1
|
van Dam JL, Verkolf EMM, Dekker EN, Bonsing BA, Bratlie SO, Brosens LAA, Busch OR, van Driel LMJW, van Eijck CHJ, Feshtali S, Ghorbani P, de Groot DJA, de Groot JWB, Haberkorn BCM, de Hingh IH, van der Holt B, Karsten TM, van der Kolk MB, Labori KJ, Liem MSL, Loosveld OJL, Molenaar IQ, Polée MB, van Santvoort HC, de Vos-Geelen J, Wumkes ML, van Tienhoven G, Homs MYV, Besselink MG, Wilmink JW, Groot Koerkamp B. Perioperative or adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX for resectable pancreatic cancer (PREOPANC-3): study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial. BMC Cancer 2023; 23:728. [PMID: 37550634 PMCID: PMC10405377 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-023-11141-5] [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] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/12/2023] [Accepted: 06/30/2023] [Indexed: 08/09/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Surgical resection followed by adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil with leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) is currently the standard of care for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. The main concern regarding adjuvant chemotherapy is that only half of patients actually receive adjuvant treatment. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, on the other hand, guarantees early systemic treatment and may increase chemotherapy use and thereby improve overall survival. Furthermore, it may prevent futile surgery in patients with rapidly progressive disease. However, some argue that neoadjuvant therapy delays surgery, which could lead to progression towards unresectable disease and thus offset the potential benefits. Comparison of perioperative (i.e., neoadjuvant and adjuvant) with (only) adjuvant administration of mFOLFIRINOX in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) is needed to determine the optimal approach. METHODS This multicenter, phase 3, RCT will include 378 patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1. Patients are recruited from 20 Dutch centers and three centers in Norway and Sweden. Resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as no arterial contact and ≤ 90 degrees venous contact. Patients in the intervention arm are scheduled for 8 cycles of neoadjuvant mFOLFIRINOX followed by surgery and 4 cycles of adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX (2-week cycle of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, irinotecan 150 mg/m2 at day 1, followed by 46 h continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil 2400 g/m2). Patients in the comparator arm start with surgery followed by 12 cycles of adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX. The primary outcome is overall survival by intention-to-treat. Secondary outcomes include progression-free survival, resection rate, quality of life, adverse events, and surgical complications. To detect a hazard ratio of 0.70 with 80% power, 252 events are needed. The number of events is expected to be reached after the inclusion of 378 patients in 36 months, with analysis planned 18 months after the last patient has been randomized. DISCUSSION The multicenter PREOPANC-3 trial compares perioperative mFOLFIRINOX with adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinical Trials: NCT04927780. Registered June 16, 2021.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J L van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - E M M Verkolf
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - E N Dekker
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - B A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - S O Bratlie
- Department of Surgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - L A A Brosens
- Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, Radboud UMC, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - O R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - L M J W van Driel
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - C H J van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S Feshtali
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - P Ghorbani
- Division of Surgery, Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - D J A de Groot
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - J W B de Groot
- Department of Medical Oncology, Isala Oncology Center, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | - B C M Haberkorn
- Department of Medical Oncology, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - I H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - B van der Holt
- Department of Hematology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - T M Karsten
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M B van der Kolk
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - K J Labori
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet and Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - M S L Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - O J L Loosveld
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands
| | - I Q Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital and University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - M B Polée
- Department of Medical Oncology, Medical Center Leeuwarden, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
| | - H C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital and University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - J de Vos-Geelen
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, GROW, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - M L Wumkes
- Department of Medical Oncology, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, The Netherlands
| | - G van Tienhoven
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Amsterdam UMC, Department of Radiation Oncology, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M Y V Homs
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J W Wilmink
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - B Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Hoek VT, Edomskis PP, Stark PW, Lambrichts DPV, Draaisma WA, Consten ECJ, Lange JF, Bemelman WA, Hop WC, Opmeer BC, Reitsma JB, Scholte RA, Waltmann EWH, Legemate A, Bartelsman JF, Meijer DW, de Brouwer M, van Dalen J, Durbridge M, Geerdink M, Ilbrink GJ, Mehmedovic S, Middelhoek P, Boom MJ, Consten ECJ, van der Bilt JDW, van Olden GDJ, Stam MAW, Verweij MS, Vennix S, Musters GD, Swank HA, Boermeester MA, Busch ORC, Buskens CJ, El-Massoudi Y, Kluit AB, van Rossem CC, Schijven MP, Tanis PJ, Unlu C, van Dieren S, Gerhards MF, Karsten TM, de Nes LC, Rijna H, van Wagensveld BA, Koff eman GI, Steller EP, Tuynman JB, Bruin SC, van der Peet DL, Blanken-Peeters CFJM, Cense HA, Jutte E, Crolla RMPH, van der Schelling GP, van Zeeland M, de Graaf EJR, Groenendijk RPR, Karsten TM, Vermaas M, Schouten O, de Vries MR, Prins HA, Lips DJ, Bosker RJI, van der Hoeven JAB, Diks J, Plaisier PW, Kruyt PM, Sietses C, Stommel MWJ, Nienhuijs SW, de Hingh IHJT, Luyer MDP, van Montfort G, Ponten EH, Smulders JF, van Duyn EB, Klaase JM, Swank DJ, Ottow RT, Stockmann HBAC, Vermeulen J, Vuylsteke RJCLM, Belgers HJ, Fransen S, von Meijenfeldt EM, Sosef MN, van Geloven AAW, Hendriks ER, ter Horst B, Leeuwenburgh MMN, van Ruler O, Vogten JM, Vriens EJC, Westerterp M, Eijsbouts QAJ, Bentohami A, Bijlsma TS, de Korte N, Nio D, Govaert MJPM, Joosten JJA, Tollenaar RAEM, Stassen LPS, Wiezer MJ, Hazebroek EJ, Smits AB, van Westreenen HL, Lange JF, Brandt A, Nijboer WN, Mulder IM, Toorenvliet BR, Weidema WF, Coene PPLO, Mannaerts GHH, den Hartog D, de Vos RJ, Zengerink JF, Hoofwijk AGM, Hulsewé KWE, Melenhorst J, Stoot JHMB, Steup WH, Huijstee PJ, Merkus JWS, Wever JJ, Maring JK, Heisterkamp J, van Grevenstein WMU, Vriens MR, Besselink MGH, Borel Rinkes IHM, Witkamp AJ, Slooter GD, Konsten JLM, Engel AF, Pierik EGJM, Frakking TG, van Geldere D, Patijn GA, D’Hoore BAJL, de Buck AVO, Miserez M, Terrasson I, Wolthuis A, di Saverio S, de Blasiis MG. Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage versus sigmoidectomy for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis: three-year follow-up of the randomised LOLA trial. Surg Endosc 2022; 36:7764-7774. [PMID: 35606544 PMCID: PMC9485102 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09326-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2021] [Accepted: 05/01/2022] [Indexed: 10/31/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Background
This study aimed to compare laparoscopic lavage and sigmoidectomy as treatment for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis during a 36 month follow-up of the LOLA trial.
Methods
Within the LOLA arm of the international, multicentre LADIES trial, patients with perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis were randomised between laparoscopic lavage and sigmoidectomy. Outcomes were collected up to 36 months. The primary outcome of the present study was cumulative morbidity and mortality. Secondary outcomes included reoperations (including stoma reversals), stoma rates, and sigmoidectomy rates in the lavage group.
Results
Long-term follow-up was recorded in 77 of the 88 originally included patients, 39 were randomised to sigmoidectomy (51%) and 38 to laparoscopic lavage (49%). After 36 months, overall cumulative morbidity (sigmoidectomy 28/39 (72%) versus lavage 32/38 (84%), p = 0·272) and mortality (sigmoidectomy 7/39 (18%) versus lavage 6/38 (16%), p = 1·000) did not differ. The number of patients who underwent a reoperation was significantly lower for lavage compared to sigmoidectomy (sigmoidectomy 27/39 (69%) versus lavage 17/38 (45%), p = 0·039). After 36 months, patients alive with stoma in situ was lower in the lavage group (proportion calculated from the Kaplan–Meier life table, sigmoidectomy 17% vs lavage 11%, log-rank p = 0·0268). Eventually, 17 of 38 (45%) patients allocated to lavage underwent sigmoidectomy.
Conclusion
Long-term outcomes showed that laparoscopic lavage was associated with less patients who underwent reoperations and lower stoma rates in patients alive after 36 months compared to sigmoidectomy. No differences were found in terms of cumulative morbidity or mortality. Patient selection should be improved to reduce risk for short-term complications after which lavage could still be a valuable treatment option.
Graphical abstract
Collapse
|
3
|
Groen JV, Smits FJ, Koole D, Besselink MG, Busch OR, den Dulk M, van Eijck CHJ, Groot Koerkamp B, van der Harst E, de Hingh IH, Karsten TM, de Meijer VE, Pranger BK, Molenaar IQ, Bonsing BA, van Santvoort HC, Mieog JSD. Completion pancreatectomy or a pancreas-preserving procedure during relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy: a multicentre cohort study and meta-analysis. Br J Surg 2021; 108:1371-1379. [PMID: 34608941 PMCID: PMC10364904 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znab273] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2020] [Accepted: 06/30/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite the fact that primary percutaneous catheter drainage has become standard practice, some patients with pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy ultimately undergo a relaparotomy. The aim of this study was to compare completion pancreatectomy with a pancreas-preserving procedure in patients undergoing relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. METHODS This retrospective cohort study of nine institutions included patients who underwent relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy from 2005-2018. Furthermore, a systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS From 4877 patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy, 786 (16 per cent) developed a pancreatic fistula grade B/C and 162 (3 per cent) underwent a relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula. Of these patients, 36 (22 per cent) underwent a completion pancreatectomy and 126 (78 per cent) a pancreas-preserving procedure. Mortality was higher after completion pancreatectomy (20 (56 per cent) versus 40 patients (32 per cent); P = 0.009), which remained after adjusting for sex, age, BMI, ASA score, previous reintervention, and organ failure in the 24 h before relaparotomy (adjusted odds ratio 2.55, 95 per cent c.i. 1.07 to 6.08). The proportion of additional reinterventions was not different between groups (23 (64 per cent) versus 84 patients (67 per cent); P = 0.756). The meta-analysis including 33 studies evaluating 745 patients, confirmed the association between completion pancreatectomy and mortality (Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model: odds ratio 1.99, 95 per cent c.i. 1.03 to 3.84). CONCLUSION Based on the current data, a pancreas-preserving procedure seems preferable to completion pancreatectomy in patients in whom a relaparotomy is deemed necessary for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J V Groen
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - F J Smits
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, University Medical Centre Utrecht, and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - D Koole
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - O R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M den Dulk
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - C H J van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - B Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - E van der Harst
- Department of Surgery, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - I H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.,Department of Epidemiology, GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - T M Karsten
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis (loc. Oost), Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - V E de Meijer
- Department of Surgery, University of Groningen and University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - B K Pranger
