86,565 research outputs found

    Contemporary indications for upfront total pancreatectomy

    No full text
    Currently, advances in surgical techniques, improvements in perioperative care, new formulations of intermediate and long-acting insulin and of modern pancreatic enzyme preparations have allowed obtaining good short and long-term results and quality of life, especially in high-volume centres in performing total pancreatectomy (TP).Thus, the surgeon’s fear in performing TP is not justified and total pancreatectomy can be considered a viable option in selected patients in high-volume centres. The aim of this review was to define the current indications for this procedure, in particular for upfront TP, considering not only the pancreatic disease, but also the surgical approach (open, mini-invasive) and the relationship with vascular resection

    Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy: Myth or reality? A systematic review and trial sequential meta-analysis

    No full text
    Background: The superiority of radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy versus standard distal pancreatectomy has never been demonstrated. Methods: A systematic review was performed to identify all comparative studies about radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy versus standard distal pancreatectomy. Random-effects analysis was performed, and hazard ratios, odds ratios, and mean differences were calculated. Using trial sequential analysis, type I and II errors were evaluated by comparing the accrued sample size with the required sample size. When the required sample size is superior to the accrued sample size, type I or II errors can be hypothesized. The critical endpoint was overall survival. Secondary endpoints were disease-free survival, R0 resection rate, major morbidity and mortality rate, clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula, delayed gastric emptying, postpancreatectomy hemorrhage, length of stay, and operative time. Results: The accrued sample size and required sample size were 1,172 and 176 for the primary endpoint, respectively. The overall survival was similar between the 2 groups, with a hazard ratio of 1.33 (95% confidence interval: 0.89-2.0 0). The required sample size reached, and false-negative equivalence can be excluded. Disease-free survival, R0 resection rate, major morbidity and mortality rate, clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula, delayed gastric emptying, postpancreatectomy hemorrhage, and operative time are similar and reached required sample sizes, suggesting that false equivalence can be excluded. Length of stay was shorter in radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy than in standard distal pancreatectomy (-3.48 days; -6.66 to -0.31 days). The accrued sample size was 826, and the required sample size was not reached. False-positive results cannot be excluded. Conclusion: Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy was not superior in guaranteeing a better overall survival and disease-free survival. The data are robust, and further retrospective comparative studies are unnecessary. (c) 2025 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

    Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy: a single centre propensity score matching analysis

    No full text
    The laparoscopic approach is considered as standard practice in patients with body-tail pancreatic neoplasms. However, only a few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity score matching (PSM) studies have been performed. Thus, additional studies are needed to obtain more robust evidence. This is a single-centre propensity score-matched study including patients who underwent laparoscopic (LDP) and open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) with splenectomy for pancreatic neoplasms. Demographic, intra, postoperative and oncological data were collected. The primary endpoint was the length of hospital stay. The secondary endpoints included the assessment of the operative findings, postoperative outcomes, oncological outcomes (only in the subset of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma-PDAC) and total costs. In total, 205 patients were analysed: 105 (51.2%) undergoing an open approach and 100 (48.8%) a laparoscopic approach. After PSM, two well-balanced groups of 75 patients were analysed and showed a shorter length of hospital stay (P = 0.001), a lower blood loss (P = 0.032), a reduced rate of postoperative morbidity (P < 0.001) and decreased total costs (P = 0.050) after LDP with respect to ODP. Regarding the subset of patients with PDAC, 22 patients were analysed: they showed a significant shorter length of hospital stay (P = 0.050) and a reduction in postoperative morbidity (P < 0.001) after LDP with respect to ODP. Oncological outcomes were similar. LDP showed lower hospital stay and postoperative morbidity rate than ODP both in the entire population and in patients affected by PDAC. Total costs were reduced only in the entire population. Oncological outcomes were comparable in PDAC patients

    Trial sequential meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: is it the time to stop the randomization?

