Small Pancreatic and Periampullary Neuroendocrine Tumors: Resect or Enucleate?

Objective  The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of enucleation versus resection in patients with small pancreatic, ampullary, and duodenal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). Methods  Multi-institutional retrospective review identified all patients with pancreatic and peri-pancreatic NETs who underwent surgery from January 1990 to October 2008. Patients with tumors ≤3 cm and without nodal or metastatic disease were included. Results  Of the 271 patients identified, 122 (45%) met the inclusion criteria and had either an enucleation (n = 37) and/or a resection (n = 87). Enucleated tumors were more likely to be in the pancreatic head (P = 0.003) or functioning (P < 0.0001) and, when applicable, less likely to result in splenectomy (P = 0.0003). The rate of pancreatic fistula formation was higher after enucleation (P < 0.01), but the fistula severity tended to be worse following resection (P = 0.07). The enucleation and resection patients had similar operative times, blood loss, overall morbidity, mortality, hospital stay, and 5-year survival. However, for pancreatic head tumors, enucleation resulted in decreased blood loss, operative time, and length of stay compared to pancreaticoduodenectomy (P < 0.05). Conclusion  These data suggest that most outcomes of enucleation and resection for small pancreatic and peri-pancreatic NETs are comparable. However, enucleation has better outcomes than pancreaticoduodenectomy for head lesions and the advantage of preserving splenic function for tail lesions. Presented at the 2009 American Hepatopancreaticobiliary Association, March 14, 2009, Miami, FL American College of Surgeons Resident Research Scholarship, NIH Grant T32 CA009614 Physician Scientist Training in Cancer Medicine.     

Pancreatic Biopsy: Why? When? How?

For final diagnosis of pancreatic cancer histologic or cytologic confirmation is needed. Tissue or cell material can be achieved by percutaneous puncture as part of the preoperative workup. During operation core-needle, incisional, and wedge biopsies or fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) can be chosen. Sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy are high for both histologic and cytologic examinations, and false-positive results are exceptional, giving a specificity of 100% in most published series. The complication rate is low, also for knife biopsies in recent reports, provided biopsy of seemingly normal tissue is avoided. Percutaneous puncture is currently restricted to patients found to have advanced disease and who are not candidates for laparotomy. Microscopic confirmation is required in all patients in whom chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or both are planned. However, for attempted radical surgery per se, biopsy is not mandatory if the clinical suspicion of cancer is high and the surgical team has documented low postoperative mortality and morbidity rates.     

Home Non-Invasive Ventilation for COPD: How,Who and When?

Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and chronic respiratory failure have high levels of morbidity and mortality. The clinical efficacy of long term home oxygen therapy has been well documented in this patient group but despite the efficacy of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) during acute decompensated respiratory failure the addition of home NIV has been associated with equivocal results. The physiological efficacy of home NIV to improve gas exchange in chronic stable hypercapnic respiratory failure has been proven in small studies but larger clinical trials failed to translate this into clinical efficacy. Criticisms of early clinical trials include the use of marginally hypercapnic patients and failure to demonstrate effective delivery of home NIV. When considering recent trial data it is important to clearly evaluate the patient phenotype and timing and delivery of NIV. Recent data supports the delivery of home NIV in patients with chronic hypercapnia (PaCO₂ > 7 kPa or 50 mmHg) and the frequent or infrequent exacerbator phenotype. Importantly in the frequent exacerbator the timing of the assessment needs to be in the recovery phase, 2-4 weeks after resolution of acute acidosis, to delineate transient from persistent hypercapnia. In patient with persistent hypercapnia NIV must be titrated to achieve control of sleep disordered breathing with the aim of improving daytime respiratory failure. Furthermore there are observational data to support the use of home positive airway pressure therapy (NIV or continuous positive airway pressure; CPAP) in patients with COPD and obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) both with and without hypercapnia.     

Outcomes of Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: Are Combined Procedures Justified?