- Department of Surgery, University of Groningen and University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - I Q Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, University Medical Centre Utrecht, and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - B A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - H C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, University Medical Centre Utrecht, and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - J S D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Janssen QP, van Dam JL, Bonsing BA, Bos H, Bosscha KP, Coene PPLO, van Eijck CHJ, de Hingh IHJT, Karsten TM, van der Kolk MB, Patijn GA, Liem MSL, van Santvoort HC, Loosveld OJL, de Vos-Geelen J, Zonderhuis BM, Homs MYV, van Tienhoven G, Besselink MG, Wilmink JW, Groot Koerkamp B. Total neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX versus neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant gemcitabine for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (PREOPANC-2 trial): study protocol for a nationwide multicenter randomized controlled trial. BMC Cancer 2021; 21:300. [PMID: 33757440 PMCID: PMC7989075 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-08031-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 78] [Impact Index Per Article: 26.0] [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] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2020] [Accepted: 03/14/2021] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Neoadjuvant therapy has several potential advantages over upfront surgery in patients with localized pancreatic cancer; more patients receive systemic treatment, fewer patients undergo futile surgery, and R0 resection rates are higher, thereby possibly improving overall survival (OS). Two recent randomized trials have suggested benefit of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy over upfront surgery, both including single-agent chemotherapy regimens. Potentially, the multi-agent FOLFIRINOX regimen (5-fluorouracil with leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) may further improve outcomes in the neoadjuvant setting for localized pancreatic cancer, but randomized studies are needed. The PREOPANC-2 trial investigates whether neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX improves OS compared with neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant gemcitabine in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer patients. METHODS This nationwide multicenter phase III randomized controlled trial includes patients with pathologically confirmed resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer with a WHO performance score of 0 or 1. Resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as no arterial and ≤ 90 degrees venous involvement; borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as ≤90 degrees arterial and ≤ 270 degrees venous involvement without occlusion. Patients receive 8 cycles of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy followed by surgery without adjuvant treatment (arm A), or 3 cycles of neoadjuvant gemcitabine with hypofractionated radiotherapy (36 Gy in 15 fractions) during the second cycle, followed by surgery and 4 cycles of adjuvant gemcitabine (arm B). The primary endpoint is OS by intention-to-treat. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, quality of life, resection rate, and R0 resection rate. To detect a hazard ratio of 0.70 with 80% power, 252 events are needed. The number of events is expected to be reached after inclusion of 368 eligible patients assuming an accrual period of 3 years and 1.5 years follow-up. DISCUSSION The PREOPANC-2 trial directly compares two neoadjuvant regimens for patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Our study will provide evidence on the neoadjuvant treatment of choice for patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION Primary registry and trial identifying number: EudraCT: 2017-002036-17 . Date of registration: March 6, 2018. Secondary identifying numbers: The Netherlands National Trial Register - NL7094 , NL61961.078.17, MEC-2018-004.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Q P Janssen
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J L van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - B A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - H Bos
- Department of Medical Oncology, Tjongerschans Hospital, Heerenveen, The Netherlands
| | - K P Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, The Netherlands
| | - P P L O Coene
- Department of Surgery, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - C H J van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - I H J T de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - T M Karsten
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M B van der Kolk
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - G A Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala Hospital, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | - M S L Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - H C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital and University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - O J L Loosveld
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands
| | - J de Vos-Geelen
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - B M Zonderhuis
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M Y V Homs
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - G van Tienhoven
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J W Wilmink
- Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - B Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
de Leede EM, van Leersum NJ, Kroon HM, van Weel V, van der Sijp JRM, Bonsing BA, Woltz S, Tromp M, Neijenhuis PA, Maaijen RCLA, Steup WH, Schepers A, Guicherit OR, Huurman VAL, Karsten TM, van de Pool A, Boerma D, Deroose JP, Beek M, Wijsman JH, Derksen WJM, Festen S, de Nes LCF. Multicentre randomized clinical trial of the effect of chewing gum after abdominal surgery. Br J Surg 2018; 105:820-828. [DOI: 10.1002/bjs.10828] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2017] [Revised: 11/30/2017] [Accepted: 12/28/2017] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Postoperative ileus is a common complication of abdominal surgery, leading to patient discomfort, morbidity and prolonged postoperative length of hospital stay (LOS). Previous studies suggested that chewing gum stimulates bowel function after abdominal surgery, but were underpowered to evaluate its effect on LOS and did not include enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS)-based perioperative care. This study evaluated whether chewing gum after elective abdominal surgery reduces LOS and time to bowel recovery in the setting of ERAS-based perioperative care.
Methods
A multicentre RCT was performed of patients over 18 years of age undergoing abdominal surgery in 12 hospitals. Standard postoperative care (control group) was compared with chewing gum three times a day for 30 min in addition to standard postoperative care. Randomization was computer-generated; allocation was concealed. The primary outcome was postoperative LOS. Secondary outcomes were time to bowel recovery and 30-day complications.