    No full text
    Background: The advantages of LPD compared with OPD remain debatable. The study aimed to compare the laparoscopic (LPD) versus open (OPD) for pancreaticoduodenectomy. Methods: A meta-analysis of randomized studies (RCTs) comparing LPD and OPD was made. The results were reported as relative risk (RRs) or mean differences (MDs). The trial sequential analysis was used to test the type I and type II errors defining the required information size (RIS). The primary outcome was mortality, major morbidity, and postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). R1 resection, post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage, delayed gastric emptying, biliary fistula, reoperation, readmission, operative time (OT), lymph nodes harvested, and length of stay (LOS) were also studied. Results: Four RCTs, counting 818 patients, were found. The RRs for mortality, major morbidity, and POPF were 1.16, 1.04, and 0.86, without significant differences. The RISs were 35,672, 16,548, and 8206. To confirm this equivalence, at least 34,854, 15,730, and 7338 should be randomized. OT was significantly longer in LPD than OPD, with an MD of 63.22. The LOS was significantly shorter in LPD than in OPD, with − 1.76 days. The RISs were 1297 and 1273, excluding a false-positive result. No significant differences were observed for the remaining endpoints, and RISs suggested that more than 3000 patients should be randomized to confirm the equivalence. Conclusion: The equivalence of LPD and OPD for mortality, major morbidity, and POPF is affected by type II error. The RISs to demonstrate a superiority of one of the two techniques seem unrealistic to obtain

    Variations on the Author

    No full text
    “Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship

    Blumgart Anastomosis After Pancreaticoduodenectomy. A Comprehensive Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression

    No full text
    Background: The superiority of Blumgart anastomosis (BA) over non-BA duct to mucosa (non-BA DtoM) still remains under debate. Methods: We performed a systematic search of studies comparing BA to non-BA DtoM. The primary endpoint was CR-POPF. Postoperative morbidity and mortality, post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), reoperation rate, and length of stay (LOS) were evaluated as secondary endpoints. The meta-analysis was carried out using random effect. The results were reported as odds ratio (OR), risk difference (RD), weighted mean difference (WMD), and number needed to treat (NNT). Results: Twelve papers involving 2368 patients: 1075 BA and 1193 non-BA DtoM were included. Regarding the primary endpoint, BA was superior to non-BA DtoM (RD = 0.10; 95% CI: −0.16 to −0.04; NNT = 9). The multivariate ORs' meta-analysis confirmed BA's protective role (OR 0.26; 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.79). BA was superior to DtoM regarding overall morbidity (RD = −0.10; 95% CI: −0.18 to −0.02; NNT = 25), PPH (RD = −0.03; 95% CI −0.06 to −0.01; NNT = 33), and LOS (− 4.2 days; −7.1 to −1.2 95% CI). Conclusion: BA seems to be superior to non-BA DtoM in avoiding CR-POPF

    Treatment for Infected Pancreatic Necrosis Should be Delayed, Possibly Avoiding an Open Surgical Approach: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

    No full text
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate all invasive treatments for suspected IPN. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The optimal invasive treatment for suspected IPN remains unclear. METHODS: A systematic search of randomized clinical trials comparing at least 2 invasive strategies for the treatment of suspected IPN was carried out. A frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis was made reporting the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA). The primary endpoint regarded both the in-hospital mortality and major morbidity rates. The secondary endpoints were mortality, length of stay, intensive care unit stay, the pancreatic fistula rate, and exocrine and endocrine insufficiency. RESULTS: Seven studies were included, involving 400 patients clustered as following: 64 (16%) in early surgical debridement (ED); 27 (6.7%) in peritoneal lavage (PL); 45 (11.3%) in delayed surgical debridement (DD), 169 (42.3%) in the step-up approach with minimally invasive debridement (SUA-DD) and 95 (23.7%) with endoscopic debridement (SUA-EnD). The step-up approach with endoscopic debridement had the highest probability of being the safest approach (SUCRA 87.1%), followed by SUA-DD (SUCRA 59.5%); DD, ED, and PL had the lowest probability of being safe (SUCRA values 27.6%, 31.4%, and 44.4%, respectively). Analysis of the secondary endpoints confirmed the superiority of SUA-EnD regarding length of stay, intensive care unit stay, pancreatic fistula rate, and new-onset diabetes. The SUA approaches are similar regarding exocrine function. Mortality was reduced by any delayed approaches (DD, SUA-DD, or SUA-EnD). CONCLUSIONS: The first choice for suspected IPN seemed to be SUA-EnD. An alternative could be SUA-DD. PL, ED, and DD should be avoided

