 2 weeks seems appropriate after SEMS placement, while waiting 2 - 4 weeks after decompressing stoma further optimizes surgical conditions for laparoscopic resection with restoration of bowel continuity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The majority of patients with symptomatic sterile walled-off necrosis (WON) can be treated conservatively. Although endoscopic transluminal drainage (ETD) is often performed in cases of persistent symptoms, post-procedural iatrogenic infection may occur. This study aimed to evaluate clinical outcomes after ETD of symptomatic sterile WON.Methods: This was a retrospective, multicenter, open-label case series of 56 patients with necrotizing pancreatitis who underwent ETD for symptomatic sterile WON between July 2001 and August 2018 at two tertiary referral hospitals. Primary end point was clinically relevant post-procedural iatrogenic infection, defined as need for endoscopic transluminal necrosectomy. Secondary end points included mortality, total number of interventions, hospital stay, and resolution of symptoms at 1-year follow-up.  RESULTS : ETD of sterile WON was performed in 56 patients (median age 55 years, 57 % male), who presented with abdominal pain (71 %), gastric outlet obstruction (45 %), jaundice (20 %), and failure to thrive (27 %). A total of 41 patients (73 %) developed clinically relevant post-procedural iatrogenic infection, resulting in a median of 3 (interquartile range [IQR] 2 - 4) endoscopic, radiological, and/or surgical interventions. Mortality rate was 2 %. Median total hospital stay was 12 days (IQR 6 - 17). Resolution of symptoms was reported in 40 of 46 patients (87 %) for whom long-term follow-up data were available (median follow-up 13 months, IQR 6 - 29).Conclusions: ETD of symptomatic sterile WON resulted in high clinical success. Nonetheless, the majority of patients required additional reinterventions for clinically relevant post-procedural iatrogenic infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Population-based data on distal cholangiocarcinoma (DCC) from the Western world are not available, albeit essential to identify areas for improvement. This study investigated the incidence, treatment and outcomes, including time trends and predictors for survival, in a nationwide cohort of DCC. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with DCC (2009–2016) derived from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Overall survival (OS) and its predictors were analyzed using Kaplan–Meier and Cox regression analysis. Time trends (2009–2012 versus 2013–2016) were assessed. Results: Overall, 1338 patients with DCC were included, with 1-, 3- and 5-year OS of 46%, 18%, and 11%. Incidence of DCC was 0.55–0.90 per 100.000 per year. Median OS was 10.4 months across all stages; 21.9 months for resected (n = 620, 46.3%), 6.7 months for unresected nonmetastatic (n = 445, 33.3%), and 3.6 months for metastatic DCC (n = 273, 20.4%) (p <.001). After resection, 30-day mortality was 4.8% and 90-day mortality 7.7%. Patients with metastatic DCC who received chemotherapy (n = 78, 28.6%) had a median OS of 8.2 versus 2.8 months for those not treated (p <.001). Over time, resection rates (53.6% to 61.7%, p =.008) and use of palliative chemotherapy in metastatic DCC (22.3% to 32.9%, p =.05) increased, without improvement in OS (10.3 vs 10.6 months, p =.55). Independent poor prognostic factors for OS in resected disease were increasing age, pT3/T4 stage, higher lymph node ratio, poor differentiation, and R1 resection. Conclusions: In a nationwide cohort of DCC, resection rates and the use of chemotherapy increased whereas OS remained stable at 10.4 months. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: In pancreatic cancer, which is therapy resistant due to its hypoxic microenvironment, hyperthermia may enhance the effect of radio(chemo)therapy. The aim of this systematic review is to investigate the validity of the hypothesis that hyperthermia added to radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy improves treatment outcome for pancreatic cancer patients. Methods and materials: We searched MEDLINE and Embase, supplemented by handsearching, for clinical studies involving hyperthermia in pancreatic cancer patients. The quality of studies was evaluated using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine levels of evidence. Primary outcome was treatment efficacy; we calculated overall response rate and the weighted estimate of the population median overall survival (mp) and compared these between hyperthermia and control cohorts. Results: Overall, 14 studies were included, with 395 patients with locally advanced and/or metastatic pancreatic cancer of whom 248 received hyperthermia. Patients were treated with regional (n = 189), intraoperative (n = 39) or whole-body hyperthermia (n = 20), combined with chemotherapy, radiotherapy or both. Quality of the studies was low, with level of evidence 3 (five studies) and 4. The six studies including a control group showed a longer mp in the hyperthermia groups than in the control groups (11.7 vs. 5.6 