Results
Between 2011 to 2015, 1000 patients were assigned to chewing gum and 1000 to the control arm. Median LOS did not differ: 7 days in both arms (P = 0·364). Neither was any difference found in time to flatus (24 h in control group versus 23 h with chewing gum; P = 0·873) or time to defaecation (60 versus 52 h respectively; P = 0·562). The rate of 30-day complications was not significantly different either.
Conclusion
The addition of chewing gum to an ERAS postoperative care pathway after elective abdominal surgery does not reduce the LOS, time to bowel recovery or the rate of postoperative complications. Registration number: NTR2594 (Netherlands Trial Register).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E M de Leede
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - N J van Leersum
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - H M Kroon
- Department of Surgery, Alrijne Hospital, Leiderdorp, The Netherlands
| | - V van Weel
- Department of Surgery, Medical Centre Haaglanden, The Hague, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medisch Centrum, Amersfoort, The Netherlands
| | - J R M van der Sijp
- Department of Surgery, Medical Centre Haaglanden, The Hague, The Netherlands
| | - B A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - S Woltz
- Department of Surgery, Medical Centre Haaglanden, The Hague
| | - M Tromp
- Department of Surgery, Groene Hart Hospital, Gouda
| | | | | | - W H Steup
- Department of Surgery, Haga Hospital, The Hague
| | - A Schepers
- Department of Surgery, Haga Hospital, The Hague
| | | | | | - T M Karsten
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Group, Delft
| | | | - D Boerma
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda
| | - J P Deroose
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda
| | - M Beek
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda
| | - J H Wijsman
- Department of Surgery, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein
| | - W J M Derksen
- Department of Surgery, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein
| | - S Festen
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam
| | - L C F de Nes
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Bakker IS, Snijders HS, Grossmann I, Karsten TM, Havenga K, Wiggers T. High mortality rates after nonelective colon cancer resection: results of a national audit. Colorectal Dis 2016; 18:612-21. [PMID: 26749028 DOI: 10.1111/codi.13262] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.4] [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: 06/15/2015] [Accepted: 11/18/2015] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
AIM Colon cancer resection in a nonelective setting is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. The aim of this retrospective study is to identify risk factors for overall mortality after colon cancer resection with a special focus on nonelective resection. METHOD Data were obtained from the Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit. Patients undergoing colon cancer resection in the Netherlands between January 2009 and December 2013 were included. Patient, treatment and tumour factors were analysed in relation to the urgency of surgery. The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative mortality. RESULTS The study included 30 907 patients. A nonelective colon cancer resection was performed in 5934 (19.2%) patients. There was a 4.4% overall mortality rate, with significantly more deaths after nonelective surgery (8.5% vs 3.4%, P < 0.001). Older patients, male patients and patients with high comorbidity, advanced tumours, perforated tumours, a tumour in the right or transverse colon and postoperative anastomotic leakage were at risk of postoperative death. In nonelective resections, a right-sided tumour and postoperative anastomotic leakage were associated with high mortality. CONCLUSION Nonelective colon cancer resection is associated with high mortality. In particular, right-sided resections and patients with tumour perforation are at particularly high risk. The optimization of patients prior to surgery and expeditious operation after diagnosis might prevent the need for a nonelective resection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- I S Bakker
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - H S Snijders
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - I Grossmann
- Department of Surgery, Afd. P, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - T M Karsten
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - K Havenga
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - T Wiggers
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Bakker OJ, van Brunschot S, van Santvoort HC, Besselink MG, Bollen TL, Boermeester MA, Dejong CH, van Goor H, Bosscha K, Ahmed Ali U, Bouwense S, van Grevenstein WM, Heisterkamp J, Houdijk AP, Jansen JM, Karsten TM, Manusama ER, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Schaapherder AF, van der Schelling GP, Schwartz MP, Spanier BWM, Tan A, Vecht J, Weusten BL, Witteman BJ, Akkermans LM, Bruno MJ, Dijkgraaf MG, van Ramshorst B, Gooszen HG. Early versus on-demand nasoenteric tube feeding in acute pancreatitis. N Engl J Med 2014; 371:1983-93. [PMID: 25409371 DOI: 10.1056/nejmoa1404393] [Citation(s) in RCA: 175] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/13/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Early enteral feeding through a nasoenteric feeding tube is often used in patients with severe acute pancreatitis to prevent gut-derived infections, but evidence to support this strategy is limited. We conducted a multicenter, randomized trial comparing early nasoenteric tube feeding with an oral diet at 72 hours after presentation to the emergency department in patients with acute pancreatitis. METHODS We enrolled patients with acute pancreatitis who were at high risk for complications on the basis of an Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score of 8 or higher (on a scale of 0 to 71, with higher scores indicating more severe disease), an Imrie or modified Glasgow score of 3 or higher (on a scale of 0 to 8, with higher scores indicating more severe disease), or a serum C-reactive protein level of more than 150 mg per liter. Patients were randomly assigned to nasoenteric tube feeding within 24 hours after randomization (early group) or to an oral diet initiated 72 hours after presentation (on-demand group), with tube feeding provided if the oral diet was not tolerated. The primary end point was a composite of major infection (infected pancreatic