Surveillance after surgery for pancreatic cancer: a global scoping review of guidelines and a nordic Survey of contemporary practice.

OBJECTIVES: Most patients with pancreatic cancer who have undergone surgical resection eventually develop disease recurrence. |This study aimed to investigate whether there is evidence to support routine surveillance after pancreatic cancer surgery, with a secondary aim of analyzing the implementation of surveillance strategies in the Nordic countries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A scoping review was conducted to identify clinical practice guidelines globally and research studies relating to surveillance after pancreatic cancer resection. This was followed by a survey among 20 pancreatic units from four Nordic countries to assess their current practice of follow-up for operated patients. RESULTS: Altogether 16 clinical practice guidelines and 17 research studies were included. The guidelines provided inconsistent recommendations regarding postoperative surveillance of pancreatic cancer. The clinical research data were mainly based on retrospective cohort studies with low level of evidence and lead-time bias was not addressed. Active surveillance was recommended in Sweden and Denmark, but not in Norway beyond the post-operative/adjuvant period. Finland had no national recommendations for surveillance. The Nordic survey revealed a wide variation in reported practice among the different units. About 75% (15 of 20 units) performed routine postoperative surveillance. Routine CA 19-9 testing was used by 80% and routine CT by 67% as part of surveillance. About 73% of centers continued follow-up until 5 years postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Evidence for routine long-term (i.e. 5 years) surveillance after pancreatic cancer surgery remains limited. Most pancreatic units in the Nordic countries conduct regular follow-up, but protocols vary.

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus antibiotic therapy for acute cholecystitis in patients over 75 years: Randomized clinical trial and retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The prevalence of acute cholecystitis among elderly patients is increasing. The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) to antibiotics in elderly patients with acute cholecystitis. METHODS: A randomized multicenter clinical trial including patients over 75 years with acute calculous cholecystitis was conducted in four hospitals in Finland between January 2017 and December 2019. Patients were randomized to undergo LC or antibiotic therapy. Due to patient enrollment challenges, the trial was prematurely terminated in December 2019. To assess all eligible patients, we performed a retrospective cohort study including all patients over 75 years with acute cholecystitis during the study period. The primary outcome was morbidity. Predefined secondary outcomes included mortality, readmission rate, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Among 42 randomized patients (LC n = 24, antibiotics n = 18, mean age 82 years, 43% women), the complication rate was 17% (n = 4/24) after cholecystectomy and 33% (n = 6/18, 5/6 patients underwent cholecystectomy due to antibiotic treatment failure) after antibiotics (p = 0.209). In the retrospective cohort (n = 630, mean age 83 years, 49% women), 37% (236/630) of the patients were treated with cholecystectomy and 63% (394/630) with antibiotics. Readmissions were less common after surgical treatment compared with antibiotics in both randomized and retrospective cohort patients (8% vs 44%, p < 0.001% and 11 vs 32%, p < 0.001, respectively). There was no 30-day mortality within the randomized trial. In the retrospective patient cohort, overall mortality was 6% (35/630). CONCLUSIONS: LC may be superior to antibiotic therapy for acute cholecystitis in the selected group of elderly patients with acute cholecystitis.

Wait-and-see strategy is justified after ERCP and endoscopic sphincterotomy in elderly patients with common biliary duct stones.

BACKGROUND: Older patients with simultaneous main bile duct and gallbladder stones, especially those with high-surgical risks, create a common clinical dilemma. After successful endoscopic removal of main bile duct stones, should these patients undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy to reduce risk of recurrent biliary events? In this population-based cohort study, we report long-term outcomes of a wait-and-see strategy after successful endoscopic extraction of main bile duct stones. METHODS: Consecutive patients 75 years or older undergoing endoscopic stone extraction without subsequent cholecystectomy in two tertiary academic centers between January 2010 and December 2018 were included. Primary outcome measure was recurrence of biliary events. Secondary outcome measures were operation-related morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 450 patients (median age, 85 years; 61% female) were included, with a median follow-up time of 36 months (0-120 months). Recurrent biliary events occurred in 51 patients (11%), with a median time from index hospital admission to recurrence of 307 days (12-1993 days). The most common biliary event was acute cholecystitis (7.1%). Twelve patients had cholangitis (2.7%) and two biliary pancreatitis (0.4%). Only one patient (0.4%) underwent surgery due to later gallstone-related symptoms. Eighteen patients (4.0%) required endoscopic intervention and 16 (3.5%) underwent surgery. There were no operation-associated deaths or morbidity among those undergoing later surgical or endoscopic interventions. CONCLUSION: In elderly patients, it is relatively safe to leave gallbladder in situ after successful sphincterotomy and endoscopic common bile duct stone removal. In elderly and frail patients, a wait-and-see strategy without routine cholecystectomy rarely leads to clinically significant consequences. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