months). Overall response rate, reported in three studies with a control group, was also better for the hyperthermia groups (43.9% vs. 35.3%). Conclusions: Hyperthermia, when added to chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy, may positively affect treatment outcome for patients with pancreatic cancer. However, the quality of the reviewed studies was limited and future randomised controlled trials are needed to establish efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: When conventional endoscopic treatment of bile duct stones is impossible or fails, advanced endoscopy-assisted lithotripsy can be performed by electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL), laser lithotripsy, or extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). No systematic review has compared efficacy and safety between these techniques.Methods: A systematic search was performed in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE for studies investigating EHL, laser lithotripsy, and ESWL in patients with retained biliary tract stones.Results: After screening 795 studies, 32 studies with 1969 patients undergoing EHL (n = 277), laser lithotripsy (n = 426) or ESWL (n = 1266) were included. No randomized studies were available. Although each advanced lithotripsy technique appeared to be highly effective, laser lithotripsy had a higher complete ductal clearance rate (95.1 %) than EHL (88.4 %) and ESWL (84.5 %; P  < 0.001). In addition, a higher stone fragmentation rate was reported for laser lithotripsy (92.5 %) than for EHL (75.5 %) and ESWL (89.3 %; P < 0.001). The post-procedural complication rate was significantly higher for patients treated with EHL (13.8 %) than for patients treated with ESWL (8.4 %) or laser lithotripsy (9.6 %; P = 0.04). Data on the recurrence rate of the biliary tract stones were lacking.Conclusion: This systematic review revealed that laser lithotripsy appeared to be the most successful advanced endoscopy-assisted lithotripsy technique for retained biliary tract stones, although randomized studies are lacking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The optimal target of endoscopic dilation of postsurgical esophageal strictures is unknown. Our aim was to compare the dilation-free period of patients who underwent dilation up to 16 mm with patients who were dilated up to 17 or 18 mm.Methods: We retrospectively analyzed adult patients who received bougie/balloon dilation for a benign anastomotic stricture after esophagectomy. An anastomotic stricture was defined as dysphagia in combination with a luminal diameter of ≤13 mm at endoscopy. We analyzed the dilation-free period using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression analysis.Results: Eighty-eight patients were dilated up to a maximum diameter of 16 mm and 91 patients to a diameter >16 mm. The stricture recurrence rate was 79.5 % in the 16 mm group and 68.1 % in the >16 mm group (p = 0.083). The overall dilation-free period had a median of 41.5 (range 8-3233) days and 92 (range 17-1745) days, respectively (p < 0.001). For patients who developed a stricture recurrence, the median dilation-free period was 28 (range 8-487) days and 63 (range 17-1013) days, respectively (p = 0.001). Cox regression analysis showed a reduced risk of stricture recurrence for patients who were dilated up to >16 mm: crude hazard ratio (HR) 0.57 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.41-0.81) and adjusted HR 0.48 (95 % CI 0.33-0.70).Conclusions: Endoscopic dilation over 16 mm resulted in a significant prolongation of the dilation-free period in comparison with dilation up to 16 mm in patients with benign anastomotic strictures after esophagectomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Treatment guidelines for splanchnic vein thrombosis in necrotizing pancreatitis are lacking due to insufficient data on the full clinical spectrum. We performed a post-hoc analysis of a nationwide prospective necrotizing pancreatitis cohort. Multivariable analyses were used to identify risk factors and compare the clinical course of patients with and without SVT. SVT was detected in 97 of the 432 included patients (22%) (median onset: 4 days). Risk factors were left, central, or subtotal necrosis (OR 28.52; 95% CI 20.11–40.45), right or diffuse necrosis (OR 5.76; 95% CI 3.89–8.51), and younger age (OR 0.94; 95% CI 0.90–0.97). Patients with SVT had higher rates of bleeding (n = 10,11%) and bowel ischemia (n = 4,4%) compared to patients without SVT (n = 14,4% and n = 2,0.6%; OR 3.24; 95% CI 1.27–8.23 and OR 7.29; 95% CI 1.31–40.4, respectively), and were independently associated with ICU admission (adjusted OR 2.53; 95% CI 1.37–4.68). Spontaneous recanalization occurred in 62% of patients (n = 40/71). Radiological and clinical outcomes did not differ between patients treated with and without anticoagulants. SVT is a common and early complication of necrotizing pancreatitis, associated with parenchymal necrosis and younger age. SVT is associated with increased complications and a worse clinical course, whereas anticoagulant use does not appear to