    Comparison of Blumgart Anastomosis with Duct-to-Mucosa Anastomosis and Invagination Pancreaticojejunostomy After Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Single-Center Propensity Score Matching Analysis

    No full text
    Background: The Blumgart anastomosis is a method of pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) which combines the principle of duct-to-mucosa anastomosis with an invagination technique of the pancreas. Methods: Retrospective study involving consecutive patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic head cancer. Data predictive of pancreatic fistula and postoperative outcomes were collected. The patients were divided into three groups and were compared based on the type of pancreatic anastomosis performed: Blumgart anastomosis (BA), duct-to-mucosa anastomosis (DtoM), and invagination pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ). The primary endpoint was to determine the occurrence of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF). The secondary endpoints were to determine whether postoperative pancreatic fistula grade C (POPF C) and/or severe complications occurred as well as to determine the reoperation rate and 30- and 90-day mortality. A propensity score matching analysis was used. Results: Using propensity score matching (PSM), the occurrence of CR-POPF was not significantly different between the BA (21.6%) and the other pancreatic anastomoses (all 31.1%, DtoM = 27.0%; PJ = 35.1%). However, the BA significantly reduced (1) severe complications (0 versus 35.1%; P < 0.001) and 90-day mortality (0% versus 12.2%; P = 0.028) with respect to all anastomoses; (2) severe complications (0% versus 29.7%; P < 0.001), POPF grade C (0% versus 16.2%; P = 0.025), and reoperation (2.7% versus 16.2%; P = 0.056) with respect to DtoM; and (3) severe complications (0% versus 40.5%; P < 0.001) and 90-day mortality (0% versus 13.5%; P = 0.054) with respect to PJ. Conclusions: Applying the PSM analysis for the first time, the present study seemed to suggest that the BA succeeded in minimizing severe complications after PD

    [Newspaper Clipping: Author Claims Evidence of Second JFK Assassin #1]

    No full text
    Newspaper article titled "Author Claims Evidence of Second JFK Assassin." The article states that author Richard J. Whalen concluded "that there is circumstantial evidence to support the theory of a second assassin in the shooting of President John F. Kennedy.

    The Usefulness of a Preoperative Nomogram for Predicting the Probability of Conversion from Laparoscopic to Open Distal Pancreatectomy: A Single-Center Experience

    No full text
    Background: Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) represents a challenging procedure with a high conversion rate. A nomogram is a simple statistical predictive tool which is superior to risk groups. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a preoperative nomogram for predicting the probability of conversion from laparoscopic to open distal pancreatectomy. Methods: This is a retrospective study of 100 consecutive patients who underwent LDP. For each patient demographic, pre-intra- and postoperative data were collected. Univariate and multivariate analyses were carried out to identify the factors significantly influencing the conversion rate. The effect of each factor was weighted using the beta coefficient (β), and a nomogram was built. Finally, a logistic regression between the score and the conversion rate was carried out to calibrate the nomogram. Results: The conversion rate was 19.0%. At multivariate analysis, female (β = − 1.8 ± 0.9; P = 0.047) and tail location of the tumor (β = − 2.1 ± 1.1; P = 0.050) were significantly related to a low probability of conversion. Body mass index (BMI) (β = 0.2 ± 0.1; P = 0.011) and subtotal pancreatectomy (β = 2.4 ± 0.9; P = 0.006) were factors independently related to a high probability of conversion. The nomogram constructed had a minimum value of 4 and a maximum value of 18 points. The probability of conversion increased significantly starting from a minimum score of 6 points (P = 0.029; conversion probability 14.4%; 95%CI, 1.5–27.3%) up to 16 (P = 0.048; 27.8%; 95%CI, 0.2–48.7%). Conclusion: The nomogram proposed could serve as an effective preoperative tool capable of assessing the probability of conversion, allowing to take reliable decisions regarding indications and adequate stepwise training program of LDP
    corecore