necrosis, bacteremia, or pneumonia) or death during 6 months of follow-up. RESULTS A total of 208 patients were enrolled at 19 Dutch hospitals. The primary end point occurred in 30 of 101 patients (30%) in the early group and in 28 of 104 (27%) in the on-demand group (risk ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.79 to 1.44; P=0.76). There were no significant differences between the early group and the on-demand group in the rate of major infection (25% and 26%, respectively; P=0.87) or death (11% and 7%, respectively; P=0.33). In the on-demand group, 72 patients (69%) tolerated an oral diet and did not require tube feeding. CONCLUSIONS This trial did not show the superiority of early nasoenteric tube feeding, as compared with an oral diet after 72 hours, in reducing the rate of infection or death in patients with acute pancreatitis at high risk for complications. (Funded by the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development and others; PYTHON Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN18170985.).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Olaf J Bakker
- The authors' affiliations are listed in the Appendix
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Snijders HS, Henneman D, van Leersum NL, ten Berge M, Fiocco M, Karsten TM, Havenga K, Wiggers T, Dekker JW, Tollenaar RAEM, Wouters MWJM. Anastomotic leakage as an outcome measure for quality of colorectal cancer surgery. BMJ Qual Saf 2013; 22:759-67. [PMID: 23687168 DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001644] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [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] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION When comparing mortality rates between hospitals to explore hospital performance, there is an important role for adjustment for differences in case-mix. Identifying outcome measures that are less influenced by differences in case-mix may be valuable. The main goal of this study was to explore whether hospital differences in anastomotic leakage (AL) and postoperative mortality are due to differences in case-mix or to differences in treatment factors. METHODS Data of the Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit were used. Case-mix factors and treatment-related factors were identified from the literature and their association with AL and mortality were analysed with logistic regression. Hospital differences in observed AL and mortality rates, and adjusted rates based on the logistic regression models were shown. The reduction in hospital variance after adjustment was analysed with Levene's test for equality of variances. RESULTS 17 of 22 case-mix factors and 4 of 11 treatment factors related to AL derived from the literature were available in the database. Variation in observed AL rates between hospitals was large with a maximum rate of 17%. This variation could not be attributed to differences in case-mix but more to differences in treatment factors. Hospital variation in observed mortality rates was significantly reduced after adjustment for differences in case-mix. CONCLUSIONS Hospital variation in AL is relatively independent of differences in case-mix. In contrast to 'postoperative mortality' the observed AL rates of hospitals evaluated in our study were only slightly affected after adjustment for case-mix factors. Therefore, AL rates may be suitable as an outcome indicator for measurement of surgical quality of care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- H S Snijders
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Daams F, Slieker JC, Tedja A, Karsten TM, Lange JF. Treatment of colorectal anastomotic leakage: results of a questionnaire amongst members of the Dutch Society of Gastrointestinal Surgery. Dig Surg 2013; 29:516-21. [PMID: 23485790 DOI: 10.1159/000346348] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/29/2012] [Accepted: 11/26/2012] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
Anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery is correlated with considerable morbidity and mortality. Although many studies focus on risk factors and detection, studies on the treatment strategy for colorectal anastomotic leakage are scarce. A national questionnaire amongst 350 members of the Dutch Society for Gastrointestinal Surgery was undertaken on the current treatment of colorectal anastomotic leakage. The response was 40% after two anonymous rounds. 27% of the respondents state that a leaking anastomosis above the level of the promontory should be salvaged in ASA 1-2 patients <80 years of age, for ASA 3 and/or >80 years of age this percentage is 7.3%. For an anastomosis under the promontory, 50% of the respondents choose preserving the anastomosis for ASA 1-2 compared to 17% for ASA 3 and/or >80 years of age. In ASA 1-2 patients with a local abscess after a rectum resection without protective ileostomy, 31% of the respondents will create an protective ileostomy, 40% break down the anastomosis to create a definite colostomy, in ASA 3 and/or >80 years of age 14% of the respondents create a protective ileostomy and 63% a definitive colostomy. In ASA 1-2 patients with peritonitis after a rectum resection with deviating ileostomy, 31% prefer a laparotomy for lavage and repair of the anastomosis, 25% for lavage without repair and 36% of the respondents prefer to break down the anastomosis. When the patient is ASA 3 and/or >80 years of age, 13% prefer repair, 9% a lavage and 74% breaking down the anastomosis. This questionnaire shows that in contrast to older people, more surgeons make an effort to preserve the anastomosis in younger people.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Daams