affect outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: It remains unclear whether urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with biliary sphincterotomy improves the outcome of patients with gallstone pancreatitis without concomitant cholangitis. We did a randomised trial to compare urgent ERCP with sphincterotomy versus conservative treatment in patients with predicted severe acute gallstone pancreatitis.Methods: In this multicentre, parallel-group, assessor-masked, randomised controlled superiority trial, patients with predicted severe (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score ≥8, Imrie score ≥3, or C-reactive protein concentration >150 mg/L) gallstone pancreatitis without cholangitis were assessed for eligibility in 26 hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by a web-based randomisation module with randomly varying block sizes to urgent ERCP with sphincterotomy (within 24 h after hospital presentation) or conservative treatment. The primary endpoint was a composite of mortality or major complications (new-onset persistent organ failure, cholangitis, bacteraemia, pneumonia, pancreatic necrosis, or pancreatic insufficiency) within 6 months of randomisation. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN97372133.Findings: Between Feb 28, 2013, and March 1, 2017, 232 patients were randomly assigned to urgent ERCP with sphincterotomy (n=118) or conservative treatment (n=114). One patient from each group was excluded from the final analysis because of cholangitis (urgent ERCP group) and chronic pancreatitis (conservative treatment group) at admission. The primary endpoint occurred in 45 (38%) of 117 patients in the urgent ERCP group and in 50 (44%) of 113 patients in the conservative treatment group (risk ratio [RR] 0·87, 95% CI 0·64-1·18; p=0·37). No relevant differences in the individual components of the primary endpoint were recorded between groups, apart from the occurrence of cholangitis (two [2%] of 117 in the urgent ERCP group vs 11 [10%] of 113 in the conservative treatment group; RR 0·18, 95% CI 0·04-0·78; p=0·010). Adverse events were reported in 87 (74%) of 118 patients in the urgent ERCP group versus 91 (80%) of 114 patients in the conservative treatment group.Interpretation: In patients with predicted severe gallstone pancreatitis but without cholangitis, urgent ERCP with sphincterotomy did not reduce the composite endpoint of major complications or mortality, compared with conservative treatment. Our findings support a conservative strategy in patients with predicted severe acute gallstone pancreatitis with an ERCP indicated only in patients with cholangitis or persistent cholestasis.Funding: The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development, Fonds NutsOhra, and the Dutch Patient Organization for Pancreatic Diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The outcomes of patients with refractory benign esophageal strictures (RBES) are unclear, and the clinical efficacy of dilation versus stent placement is lacking. Our objective was to explore the role of endoscopic dilation and stents placement in the management of RBES.Methods: RBES patients treated with dilation and stents in our hospital between January 2009 and December 2017 were included in this study. The primary outcomes were to assess clinical effectiveness and adverse events. The secondary outcome was to identify factors that predicted the dysphagia-free period.Results: Among 75 RBES patients (54 male; median age 59 years), 39 (52%), 20 (26.7%), 3 (4%), 10 (13.3%), and 3 (4%), were postsurgical, post-ESD, achalasia of cardia, caustic and mixed etiology, respectively. The median number of endoscopic therapy was 5 times (range 3, 21). Endoscopic therapy was successful in 46 patients (61.3%). Patients treated with dilation showed a higher success rate (70.9%, 39/55) than that treated with stents (35%, 7/20). Fifteen patients died during follow-up. Nineteen patients had adverse events after endoscopic therapy. In total, the mean dysphagia-free period was 3.4 months (95% CI, 2.5-4.3). The patients treated with dilation demonstrated a dysphagia-free period of 3.7 months (95% CI, 2.7-5), while patients treated with stents displayed a dysphagia-free period of 2.3 months (95% CI, 1.5-3). The dysphagia-free period had a linear growth trend over time, with an increase of 12 days per endoscopic therapy.Conclusion: The dysphagia-free period increased by 12 days per endoscopic therapy, so the endoscopic therapy tended to be effective in patients with RBES by increasing the dysphagia-free period. However, compared to dilation therapy, stent therapy was not effective in increasing the dysphasia-free period and reducing the times and frequency of dilation. In addition, univariate and multivariate analyses also indicated that etiology may predict the endoscopic therapy outcome.Trial Registration: This study was retrospectively registered and approved by the Ethics Committee of West China Hospital of Sichuan University (IRB number: ChiCTR1800016321 ). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]