Ampullary tumors: French Intergroup Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatments and follow-up (TNCD, SNFGE, FFCD, UNICANCER, GERCOR, SFCD, SFED, ACHBT, AFC, SFRO, RENAPE, SNFCP, AFEF, SFP, SFR).

BACKGROUND: Management of ampullary tumors (AT) is challenging because of a low level of scientific evidence. This document is a summary of the French intergroup guidelines regarding the management of AT, either adenoma (AA) or carcinoma (AC), published in July 2023, available on the website of the French Society of Gastroenterology (SNFGE) (www.tncd.org). METHODS: A collaborative work was conducted under the auspices of French medical, endoscopic, oncological and surgical societies involved in the management of AT. Recommendations are based on recent literature review and expert opinions and graded in three categories (A, B, C), according to quality of evidence. RESULTS: Accurate diagnosis of AT requires at least duodenoscopy and EUS. All patients should be discussed in multidisciplinary tumor board before treatment. Surveillance may only be proposed for small AA in familial adenomatous polyposis. For AA, endoscopic papillectomy is the preferred option only if R0 resection can be achieved. When not possible, surgical papillectomy should be considered. For AC beyond pT1a N0, pancreaticoduodenectomy is the procedure of choice. Adjuvant monochemotherapy (gemcitabine, 5FU) may be proposed. For aggressive tumors (pT3/T4, pN+, R1, poorly differentiated AC, pancreatobiliary differentiation) with high risk of recurrence, 6 months polychemotherapy (CAPOX/FOLFOX for the intestinal subtype and mFOLFIRINOX for the pancreatobiliary or the mixed subtype) may be a valid alternative. Clinical and radiological follow up is recommended for 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines help to homogenize and highlight unmet needs in the management of AA and AC. Each individual case should be discussed by a multidisciplinary team.

Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy for resectable pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: A propensity score matched multicentric comparative French study.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery has gained momentum for left pancreatic resections. However, debate remains about whether it has any advantage over open surgery for distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. METHODS: This retrospective review examined pancreatectomies performed for resectable pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors at 21 centers in France between January 2014 and December 2018. Short and long-term outcomes were compared before and after propensity score matching based on tumor size, sex, age, body mass index, center, and method of pancreatic transection. RESULTS: During the period study, 274 patients underwent left pancreatic resection for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors [109 underwent distal splenopancreatectomy, and 165 underwent spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy [(splenic vessel preservation (n = 97; 58.7%)/splenic vessel resection (n = 68; 41.3%)]. Before propensity score matching, minimally invasive surgery was associated with a lower rate of major morbidity (P = .004), lower rate of postoperative delayed gastric emptying (P = .04), and higher rate of "textbook" outcomes (P = .04). After propensity score matching, there were 2 groups of 54 patients (n = 30 distal splenopancreatectomy; n = 78 spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy). Minimally invasive surgery was associated with less blood loss (P = .05), decreased rate of major morbidity (6% vs. 24%; P = .02), less delayed gastric emptying (P = .05) despite similar rates of postoperative fistula, hemorrhage, and reoperation (P > .05). The 5-year overall survival (79% vs. 75%; P = .74) and recurrence-free survival (10% vs 17%; P = .39) were similar. CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive surgery for left pancreatic resection can be safely proposed for patients with resectable left pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Minimally invasive surgery decreases the rate of major complications while providing comparable long-term oncologic outcomes.

The impact of cirrhosis on short and long postoperative outcomes after distal pancreatectomy.

BACKGROUND: The impact of cirrhosis on the postoperative outcomes of distal pancreatectomy is yet to be reported. We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of distal pancreatectomy in patients with cirrhosis. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, multicentric study patients with cirrhosis who underwent planned distal pancreatectomy between 2008 and 2020 in French high volume centers. Patients with cirrhosis were matched 1:4 for demographic, surgical, and histologic criteria with patients without cirrhosis. The primary endpoint was severe morbidity (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III). The secondary endpoints were postoperative complications, specifically related to cirrhosis and pancreatic surgery, and survival for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. RESULTS: Overall, 32 patients with cirrhosis were matched with 128 patients without cirrhosis. Most patients (93.5%) had Child-Pugh A cirrhosis. The severe morbidity rate after distal pancreatectomy was higher in patients with cirrhosis than in those without cirrhosis (28.13% vs 25.75%, P = .11. The operative time was significantly longer in the cirrhotic group compared with controls (P = .01). However, patients with and without cirrhosis had comparable blood loss and conversion rates. Postoperatively, the two groups had similar rates of pancreatic fistula, hemorrhage, reoperation, postoperative mortality, and survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years. CONCLUSION: The current study suggests that distal pancreatectomy in high-volume centers is feasible for patients with compensated cirrhosis.