Efficacy and outcomes of resection for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNET) are well established; specific data on outcomes for pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), either alone or with combined procedures, are limited. A retrospective review of PDs for pNET (1998–2014) at our institution was conducted. Patients were categorized into standard PD (SPD) alone or combined PD (CPD) defined as patients undergoing concurrent vascular reconstruction or additional organ resection for curative intent. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were performed. PD for pNET was performed for 95 patients. Tumors were functional in 11 patients (9 %). Twenty-six patients (28 %) underwent CPD. The 30/90-day mortality was 1.1/5.3 % respectively and similar between SPD and CPD (p?=?0.61/p?=?0.24). Five-year overall survival after PD for pNET was 85.1/71.9 % and similar between SPD/CPD groups (p?=?0.17). Recurrence-free and overall survival for low-grade tumors was 74.7/93.9 % at 5 years compared to only 14.8/49.7 % for high-grade tumors (p?<?0.001) and not predicted by extent of resection (SPD/CPD, respectively). PD with or without concurrent resection provides an acceptable, perioperative and long-term oncologic, outcome for pNET. CPD is justified treatment modality, particularly for patients with low-grade tumors. The need for combinatorial procedures during PD is not contraindication alone for otherwise resectable patients with pNET.     

Is Surgery Indicated for Patients with Symptomatic Nonfunctioning Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor and Unresectable Hepatic Metastases?

Background Patients with advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor, even in the presence of unresectable hepatic metastases, have survival usually measured in years than in months. Theoretically, we would have reason to resect symptomatic primary pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors from these patients palliatively. However, the effect and feasibility of removing symptomatic primary pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor in patients with unresectable hepatic metastases has never been addressed. Methods In 2000, we instituted a prospective study to resect symptomatic primary tumors and treat unresectable hepatic metastases by lanreotide and hepatic artery embolization in patients with definite tissue proof of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor. Results Thirteen patients were included in this study; seven patients underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy, and six underwent distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy. There were no operative deaths. Eight of thirteen patients had no radiologic evidence of disease progression. The other five patients had disease progression by their 6-month follow-up; they underwent hepatic artery chemoembolization or chemotherapy. One patient died of multiple lung and bone metastases 80 months after operation, and one patient died of continuous progression of liver metastases 18 months after operation. Telephone interviews of 11 patients who survived revealed that 10 reported improved quality of life after resection of symptomatic primary pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor and one patient reported no change. Conclusions We suggest that symptomatic primary pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors should be resected even when unresectable hepatic metastases are found at diagnosis because of the relatively low risk of pancreatic surgery, effective elimination of symptoms caused by primary tumors, and slow progression of hepatic metastases under lanreotide and hepatic artery embolization.     

Is Laparoscopic Resection Adequate in Patients with Neuroendocrine Pancreatic Tumors?

