The role of extra-hepatic bile duct resection in the surgical management of gallbladder carcinoma. A first meta-analysis

ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the clinicopathological and prognostic value of extra-hepatic bile duct resection (EHBDR) in the surgical management of patients with gallbladder carcinoma (GBC), especially in non-jaundiced patients.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were searched up to March 1^st 2021 for comparative studies between bile duct resected and non-resected groups. RevMan5.3 and Stata 13.0 software were used for the statistical analyses.ResultsEHBDR did not correlate with a better overall survival (OS) (P = 0.17) or disease-free survival (P = 0.27). No survival benefit was also observed in patients with T2N1 (P = 0.4), T3N0 (P = 0.14) disease and node-positive patients (P = 0.75), rather, EHBDR was even harmful for patients with T2N0 (P = 0.01) and node-negative disease (P = 0.02). Significantly higher incidences of recurrent disease (P = 0.0007), postoperative complications (P < 0.00001) and positive margins (P = 0.02) were detected in the bile duct-resected group. The duration of postoperative hospital stay between the two groups was comparable (P = 0.58). Selection bias was also detected in our analysis that a significantly higher proportion of advanced lesions with T3-4 or III-IV disease was observed in the bile duct-resected group (P < 0.00001). EHBDR only contributed to a greater lymph yield (P = 0.01).ConclusionEHBDR has no survival advantage for patients with GBC, especially for those with non-jaundiced disease. Considering the unfairness of comparing OS between jaundiced patients receiving EHBDR with non-jaundiced patients without EHBDR, we could only conclude that routine EHBDR in non-jaundiced patients is not recommended and future well-designed studies with more specific subgroup analyses are required for further validation.     

早产儿消化道穿孔的病因及影响预后的危险因素分析

目的:探讨早产儿消化道穿孔的病因，分析影响早产儿消化道穿孔短期预后不良的危险因素。方法:回顾性分析山西省 儿童医院新生儿外科2015年1月—2021 年5月诊治的89 例早产儿消化道穿孔的临床资料。根据术后3 个月时结局分为生存 组和预后不良组。比较两组术前、术中及术后与早产儿消化道穿孔预后不良相关的因素，采用Logistic 回归分析筛选早产儿消 化道穿孔预后不良的危险因素。结果:早产儿消化道穿孔的病死率为25.84%，坏死性小肠结肠炎（NEC）和胃壁肌层缺损是早产 儿消化道穿孔常见的病因。单因素分析显示生存组患儿从发现气腹至手术时间在8 h 之内的比例显著高于预后不良组 （χ2=15.22，P＜0.01）。预后不良组合并脓毒性休克的比例显著高于生存组（χ2=33.19，P＜0.01）。预后不良组术后合并需非计划二次 手术的并发症比例显著高于生存组（χ2=7.24，P＜0.01）。Logistic 回归分析显示脓毒性休克（OR=0.06，95%CI:0.02~0.21，P＜0.01）和 气腹至手术时间大于8 h（OR=0.23，95%CI:0.07~0.81，P＜0.05）是早产儿消化道穿孔短期预后不良的危险因素。结论:NEC 和胃 壁肌层缺损是早产儿消化道穿孔的主要病因，脓毒性休克和从气腹发生至手术时间大于8 h 是早产儿消化道穿孔短期预后 不良的危险因素。     

Management of upper gastrointestinal perforations

Perforation of the upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tract is a surgical emergency. Causes of oesophageal perforation include spontaneous (Boerhaave's), iatrogenic or foreign body ingestion. Perforation of the stomach and duodenum is most often caused by peptic ulcer disease. Management involves obtaining an accurate clinical diagnosis, through a combination of patient assessment, imaging and endoscopy. It is important to differentiate intramural from full thickness oesophageal perforations as this will guide the definitive surgical or endoscopic management. Perioperative care of these patients is as important as the definitive management step. This article will summarise an approach to managing perforation of the UGI tract; from initial assessment to postoperative care.     

Current standards and future perspectives in adjuvant treatment for biliary tract cancers

Biliary tract cancer, including cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) and gallbladder cancer (GBC) are rare tumours with a rising incidence. Prognosis is poor, since most patients are diagnosed with advanced disease. Only ~20% of patients are diagnosed with early-stage disease, suitable for curative surgery. Despite surgery performed with potentially-curative intent, relapse rates are high, with around 60–70% of patients expected to have disease recurrence. Most relapses occur in the form of distant metastases, with a predominance of liver spread. In view of high tumour recurrence, adjuvant strategies have been explored for many years, in the form of radiotherapy, chemo-radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Historically, few randomised trials were available, which included a variety of additional tumours (e.g. pancreatic and ampullary tumours); most evidence relied on phase II and retrospective studies, with no high-quality evidence available to define the real benefit derived from adjuvant strategies.Since 2017, three randomised phase III clinical trials have been reported; all recruited patients with resected biliary tract cancer (CCA and GBC) who were randomised to observation alone, or chemotherapy in the form of gemcitabine (BCAT study; included patients diagnosed with extrahepatic CCA only), gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (PRODIGE-12/ACCORD-18; included patients diagnosed with CCA and GBC) or capecitabine (BILCAP; included patients diagnosed with CCA and GBC). While gemcitabine-based chemotherapy failed to show an impact on patient outcome (relapse-free survival (RFS) or overall survival (OS)), the BILCAP study showed a benefit from adjuvant capecitabine in terms of OS (pre-planned sensitivity analysis in the intention-to-treat population and in the per-protocol analysis), with confirmed benefit in terms of RFS. Based on the BILCAP trial, international guidelines recommend adjuvant capecitabine for a period of six months following potentially curative resection of CCA as the current standard of care for resected CCA and GBC. However, BILCAP failed to show OS benefit in the intention-to-treat (non-sensitivity analysis) population (primary end-point), and this finding, as well as some inconsistencies between studies has been criticised and has led to confusion in the biliary tract cancer medical community.This review summarises the adjuvant field in biliary tract cancer, with evidence before and after 2017, and comparison between the latest randomised phase III studies. Potential explanations are presented for differential findings, and future steps are explored.     