Prognostic impact of positive microscopic margins (R1 resection) in patients with GIST (gastrointestinal stromal tumours): Results of a multicenter European study.

BACKGROUND: Although several prognostic factors in GIST have been well studied such as tumour size, mitotic rate, or localization, the influence of microscopic margins or R1 resection remains controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of R1 resection on the prognosis of GIST in a large multicentre retrospective series of patients. METHODS: From 2001 to 2013, 1413 patients who underwent surgery for any site of GIST were identified from 61 European centers. 1098 patients were included, excluding synchronous metastases, concurrent malignancies, R2 resection or GIST recurrence. Tumour rupture (TR) was reclassified according to the Oslo sarcoma classification. Cox proportional hazards ratio and Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were used to analyse 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS). RESULTS: Of 1098 patients, 38 (3%) underwent R1 resection with a risk of TR of 11%. The 5-year RFS was 89.6% with a median follow-up of 81 months [range: 31.2-152 months]. On univariate analysis, lower RFS was significantly associated with R1 resection [HR = 2.13; p = 0.04], high risk score according to the modified NIH classification, administration of adjuvant therapy [HR = 2.24; p < 0.001] and intraoperative complications [HR = 2.82; p < 0.001]. Only intraoperative complications [HR = 1.79; p = 0.02] and high risk according to the modified NIH classification including the updated definition of TR [HR = 3.43; p = 0.04] remained significant on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: This study shows that positive microscopic margins are not an independent predictive factor for RFS in GIST when taking into account the up-dated classification of TR. R1 resection may be considered a reasonable alternative to avoid major functional sequelae and should not lead to reoperation.

Somatostatin vs. Octreotide for Prevention of Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula The PREFIPS Randomized Clinical Trial A FRENCH 007 - ACHBT Study.

OBJECTIVE: Pharmacological prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreatectomy is open to debate. The present study compares clinically significant POPF rates in patients randomized between somatostatin versus octreotide as prophylactic treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Multicentric randomized controlled open study in patient's candidate for pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) or distal pancreatectomy (DP) comparing somatostatin continuous intravenous infusion for 7 days versus octreotid 100 µg, every 8 hours subcutaneous injection for 7 days, stratified by procedure (PD vs. DP) and size of the main pancreatic duct (>4 mm) on grade B/C POPF rates at 90 days based on an intention-to-treat analysis. RESULTS: Of 763 eligible patients, 651 were randomized: 327 in the octreotide arm and 324 in the somatostatin arm, with comparable the stratification criteria - type of surgery and main pancreatic duct dilatation. Most patients had PD (n=480; 73.8%), on soft/normal pancreas (n=367; 63.2%) with a non-dilated main pancreatic duct (n=472; 72.5%), most often for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (n=311; 47.8%). Almost all patients had abdominal drainage (n=621; 96.1%) and 121 (19.5%) left the hospital with the drain in place (median length of stay=16 d). A total of 153 patients (23.5%) developed a grade B/C POPF with no difference between both groups: 24.1%: somatostatin arm and 22.9%: octreotide arm (Chi-2 test, P=0.73, ITT analysis). Absence of statistically significant difference persisted after adjustment for stratification variables and in per-protocol analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous intravenous somatostatin is not statistically different from subcutaneous octreotide in the prevention of grade B/C POPF after pancreatectomy.

Comparing indications, complexity and outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection between centers with and without a liver transplant program: a French nationwide study.