A randomized clinical trial comparing early patient-reported pain after open anterior mesh repair versus totally extraperitoneal repair of inguinal hernia.

BACKGROUND: This was a prospective, multicentre, non-blinded, randomized clinical trial involving two parallel groups of patients. METHODS: Adult patients with symptomatic unilateral primary inguinal hernia were included in this study. Patients were enrolled and treated in five Finnish hospitals. Eligible patients were randomized by use of a computer-based program to receiving either open anterior repair (modified Lichtenstein) with glue mesh fixation or totally extraperitoneal (TEP) repair. The primary aims were to compare 30-day patient-reported pain scores and return to work after surgery between the two groups. RESULTS: A total of 202 patients were randomized: 98 patients to TEP repair and 104 patients to open repair. All randomized patients received their allocated treatment. A total of 86 patients (88 per cent) in the TEP group and 94 patients (90 per cent) in the Lichtenstein group completed the 30-day follow-up. Patients experienced less early pain (P < 0.001) and used less analgesics after TEP repair, compared to those who had modified Lichtenstein repair. Two patients in the TEP group and five in the Lichtenstein group developed superficial wound infection (P = 0⋅446). Only one reoperation was performed in the Lichtenstein group due to haematoma. CONCLUSION: TEP inguinal hernia repair is associated with less early postoperative pain compared to the open glue mesh fixation technique. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03566433 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

In this randomized clinical trial, we compared two different operating techniques for inguinal hernia repair. Patients were randomized to receiving either open or laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. After the operation, patient-reported pain and functional outcomes were compared. Patients experienced less pain after laparoscopic repair.

Emergency Abdominal Operations in the Elderly: A Multivariate Regression Analysis of 430 Consecutive Patients with Acute Abdomen.

BACKGROUND: This study is intended to ascertain if outcome of acute abdominal surgery among elderly patients with acute abdominal pain have improved. METHODS: Altogether 456 patients aged >65 years underwent emergency abdominal surgery between the years 2007 and 2009 in our hospital. After excluding emergency reoperations of elective surgery, a total of 430 consecutive patients were included in this retrospective audit. The key factors under analysis in this study were the occurrence of major complications and death from any cause within 30 days after the operation. In addition, we compared our results to our previously published data some 20 years ago. RESULTS: The most common diagnoses were cholecystitis (n = 139, 32.3 %, incidence of 125 per 100,000 elderly persons), incarcerated hernia (n = 60, 13.9 %, 54/100,000), malignancy related (n = 50, 11.6 %, 45/100,000), or acute appendicitis (n = 46, 10.7 %, 41/100,000). The majority of operations (80.7 %) were performed using open technique. Of all 112 laparoscopic procedures, 25.9 % were converted to open surgery. Reoperations were rare and postoperative surgical complications were not associated with statistically significant increase in mortality, even if reoperation was needed. The 30-day mortality and morbidity rates were 14.2 and 31.9 %, respectively. Logistic regression analysis showed that patient's age (p = 0.014), atrial fibrillation (p = 0.017), low body mass index (p = 0.001), open surgery (p = 0.029), ASA grade III or more (p < 0.001), and previous history of malignancies (p = 0.010) were likely to increase mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Despite modern diagnostics and improved surgical techniques, the results of emergency abdominal surgery still have relatively high morbidity and mortality as reported in earlier studies.