腹腔镜胆囊切除术中意外胆囊癌12例诊治分析

目的:探讨腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)中意外胆囊癌(unexpected gallb ladder carc inom a,UGC)的处理措施。方法:回顾分析本院955例LC术中遇到的12例(1.26%)UGC的临床资料。结果:随诊3~36个月,平均18个月。迄今全部存活。5例PT1、5例PT2、1例PT3(中转开腹)随访至今未发现癌复发及转移。1例PT2因拒绝根治术,现出现肝多发转移。1例PT4因腹腔种植转移,无法根治,故仅部分切除胆囊(胆囊粘连重),以解决急性胆囊炎问题,现有腹水、恶液质表现。所有病例均未见脐部戳孔处肿瘤种植转移。结论:LC术中应常规切开胆囊标本,必要时送术中冰冻。PT1单纯切除胆囊已足够;PT2要额外楔形切除肝组织及区域淋巴结;PT3中转开腹,行根治手术或姑息手术。     

Prospect of Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Early Gastric Cancer: Our Devices in Insulated‐Tip Electrosurgical Knife Method

In Kobe University Hospital, a new method for endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) using insulated‐tip electrosurgical knife (IT‐EMR) for early gastric cancer (EGC) was introduced from November 2001. To achieve an effective and safe IT‐EMR procedure, we use a high‐frequency surgical unit for cutting and coagulation (ERBOTOM ICC 200) with automatically controlled cutting mode (ENDOCUT). In this study, we show not only our results of IT‐EMR for EGC in comparison with those of the conventional strip biopsy method, but also the optimal conditions for the apparatus of a high‐frequency surgical unit to prevent complications such as bleeding and perforation.     

MR T2加权成像显示胆囊壁增厚点状高信号的意义

目的研究病理组织学证实的胆囊腺肌瘤病、慢性胆囊炎和管壁增厚型胆囊腺癌在MRL加权成像（T2WI）显示病变胆囊壁点状高信号的特征。方法38例患者（胆囊腺肌瘤病16例，慢性胆囊炎13例，管壁增厚型胆囊腺癌9例），每例均进行了MR常规T1WI、常规T2WI和3mm薄层T2WI及MR胰胆管成像（MRCP）。所有患者均接受了胆囊切除手术。2名高年资放射科医生共同分析不同序列MRI，观察胆囊壁增厚及T2WI显示病变胆囊壁点状高信号的不同表现，将观察结果与病理组织学检查所见对照。结果所有患者的胆囊壁均明显增厚，厚度范围5～15mm，平均9mm。T2WI显示病变胆囊壁存在各种各样的点状高信号，在胆囊腺肌瘤病，点状高信号分布于整个增厚的胆囊壁，且数量较多（5～15个／cm^2），较大（直径2～7mm），边界清楚，呈现中等至明显高信号；在慢性胆囊炎，点状高信号主要位于增厚胆囊壁的黏膜侧，数量较少（3～5个／cm^2），较小（直径2～4mm），边界清楚，呈中等至明显高信号；在管壁增厚型胆囊腺癌，点状高信号边界欠清，呈现稍高信号，其数量和大小差异较大，分布范围取决于癌组织浸润胆囊壁的深度。结论胆囊腺肌瘤病、慢性胆囊炎和管壁增厚型胆囊腺癌在T2WI呈现的点状高信号有一定差别，正确识别这些点状高信号的特征有助于鉴别诊断良恶性胆囊壁增厚。     

碱性成纤维细胞生长因子对慢性鼓膜穿孔愈合的影响

目的 :探讨碱性成纤维细胞生长因子 (bFGF)在慢性鼓膜穿孔愈合中的作用。方法 :在豚鼠慢性创伤性鼓膜穿孔的动物模型上 ,观察应用bFGF 磷酸缓冲液 (2 5 0mg/L)治疗的鼓膜愈合率 ,用组织学检查鼓膜中层厚度 ,并与仅用磷酸缓冲液 (PBS)处理的作对照。结果 :bFGF治疗组鼓膜愈合率明显高于PBS组 (89.3%vs 37.5 % ,P <0 .0 1) ;鼓膜中层厚度bFGF组显著高于PBS组 [(30 5± 37) μmvs (10 2± 2 1) μm ,P <0 .0 1]。结论 :局部应用bFGF有明显促进慢性鼓膜穿孔鼓膜中层厚度及上皮细胞增生 ,促进鼓膜愈合的作用。     

Outpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a reality.

BACKGROUND: The author reports on his personal experience with outpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), focusing on the main guidelines for preoperative and postoperative care and operating technique. METHODS: From January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2000, 71 laparoscopic cholecystectomies were performed on outpatients. The patients remained in the outpatient surgery center for 36 hours. In 4 cases, the operation was converted into laparotomy. Twenty patients remained in the hospital and were discharged 5 to 7 days later. Twelve were rehospitalized due to pathologies that could not be treated at home. RESULTS: In all 71 cases, a complete remission of the symptoms occurred, and none of the patients died either during the operation or during the postoperative period. Eighty percent of patients were treated in outpatient surgery centers. CONCLUSIONS: With clear guidelines, LC is a major surgical operation that can be performed in outpatient surgery centers without death or other major complications and with very good remission of symptoms.