What to expect when you're expecting a hepatopancreatobiliary surgeon: self-reported experiences of HPB surgeons from different training pathways

BackgroundHepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) surgery fellowship training has multiple paths. Prospective trainees and employers must understand the differences between training pathways. This study examines self-reported fellowship experiences and current scope of practice across three pathways.MethodsAn online survey was disseminated to 654 surgeons. These included active Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (AHPBA) members and recent graduates of HPB, transplant–HPB and HPB–heavy surgical oncology fellowships.ResultsA total of 416 (64%) surgeons responded. Most respondents were male (89%) and most were practising in an academic setting (83%). 290 (70%) respondents underwent formal fellowship training. Although fellowship experiences varied, current practice was largely similar. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and ultrasound were the most commonly identified areas of training deficiencies and were, respectively, cited as such by 47% and 34% of HPB-, 49% and 50% of transplant-, and 52% and 25% of surgical oncology-trained respondents. Non-HPB cases performed in current practice included gastrointestinal (GI) and general surgery cases (56% and 49%, respectively) for HPB-trained respondents, transplant and general surgery cases (87% and 21%, respectively) for transplant-trained respondents, and GI surgery and non-HPB surgical oncology cases (70% and 28%, respectively) for surgical oncology-trained respondents.ConclusionsFellowship training in HPB surgery varies by training pathway. Training in MIS and ultrasound is deficient in each pathway. The ultimate scope of non-transplant HPB practice appears similar across training pathways. Thus, training pathway choice is best guided by the training experience desired and non-HPB components of anticipated practice.     

Preoperative Chemotherapy for Colorectal Liver Metastases: Impact on Hepatic Histology and Postoperative Outcome

Some investigators have suggested that preoperative chemotherapy for hepatic colorectal metastases may cause hepatic injury and increase perioperative morbidity and mortality. The objective of the current study was to examine whether treatment with preoperative chemotherapy was associated with hepatic injury of the nontumorous liver and whether such injury, if present, was associated with increased morbidity or mortality after hepatic resection. Two-hundred and twelve eligible patients who underwent hepatic resection for colorectal liver metastases between January 1999 and December 2005 were identified. Data on demographics, clinicopathologic characteristics, and preoperative chemotherapy details were collected and analyzed. The majority of patients received preoperative chemotherapy (n = 153; 72.2%). Chemotherapy consisted of fluoropyrimidine-based regimens: 5-FU monotherapy, 31.6%; irinotecan, 25.9%; and oxaliplatin, 14.6%. Among those patients who received chemotherapy, the type of chemotherapy regimen predicted distinct patterns of liver injury. Oxaliplatin was associated with increased likelihood of grade 3 sinusoidal dilatation (p = 0.017). Steatosis >30% was associated with irinotecan (27.3%) compared with no chemotherapy, 5-FU monotherapy, and oxaliplatin (all p < 0.05). Irinotecan also was associated with steatohepatitis, as two of the three patients with steatohepatitis had received irinotecan preoperatively. Overall, the perioperative complication rate was similar between the no-chemotherapy group (30.5%) and the chemotherapy group (35.3%) (p = 0.79). Preoperative chemotherapy was also not associated with 60-day mortality. In patients with hepatic colorectal metastases, preoperative chemotherapy is associated with hepatic injury in about 20 to 30% of patients. Furthermore, the type of hepatic injury after preoperative chemotherapy was regimen-specific. Presented at the American Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association 2006 Annual Meeting, March 11, Miami, Florida.     

Echogenic Appearance of Colorectal Liver Metastases on Intraoperative Ultrasonography is Associated with Survival After Hepatic Resection

Survival after resection of colorectal liver metastases has traditionally been associated with clinicopathologic factors. We sought to investigate whether echogenicity of colorectal liver metastasis as assessed by intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) was a prognostic factor after hepatic resection. Prospective data on tumor IOUS appearance were collected in 84 patients who underwent hepatic resection for colorectal liver metastasis. Images were digitally recorded, blindly reviewed, and scored for echogenicity (hypo-, iso-, or hyperechoic). The median tumor number was 1 and the median tumor size was 5.0 cm. At the time of surgery, the IOUS appearance of the colorectal liver metastases were hypoechoic in 35 (41.7%) patients, isoechoic in 37 (44.0%) patients, and hyperechoic in 12 (14.3%) patients. Traditional clinicopathologic prognostic factors were similarly distributed among the three echogenicity groups (all p > 0.05). Patients with a hypoechoic lesion had a significantly shorter median survival (30.2 months) compared with patients who had either an isoechoic (53.2 months) or hyperechoic (42.3 months) lesion (p = 0.005). The 5-year survival after hepatic resection of colorectal liver metastasis was also associated with the echogenic appearance of the lesion (hypoechoic 14.4 vs isoechoic 37.4 vs hyperechoic 46.2%) (p < 0.05). Intraoperative ultrasound echogenicity should be considered a prognostic factor after hepatic resection of metastatic colorectal cancer. This study was presented at the 47th annual meeting of The Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, Los Angeles, CA, USA, 22 May 2006.     

Effect of N-alpha-methyl histamine on ulcer healing in rats

Inflammation Research -     

Incidence of Finding Residual Disease for Incidental Gallbladder Carcinoma: Implications for Re-resection

Re-resection for gallbladder carcinoma incidentally discovered after cholecystectomy is routinely advocated. However, the incidence of finding additional disease at the time of re-resection remains poorly defined. Between 1984 and 2006, 115 patients underwent re-resection at six major hepatobiliary centers for gallbladder carcinoma incidentally discovered during cholecystectomy. Data on clinicopathologic factors, operative details, TNM tumor stage, and outcome were collected and analyzed. Data on the incidence and location of residual/additional carcinoma discovered at the time of re-resection were also recorded. On pathologic analysis, T stage was T1 7.8%, T2 67.0%, and T3 25.2%. The median time from cholecystectomy to re-resection was 52 days. At the time of re-resection, hepatic surgery most often consisted of formal segmentectomy (64.9%). Patients underwent lymphadenectomy (LND) (50.5%) or LND + common bile duct resection (43.3%). The median number of lymph nodes harvested was 3 and did not differ between LND alone (n = 3) vs LND + common duct resection (n = 3) (P = 0.35). Pathology from the re-resection specimen noted residual/additional disease in 46.4% of patients. Of those patients staged as T1, T2, or T3, 0, 10.4, and 36.4%, respectively, had residual disease within the liver (P = 0.01). T stage was also associated with the risk of metastasis to locoregional lymph nodes (lymph node metastasis: T1 12.5%; T2 31.3%, T3 45.5%; P = 0.04). Cystic duct margin status predicted residual disease in the common bile duct (negative cystic duct, 4.3% vs positive cystic duct, 42.1%) (P = 0.01). Aggressive re-resection for incidental gallbladder carcinoma is warranted as the majority of patients have residual disease. Although common duct resection does not yield a greater lymph node count, it should be performed at the time of re-resection for patients with positive cystic duct margins because over one-third will have residual disease in the common bile duct. Presented at the 48th Annual Meeting of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract at Digestive Week 2007, Plenary Session, Washington, DC, March 23, 2007.