BACKGROUND: There are no data to evaluate the difference in populations and impact of centers with liver transplant programs in performing laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). METHODS: This was a multicenter study including patients undergoing LLR for benign and malignant tumors at 27 French centers from 1996 to 2018. The main outcomes were postoperative severe morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 3154 patients were included, and 14 centers were classified as transplant centers (N = 2167 patients, 68.7 %). The transplant centers performed more difficult LLRs and more resections for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients who more frequently had cirrhosis. A higher rate of performing the Pringle maneuver, a lower rate of blood loss and a higher rate of open conversion (all p < 0.05) were observed in the transplant centers. There was no association between the presence of a liver transplant program and either postoperative severe morbidity (<10 % in each group; p = 0.228) or mortality (1 % in each group; p = 0.915). CONCLUSIONS: Most HCCs, difficult LLRs, and cirrhotic patients are treated in transplant centers. We show that all centers can achieve comparable safety and quality of care in LLR independent of the presence of a liver transplant program.

Combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma compared to hepatocellular carcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: Different survival, similar recurrence: Report of a large study on repurposed databases with propensity score matching.

BACKGROUND: Combined hepatocholangiocarcinoma is a rare cancer with a grim prognosis composed of both hepatocellular carcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma morphologic patterns in the same tumor. The aim of this multicenter, international cohort study was to compare the oncologic outcomes after surgery of combined hepatocholangiocarcinoma to hepatocellular carcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. METHODS: Patients treated by surgery for combined hepatocholangiocarcinoma, hepatocellular carcinoma, and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma from 2000 to 2021 from multicenter international databases were analyzed retrospectively. Patients with combined hepatocholangiocarcinoma (cases) were compared with 2 control groups of hepatocellular carcinoma or intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, sequentially matched using a propensity score based on 8 preoperative characteristics. Overall and disease-free survival were compared, and predictors of mortality and recurrence were analyzed with Cox regression after propensity score matching. RESULTS: During the study period, 3,196 patients were included. Propensity score adjustment and 2 sequential matching processes produced a new cohort (n = 244) comprising 3 balanced groups was obtained (combined hepatocholangiocarcinoma = 56, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma = 66, and hepatocellular carcinoma = 122). Kaplan-Meier overall survival estimations at 1, 3, and 5 years were 67%, 45%, and 28% for combined hepatocholangiocarcinoma, 92%, 75%, and 55% for hepatocellular carcinoma, and 86%, 53%, and 42% for the intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma group, respectively (P = .0014). Estimations of disease-free survival at 1, 3, and 5 years were 51%, 25%, and 17% for combined hepatocholangiocarcinoma, 63%, 35%, and 26% for the hepatocellular carcinoma group, and 51%, 31%, and 28% for the intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma group, respectively (P = .19). Predictors of mortality were combined hepatocholangiocarcinoma subtype, metabolic syndrome, preoperative tumor markers alpha-fetoprotein and carbohydrate antigen 19-9, and satellite nodules, and recurrence was associated with satellite nodules rather than cancer subtype. CONCLUSION: Despite data limitations, overall survival among patients with combined hepatocholangiocarcinoma was worse than both groups and closer intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, whereas disease-free survival was similar among the 3 groups. Future research on immunophenotypic profiling may hold more promise than traditional nonmodifiable clinical characteristics (as found in this study) in predicting recurrence or response to salvage treatments.

Is systematic histological examination of the cholecystectomy specimen always necessary?

INTRODUCTION: The histological examination (HE) of all cholecystectomy specimens removed for cholelithiasis is a widespread practice to rule out unrecognized gallbladder cancer. (GBC). But this dogmatic practice has been called into question by recent published data. The aim of this literature review was to answer two questions: (1) can HE be omitted in specific cases; (2) under what conditions is a selective strategy indicated? METHODS: A review of the literature was carried out that included selected multicenter studies, registry studies, or meta-analyses. A reliable technique for the surgeon's macroscopic examination of the specimen would allow the selection of dubious cases for HE. The cost-effectiveness of selective HE was discussed. The PICO methodology (population, intervention, comparator, outcome) was used in the selection of articles that compared routine and selective histological examination. RESULTS: If cases from countries with a high prevalence of gallbladder cancer are excluded and in the absence of high-risk situations (advanced age, female gender, calcified or porcelain gallbladder, acute cholecystitis, polyps, abnormalities noted intra-operatively), the macroscopic examination of the gallbladder in the operating room has a reliability approaching 100% in the majority of published studies. This would make it possible to omit systematic HE without compromising the diagnosis and prognosis of patients with unsuspected GBC and with a very favorable cost-effectiveness ratio. CONCLUSION: Through a selection of patients at very low risk of incidentally-discovered cancer and a routine macroscopic examination of the opened gallbladder, the strategy of selective HE could prove useful in both clinical and economic terms.