Since the first reports with laparoscopic resection of islet cell tumors in 1996, the experience worldwide is still limited, with only short-term outcomes available. Some have suggested that a malignant tumor is a contraindication to laparoscopic resection. Aim The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and long-term outcome of the laparoscopic approach in patients with functioning, nonfunctioning, or overt malignant pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (PNT). To our knowledge this is the largest single-institution series on this subject to date. Patients and methods A total of 49 consecutive patients (43 women, 6 men; mean age 58 years, range 22–83 years) underwent laparoscopic pancreatic surgery (LPS) from April 1998 to June 2007. Preoperative localization was done by computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, endoscopic ultrasonography, and Octreoscan imaging. Other than 9 PNTs localized in the head of the pancreas, all tumors were located in the left pancreas. Malignancy was diagnosed based on the presence of lymph nodes or liver metastasis. There were 33 patients with functioning tumors: 4 with gastrinomas (mean size 1.2 cm), 1 with a glucagonoma (4 cm), 3 with vipomas (3.2 cm), 2 with carcinoids (5.2 cm), 20 with sporadic insulinomas (1.4 cm), 2 with insulinoma/multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN-1) (4.4 cm), and 1 with a malignant insulinoma (13 cm). Sixteen patients had a nonfunctioning tumor (mean size 5 cm). The following techniques were performed: laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (Lap SPDP), laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (Lap SxDP) and laparoscopic enucleation (Lap En)/laparoscopic excision (Lap E). Lymph node dissection was performed when malignancy was suspected (Strasberg′s technique). Evaluation criteria included operative and postoperative factors, pathologic data including R0 or R1 resection (the pancreatic transection margin and all transection margins on the specimen were inked). Long-term outcomes were analyzed by tumor recurrence and patient survival. Results Four cases (8.2%) were converted to open surgery. Overall, Lap SPDP, Lap SxDP, and Lap En/Lap E were performed in 15 (33.3%), 8 (17.8%), and 22 (48.9%) patients, respectively. The operative time and blood loss was significantly lower in the Lap En group compared with the other laparoscopic techniques. The group of patients with malignant tumors undergoing Lap SxDP had a longer operating time and greater blood loss compared with the other distal pancreatectomy (Lap DP) techniques. Overall, the postoperative complications were significantly higher in the Lap En group (42.8%) than in the Lap DP (Lap SPDP + Lap SxDP) group (22%). These complications were mainly pancreatic fistula: 8.7% after Lap DP and 38% after Lap En. The overall morbidity was significantly higher after Lap SPDP (26.7%) than after Lap SxDP (12.5%) owing to the occurrence of splenic complications in the Lap SPDP group without splenic vessel preservation two of seven (28.5%). The means and ranges of hospital stay after Lap SPDP, Lap SxDP, and Lap En/Lap E were 5.9 (5–14), 7.5 (5–12), and 5.5 (5–7) days, respectively (NS). Pathology examination of the specimen showed R0 resection in all patients with malignant PNT. The mean time to resumption of previous activities for patients undergoing Lap DP or Lap En was 3 weeks. There were no postoperative (30 days) or hospital deaths. Conclusions This series demonstrates that LPS is feasible and safe in benign-appearing and malignant neuroendocrine pancreatic tumors (NEPTs). The benefits of minimally invasive surgery were manifest in the short hospital stay and acceptable pancreas-related complications in high-risk patients. LPS can achieve negative tangential margins in a high percentage of patients with malignant tumors. Although surgical cure is rare in malignant NEPTs, significant long-term palliation can be achieved in a large proportion of patients with an aggressive surgical approach.     

Is the New Classification of Neuroendocrine Pancreatic Tumors of Clinical Help?

A new concept of classifying neuroendocrine pancreatic tumors based on clinicopathologic patterns was summarized recently. To evaluate the clinical reliability and prognostic specificity of this classification system, 100 neuroendocrine pancreatic tumors were retrospectively categorized as “benign,”“uncertain,” and “malignant” based on tumor risk factors (size, local invasion and angioinvasion, cell atypia, metastases) and were followed for disease recurrence and progression. Altogether, 71 functioning tumors (insulinoma, gastrinoma, glucagonoma, enterochromaffin-like (ECL)oma, somatostatinoma) and 29 nonfunctioning neuroendocrine pancreatic tumors (NETs) were studied. NETs had an increased risk of malignancy (p < 0.05). Tumor size, gross invasion, and metastases correlated significantly with tumor behavior and allowed us to distinguish between “benign” and “malignant” tumors. About 89% of the tumors ≤ 20 mm were “benign,” whereas 71% > 20 mm were “malignant” (p < 0.05). In patients with “benign” and “uncertain” neuroendocrine pancreatic tumors, neither recurrence nor progression of disease was seen. About 41% of the patients with “malignant” tumors died of the disease. The 5-year estimated cumulative survival of those with “benign” and “uncertain” tumors was 100% and 52 ± 10% for those with “malignant” tumors (p < 0.05). Histomorphologic details classifying the behavior of an “uncertain” tumor are known only after initial treatment and definitive histopathologic investigation. Thus this information is of limited clinical help for treatment strategies.     

Late Complications Following Elective Primary Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: Who,When, and How?

Background

Improved pain management and early mobilization protocols have increased interest in the feasibility of short stay (<24 hours) or outpatient total hip (THA) and total knee (TKA) arthroplasty. However, concerns exist regarding patient safety and readmissions. The purposes of this study were to determine the incidence of in-hospital complications following THA/TKA, to create a model to identify comorbidities associated with the risk of developing major complications >24 hours postoperatively, and to validate this model against another consecutive series of patients.

Acute Symptomatic Seizures and Provoked Seizures: to Treat or Not to Treat?

Purpose of review

Acute symptomatic and provoked seizures by definition occur in close proximity to an event and are considered to be situational. The treatment implications and likelihood of recurrence of acute symptomatic and provoked seizures differ from unprovoked seizures. In this article, the authors review the literature on acute symptomatic and provoked seizures with regard to therapeutic approach and risk of recurrence.