- Department of Surgery and Traumatology, Reinier de Graaf Gasthuis, Delft, The Netherlands.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Hemmer PHJ, de Schipper JS, van Etten B, Pierie JPEN, Bonenkamp JJ, de Graaf PW, Karsten TM. Results of surgery for perforated gastroduodenal ulcers in a Dutch population. Dig Surg 2011; 28:360-6. [PMID: 22086121 DOI: 10.1159/000331320] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/28/2011] [Accepted: 07/28/2011] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Despite improvements in anesthesiology and intensive care medicine, mortality for perforated gastroduodenal ulcer disease remains high. This study was designed to evaluate the results of surgery for perforated ulcer disease and to identify prognostic factors for mortality in order to optimize treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS The medical records of 272 patients undergoing emergency surgery for perforated ulcer disease from 2000 to 2005 in two large teaching hospitals and one university hospital in the Netherlands were retrospectively analyzed. Information on 89 pre-, peri- and postoperative data were recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using multiple logistic regression analysis. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. RESULTS The 30-day mortality rate was 16%. Variables associated with 30-day mortality were age, shock, tachycardia, anemia and ASA class. CONCLUSIONS A relatively low 30-day mortality rate was achieved. Age, shock, tachycardia and anemia were significantly associated with 30-day mortality. Finding that shock, tachycardia and anemia are independently associated with 30-day mortality could indicate that patients are septic upon admission. Improvements in survival might be achieved by early sepsis treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P H J Hemmer
- Department of Surgery, Leeuwarden Medical Center, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Bakker OJ, van Santvoort HC, van Brunschot S, Ali UA, Besselink MG, Boermeester MA, Bollen TL, Bosscha K, Brink MA, Dejong CH, van Geenen EJ, van Goor H, Heisterkamp J, Houdijk AP, Jansen JM, Karsten TM, Manusama ER, Nieuwenhuijs VB, van Ramshorst B, Schaapherder AF, van der Schelling GP, Spanier MBM, Tan A, Vecht J, Weusten BL, Witteman BJ, Akkermans LM, Gooszen HG. Pancreatitis, very early compared with normal start of enteral feeding (PYTHON trial): design and rationale of a randomised controlled multicenter trial. Trials 2011; 12:73. [PMID: 21392395 PMCID: PMC3068962 DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-12-73] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2010] [Accepted: 03/10/2011] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In predicted severe acute pancreatitis, infections have a negative effect on clinical outcome. A start of enteral nutrition (EN) within 24 hours of onset may reduce the number of infections as compared to the current practice of starting an oral diet and EN if necessary at 3-4 days after admission. METHODS/DESIGN The PYTHON trial is a randomised controlled, parallel-group, superiority multicenter trial. Patients with predicted severe acute pancreatitis (Imrie-score ≥ 3 or APACHE-II score ≥ 8 or CRP > 150 mg/L) will be randomised to EN within 24 hours or an oral diet and EN if necessary, after 72 hours after hospital admission.During a 3-year period, 208 patients will be enrolled from 20 hospitals of the Dutch Pancreatitis Study Group. The primary endpoint is a composite of mortality or infections (bacteraemia, infected pancreatic or peripancreatic necrosis, pneumonia) during hospital stay or within 6 months following randomisation. Secondary endpoints include other major morbidity (e.g. new onset organ failure, need for intervention), intolerance of enteral feeding and total costs from a societal perspective. DISCUSSION The PYTHON trial is designed to show that a very early (< 24 h) start of EN reduces the combined endpoint of mortality or infections as compared to the current practice of an oral diet and EN if necessary at around 72 hours after admission for predicted severe acute pancreatitis. TRIAL REGISTRATION ISRCTN: ISRCTN18170985.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Olaf J Bakker
- Dept. of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, HP G04.228, PO 85500, 3508 GA Utrecht; The Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Dept. of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, HP G04.228, PO 85500, 3508 GA Utrecht; The Netherlands
| | - Sandra van Brunschot
- Dept. of Surgery, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, HP 630, PO 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegen; The Netherlands
| | - Usama Ahmed Ali
- Dept. of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, HP G04.228, PO 85500, 3508 GA Utrecht; The Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Dept. of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, HP G04.228, PO 85500, 3508 GA Utrecht; The Netherlands
| | - Marja A Boermeester
- Dept. of Surgery, Academic Medical Center Amsterdam, PO 22660, 1100 DD Amsterdam; The Netherlands
| | - Thomas L Bollen
- Dept. of Radiology, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, PO 2500, 3430 EM Nieuwegein; The Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Dept. of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, PO 90153, 5200 ME Den Bosch; The Netherlands
| | - Menno A Brink
- Dept. of Gastroenterology, Meander Medical Center Amersfoort, PO 1502, 3800 BM, Amersfoort; The Netherlands
| | - Cornelis H Dejong
- Dept. of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, PO 5800, 6202 AZ Maastricht; The Netherlands
| | - Erwin J van Geenen
- Dept. of Gastroenterology, VU Medical Center, PO 7057, 1007 MB Amsterdam; The Netherlands
| | - Harry van Goor
- Dept. of Surgery, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, HP 630, PO 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegen; The Netherlands
| | - Joos Heisterkamp
- Dept. of Surgery, St.Elisabeth Hospital, PO 90151, 5000 LC Tilburg; The Netherlands
| | - Alexander P Houdijk
- Dept. of Surgery, Medical Center Alkmaar, PO 501, 1800 AM Alkmaar; The Netherlands
| | - Jeroen M Jansen
- Dept. of Gastroenterology, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, PO 95500, 1090 HM Amsterdam; The Netherlands
| | - Thom M Karsten
- Dept. of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Gasthuis, PO 5011, 2600 GA Delft; The Netherlands
| | - Eric R Manusama
- Dept. of Surgery, Medical Center Leeuwarden, PO 888, 8901 BR Leeuwarden; The Netherlands
| | - Vincent B Nieuwenhuijs
- Dept. of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, PO 30001, 9700 RB Groningen; The Netherlands
| | - Bert van Ramshorst
- Dept. of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, PO 2500, 3430 EM Nieuwegein; The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Marcel BM Spanier
- Dept. of Gastroenterology, Rijnstate Hospital, PO 9555, 6800 TA Arnhem; The Netherlands
| | - Adriaan Tan
- Dept. of Gastroenterology, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, PO 9015, 6500 GS Nijmegen; The Netherlands
| | - Juda Vecht
- Dept. of Gastroenterology, Isala Clinics, PO 10400, 8000 GK, Zwolle; The Netherlands
| | - Bas L Weusten
- Dept. of Gastroenterology, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, PO 2500, 3430 EM Nieuwegein; The Netherlands
| | - Ben J Witteman