Is early CT in cases of elevated postoperative CRP the best option for the diagnosis of colorectal anastomotic leakage?

PURPOSE: After colorectal surgery (CRS), the early detection and treatment of anastomotic leakage (AL) is critical. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of early contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) (postoperative day [POD] 2-3) after elective colorectal surgery for the diagnosis of AL for patients with elevated CRP levels at POD 2-3. METHOD: From 2017 to 2022, all patients who underwent elective CRS with an anastomosis and CRP > 150 mg/ml on POD 2-3 underwent enhanced CT during the 24 h following the CRP evaluation and were included in this retrospective, single-center study. The primary endpoint was the diagnostic value of the early CT scan for the detection of AL. The secondary endpoints were the diagnostic value of the early CT scan for the detection of grade C AL according to the type of resection and anastomosis and the quality of the opacification. RESULTS: A total of 661 patients underwent elective CRS with anastomosis with an overall AL rate of 7.4%. Among the 661 patients, 141 were finally included in the study. The accuracy of early CT for the diagnosis of AL was 83.7%. For grade C AL, the accuracy was 81.6%. Among patients who had an ileocolic anastomosis, the accuracy was 88.2%, among those who had colorectal or ileorectal anastomosis, the accuracy was 83.0%, and among those who had a coloanal, the accuracy was 66.7%. In cases of good opacification by CT, the accuracy was 84.0%. CONCLUSION: Early CT does not show perfect accuracy for an early diagnosis of AL.

Right portal vein ligation is still relevant for left hemi-liver hypertrophy: results of a comparative study using a propensity score between right portal vein ligation and embolization.

BACKGROUND: In two-stage hepatectomy for bilobar liver metastases from colorectal cancer, future liver remnant (FLR) growth can be achieved using several techniques, such as right portal vein ligation (RPVL) or right portal vein embolization (RPVE). A few heterogeneous studies have compared these two techniques with contradictory results concerning FLR growth. The objective of this study was to compare FLR hypertrophy of the left hemi-liver after RPVL and RPVE. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective comparative study using a propensity score of patients who underwent RPVL or RPVE prior to major hepatectomy between January 2010 and December 2020. The endpoints were FLR growth (%) after weighting using the propensity score, which included FLR prior to surgery and the number of chemotherapy cycles. Secondary endpoints were the percentage of patients undergoing simultaneous procedures, the morbidity and mortality, the recourse to other liver hypertrophy procedures, and the number of invasive procedures for the entire oncologic program in intention-to-treat analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-four consecutive patients were retrospectively included and analyzed, 18 in the RPVL group, and 36 in the RPVE group. The demographic characteristics were similar between the groups. After weighting, there was no significant difference between the RPVL and RPVE groups for FLR growth (%), respectively 32.5% [19.3-56.0%] and 34.5% [20.5-47.3%] (p = 0.221). There was no significant difference regarding the secondary outcomes except for the lower number of invasive procedures in RPVL group (median of 2 [2.0, 3.0] in RPVL group and 3 [3.0, 3.0] in RPVE group, p = 0.001)). CONCLUSION: RPVL and RPVE are both effective to provide required left hemi-liver hypertrophy before right hepatectomy. RPVL should be considered for the simultaneous treatment of liver metastases and the primary tumor.

Risk factors for ischemia/necrosis of the colonic stump after proctectomy and delayed coloanal anastomosis.