Recent findings

In the acute period, patients who suffer from acute symptomatic and provoked seizures have higher rates of morbidity and mortality. Patients with acute symptomatic seizures in the setting of certain conditions including subdural hemorrhage, traumatic penetrating injuries, cortical strokes, neurocysticercosis, venous sinus thrombosis, and viral encephalitis have a higher rate of seizure recurrence although the rate of recurrence of seizures is less than that of patients with unprovoked seizures.

Summary

In patients with acute symptomatic and provoked seizures, short-term treatment with anti-seizure medications is appropriate given the higher morbidity and mortality in the acute phase of illness. In patients with acute symptomatic seizures with persistent epileptiform activity on EEG and structural changes on imaging, longer-term treatment (i.e., a few months as opposed to 1 week) with anti-seizure medications can be considered due to high risk of seizure recurrence. If a patient subsequently has an unprovoked seizure, there is yet a higher risk of recurrence of seizures and likelihood of the development of epilepsy. In these patients, long-term seizure treatment can be considered, keeping in mind that although anti-seizure treatment may reduce risk of seizure recurrence in the short-term, it does not appear to influence long-term seizure remission rates.

     

Gallstones and Bariatric Surgery: To Treat or Not to Treat?

Background

Obesity and rapid weight loss after bariatric surgery are risk factors for gallstone disease.

Objectives

The present study sought to evaluate the feasibility of selective concomitant cholecystectomy only in patients with symptomatic disease and study risk factors for the development of symptomatic gallstones after bariatric surgery.

Methods

Between January 2010 and December 2012, 734 consecutive patients presenting to our institution underwent bariatric surgery. From these, 81 patients were excluded due to prior or concurrent cholecystectomy. The remaining 653 patients with in situ gallbladder were followed for 12 months and were clinically screened for symptomatic or complicated cholelithiasis. Clinical and demographic characteristics were compared at baseline and 12 months after surgery.

Results

Of the 653 patients with in situ gallbladder, only 24 (3.3 %) developed symptomatic gallstones and only nine presented complicated disease. None of the patients with asymptomatic disease at the time of surgery progressed to symptomatic or complicated disease. Patients who developed symptomatic disease were not significantly different, although there was a trend toward longer obesity evolution, lower insulin levels, and lower hepatic enzymes level. A multivariate regression analysis revealed that patients with gastric sleeve were more likely to develop symptomatic gallstones.

Conclusions

Although further studies are required, the management of gallstones in morbidly obese patients should not be different from normal-weight patients. Therefore, performing a laparoscopic cholecystectomy only in symptomatic patients is an effective approach and asymptomatic gallstones should not be treated at the time of bariatric surgery.

     

Canceled Total Joint Arthroplasty: Who,What, When,and Why?

BackgroundUnexpected cancelation of scheduled total joint arthroplasty (TJA) procedures creates patient distress and disruption for the clinical team. The purpose of this study is to identify the etiology and fate of cancelations for scheduled TJAs.MethodsA consecutive series of 11,670 patients at a single institution from 2013 to 2017 was reviewed in March 2020. All patients who were scheduled for a primary total hip arthroplasty or total knee arthroplasty and subsequently canceled were identified. The etiology of cancelation and time to rescheduling were recorded.ResultsOf the 505 (4.3%) canceled patients, 209 (42%) were due to medical reasons. Three hundred ninety-one patients (77%) eventually underwent their procedure at a mean delay of 165 days (19-1908). Only 53 (25%) patients canceled for a medical reason underwent further diagnostic or therapeutic intervention for their medical condition. When compared to patient-driven cancelations, those canceled for medical reasons had a higher mean Charlson Comorbidity Index (0.82 vs 0.39, P < .001), were canceled closer to the scheduled surgery date (8.55 vs 18.1 days, P < .001), and were more likely to eventually undergo surgery (86% vs 73%, P = .004).ConclusionCanceled elective TJA surgeries are most often due to a medical concern, however only a minority of these patients undergo intervention for that medical condition. To minimize the risk of cancelation, healthcare providers may consider early referral of medically complex patients to the patient’s primary care physician. After cancelation, patients should have a clearly defined path to return to the operative schedule to prevent further delays.