- Dept. of Gastroenterology, Hospital Gelderse Vallei Ede, PO 9025, 6710 HN Ede; The Netherlands
| | - Louis M Akkermans
- Dept. of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, HP G04.228, PO 85500, 3508 GA Utrecht; The Netherlands
| | - Hein G Gooszen
- Dept. of OR/Evidence Based Surgery, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, PO 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegen; The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Verdaasdonk EGG, Stassen LPS, van der Elst M, Karsten TM, Dankelman J. Problems with technical equipment during laparoscopic surgery. An observational study. Surg Endosc 2006; 21:275-9. [PMID: 17122973 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-006-0019-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 64] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [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: 01/10/2006] [Accepted: 05/25/2006] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study was designed to investigate the incidence of technical equipment problems during laparoscopic procedures. METHODS A video-capturing system was used, consisting of an analog video recorder with three camera image inputs and a microphone. Problems with all technical equipment used by the surgical team, such as the insufflator, diathermy apparatus, monitors, light source, camera and camera unit, endoscope, suction devices, and instruments, were registered. RESULTS In total, 30 procedures were randomly videotaped. In 87% (26/30) of the procedures, one or more incidents with technical equipment (49 incidents) or instruments (9 incidents) occurred. In 22 of those incidents (45%) the technical equipment was not correctly positioned or not present at all; in the other 27 (55%), the equipment malfunctioned as a result of a faulty connection (9), a defect (5), or the wrong setting of the equipment (3). In 10 (20%) cases the exact cause of equipment malfunctioning was unclear. CONCLUSIONS The incidence of problems with laparoscopic technical equipment is high. To prevent such problems, improvement and standardization of equipment is needed, combined with the incorporation of checklist use before the start of a surgical procedure. Future research should be aimed at development, implementation, and evaluation of these measures into the operating room.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E G G Verdaasdonk
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Group, Delft, The Netherlands.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Karsten TM, van Gulik TM, Spanjaard L, Bosma A, van der Bergh Weerman MA, Dingemans KP, Dankert J, Gouma DJ. Bacterial translocation from the biliary tract to blood and lymph in rats with obstructive jaundice. J Surg Res 1998; 74:125-30. [PMID: 9587350 DOI: 10.1006/jsre.1997.5192] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [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: 12/07/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The disruption of the hepatocyte tight junctions observed in biliary obstruction suggests altered permeability of the blood-bile barrier. In this study the role of biliary obstruction and increased biliary pressure on the translocation of bacteria from biliary tract to bloodstream and lymphatic system were evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS Rats underwent distal bile duct ligation (BDL, n = 33) for two weeks or a sham celiotomy (n = 21). Seventeen of the 33 BDL rats underwent subsequent biliary decompression by a choledochojejunostomy (CJ). Two weeks after the final operation, a laparotomy was performed again and the CBD, the thoracic duct, and the caval vein were canulated. Next, a suspension containing 10(8) Escherichia coli/ml was retrogradely infused in the CBD for 5 min at 5 or 20 cm H2O above the secretory biliary pressure. RESULTS A higher biliary infusion pressure resulted in a significant increase of cfu E.coli per milliliter of blood in all the three groups (Sham, BDL, CJ). BDL rats showed significantly more bacterial translocation to the bloodstream than the shams. After biliary decompression, translocation normalized to the control levels. At 5 cm H2O infusion pressure only one lymph culture was positive (CJ group). At 20 cm H2O overpressure, nine lymph cultures were E.coli positive (P = 0.03). These were found mainly in groups with a nonobstructed bile duct (Sham and CJ 40% vs BDL 10%). CONCLUSION Translocation of bacteria from biliary tract to bloodstream increased at higher intrabiliary pressures. Longstanding bile duct obstruction was an independent determinant for cholangiovenous reflux. Bacterial translocation to the lymphatic system did not parallel translocation to the bloodstream, although in the nonobstructed biliary tract, increased bacterial translocation to the lymphatic system was pressure related.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- T M Karsten
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Karsten TM, Allema JH, Reinders M, van Gulik TM, de Wit LT, Verbeek PC, Huibregtse K, Tytgat GN, Gouma DJ. Preoperative biliary drainage, colonisation of bile and postoperative complications in patients with tumours of the pancreatic head: a retrospective analysis of 241 consecutive patients. Eur J Surg 1996; 162:881-8. [PMID: 8956957] [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] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To analyse the outcome of preoperative biliary drainage in patients being operated on for a tumour in the pancreatic head. DESIGN Retrospective study. SETTING University hospital, The Netherlands. SUBJECTS Consecutive series of 241 patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Decline in bilirubin concentrations and bacterial contamination of bile as a result of preoperative drainage. Incidence of postoperative complications in patients who underwent preoperative drainage and those who did not. RESULTS 184/241 patients underwent preoperative biliary drainage. Endoscopic drainage was the most effective, shown by a median reduction in bilirubin concentrations of 82%, 74%, and 50% after endoscopic drainage (n = 149), papillotomy (n = 25) and external drainage (n = 10), respectively. Bacterial contamination of bile was significantly more common when an endoprosthesis was used, but did not result in a higher rate of infective complications. 163 Whipple's resections, 33 total pancreatectomies, and 45 biliary-enteric bypasses were performed. 137/241 (57%) patients had postoperative complications. There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between patients who had preoperative biliary drainage and those who did not (p = 0.4).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- T M Karsten
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Reinders ME, Allema JH, van Gulik TM, Karsten TM, de Wit LT, Verbeek PC, Rauws EJ, Gouma DJ. Outcome of microscopically nonradical, subtotal pancreaticoduodenectomy (Whipple's resection) for treatment of pancreatic head tumors. World J Surg 1995; 19:410-4; discussion 414-5. [PMID: 7638998 DOI: 10.1007/bf00299174] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [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] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/26/2023]
Abstract
From 1983 to 1992 a total of 240 patients with a pancreatic head tumor underwent laparotomy to assess the resectability of the tumor. In 44 patients the tumor was not resected because of distant metastases (n = 20) or major vascular involvement or local tumor infiltration (n = 24) not detected during the preoperative workup. A palliative biliary and gastric bypass was performed in these patients. All other patients underwent a subtotal (Whipple's resection, n = 164) or total (n = 32) pancreaticoduo-denectomy. However, in 56 cases after Whipple's resection, microscopic examination of the specimen showed tumor invasion in the dissection margins. For this reason, these resections were considered palliative. We compared hospital mortality, morbidity, and long-term survival of patients who had undergone a biliary and gastric bypass for a locally advanced tumor (group A, n = 24) with a matched group of patients who had undergone a macroscopically radical Whipple's resection that on microscopic examination proved to be nonradical (group B, n = 36). Both groups were comparable with regard to age (mean 61 years in both groups), duration of symptoms (8 weeks in group A and 10 weeks in group B), and tumor size (mean 4.25 cm in group A and 4.30 cm in group B). Median postoperative hospital stay was 18 days in group A and 25 days in group B. Postoperative complications (intraabdominal abscess, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, anastomotic leakage, delayed gastric emptying) occurred in 33% of patients in group A and in 44% of patients in group B. Hospital mortality was 0% and 3% in group A and group B, respectively.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M E Reinders
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
Karsten TM, Davids PH, van Gulik TM, Bosma A, Tytgat GN, Klopper PJ, van der Hyde MN. Effects of biliary endoprostheses on the extrahepatic bile ducts in relation to subsequent operation of the biliary tract. J Am Coll Surg 1994; 178:343-52. [PMID: 7511966] [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: 01/25/2023]
Abstract
Despite the widespread use of transpapillary biliary endoprostheses, little is known about their effect on the extrahepatic bile ducts. In an experimental study in dogs, we induced inflammatory changes in the bile ducts by stent insertion and studied the reversibility of these changes after stent removal. In addition, the consequences of a period of preoperative stenting for subsequent operation of the biliary tract and the eventual detrimental effects of stenting on the histologic factors of the liver were studied. Twenty-six mongrel dogs were randomly divided into four groups: group 1, stenting during four weeks; group 2, after four weeks stenting, construction of a hepaticojejunostomy; group 3, four days of common bile duct (CBD) ligation, four weeks stenting and hepaticojejunostomy, and group 4, four days of CBD ligation and hepaticojejunostomy. All dogs were sacrificed two months after the last procedure. Hepatic biopsies were obtained during each procedure and bile duct biopsies during hepaticojejunostomy and upon sacrifice. Four weeks of stenting of a normal or obstructed CBD resulted in fibrosed bile ducts, showing severe chronic inflammation with papillary hyperplasia of the epithelium. All bile cultures grew fecal bacteria. Two months after stent removal, inflammation was still present, albeit less severe. Stenting and subsequent surgical treatment resulted in a higher incidence of postoperative complications (54 percent) compared with the control group (14 percent), although this did not reach statistical significance. Hepatic histologic factors were not markedly changed after transpapillary endoprosthesis placement, but after hepaticojejunostomy cholangiolitis was observed. Whenever transpapillary biliary endoprostheses are used, the local effects on the extrahepatic bile ducts and the subsequent bacterial contamination of the bile should be considered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- T M Karsten
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Karsten TM, Coene PP, van Gulik TM, Bosma A, van Marle J, James J, Lygidakis NJ, Klopper PJ, van der Heyde MN. Morphologic changes of extrahepatic bile ducts during obstruction and subsequent decompression by endoprosthesis. Surgery 1992; 111:562-8. [PMID: 1598676] [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: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
The morphologic changes of the extrahepatic biliary tract during obstruction and the effects of biliary decompression by means of an endoprosthesis on the bile duct wall were studied by light microscopy and scanning electron microscopy. Common hepatic duct biopsy specimens and bile cultures were obtained during surgery from 30 patients with a distal common bile duct obstruction caused by a tumor. Thirteen patients had obstructed bile ducts of 3 weeks' duration (group A). Seventeen patients had had jaundice for a period of 4 weeks and had subsequently undergone preoperative endoscopic biliary stenting for a period of 4 weeks (group B). Three autopsy specimens from patients without hepatobiliary disease served as controls. The results showed that the initial dilatation and thickening of the obstructed ducts in group A were associated with a mild inflammation, a moderate degree of fibrosis, and local epithelial disintegration. The presence of an endoprosthesis, however (group B), induced severe inflammatory changes with considerable fibrosis and ulcerative lesions, resulting in markedly thickened ducts with lumina approximating the diameter of the stent. Three of 13 (24%) bile cultures in group A were positive and 14 of 17 (82%) in group B were positive.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- T M Karsten
- Department of Surgery, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|