INTRODUCTION: Delayed coloanal anastomosis (DCAA) is a two-stage procedure. DCAA has been increasingly reused in recent years in the management of rectal cancer. Such increased use of DCAA has highlighted the complications associated with this procedure. We aimed to evaluate the risk and risk factors of ischemia/necrosis of the colonic stump between the two stages of DCAA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients who underwent a proctectomy with a DCAA were included in this retrospective single-centre study from November 2012 to June 2022. Two groups of patients were defined: patients with a well vascularized colonic stump (well vascularized group) and those who experienced ischemia or necrosis of the colonic stump (ischemic group). The primary endpoint was the rate of ischemia or necrosis of the colonic stump and an evaluation of the associated risk factors. RESULTS: During the study period, 43 patients underwent DCAA. Amongst them, 32 (75%) had a well-vascularized colonic stump (well-vascularized group) and 11 (25%) ischemia of the colonic stump (ischemic group). Relative to patients in the well-vascularized group, those in the ischemic group were more often men (81.8% vs 40.6%, p = 0.034), had a higher BMI (29.2 kg/m2 vs 25.7 kg/m2, p = 0.03), were more frequently diabetic (63.6% vs 21.9%, p = 0.01) and more frequently had had preoperative radiotherapy (100% vs 53.1%, p = 0.008). On the preoperative CT scan, the interspinous diameter was shorter in the ischemic group (9.4 ± 1.01 cm vs 10.6 ± 1.01 cm, p = 0.001), the intertuberosity diameter was shorter (9.2 ± 1.18 cm vs 11.9 ± 1.18 cm, p < 0.0001), and the length of the anal canal was longer (31.9 ± 3 mm vs 27.4 ± 3.2 mm, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: This study highlights clear risk factors for ischemia/necrosis of the colonic stump after proctectomy with DCAA.

Multiplanar CT reconstructions allow optimization of the laparoscopic surgical approach for liver lesions.

PURPOSE: Resection of hepatic lesions can be difficult and requires careful analysis of pre-operative imaging. The aim of this study is to highlight the use of multiplanar CT reconstruction in liver surgery, which helps to anticipate intra-operative technical difficulties. METHODS: We retrospectively selected the imaging of several patients managed for liver lesions in specific locations: liver dome (IVa, VIII), the left lobe (intra-parenchymal, left edge), and the antero-inferior edge of segment VI. The IWATE classification was used to grade the difficulty of these resections. RESULTS: Multiplanar analysis has made it possible to change the level of difficulty of liver resection and to anticipate intra-operative difficulties. Frontal and/or sagittal section in addition to axial sections analysis increased the IWATE score. CONCLUSION: Multi-planar reconstruction must be a tool used by the liver surgeon pre-operatively in order to limit intra-operative complications.

Purse string closure of perineal defects after abdominoperineal excision.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to describe a new technique of perineal closure following abdominoperineal excision (APE) using purse-string perineal skin closure (PSPC). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between January 2016 and May 2021, 15 consecutives patients who had an APE procedure were included in this retrospective single-center study. All indications of APE were considered, as well as all types of APE. We analyzed the patient characteristics and peri-operative features, including overall (Clavien 1 to 5) and severe (Clavien 3 and 4) postoperative morbidity, length of stay (LOS), and long-term results (median time to perineal wound closure and rate of perineal incisional hernia). RESULTS: The patients included 11 men and four women, with a mean age of 64 ± 13 [33-80] years. The indication of APE was an epidermoid carcinoma of the anal canal (n = 5) or an adenocarcinoma of the rectum (n = 10). The mean operating time was 220 ± 88.64 [70-360] min. The overall morbidity rate was 60%, the severe morbidity rate 26%, and reoperation rate 26%. The median length of stay was 9 ± 6.5 days. After a mean follow-up of 23.5 ± 20.3 months, the median time to perineal wound closure was 96 ± 60 days, the persistent perineal sinus rate was 6% (n = 2), and one patient developed a perineal incisional hernia. CONCLUSION: Purse-string closure of perineal wounds is a safe and effective technique for perineal wound closure after APE. The short LOS allowed an early return home.

Quality of life after sigmoid diverticulitis: A review.

INTRODUCTION: Diverticular disease, including diverticulitis, begins when the patient becomes symptomatic. Sigmoid diverticulitis corresponds to inflammation/infection of a diverticulum of the sigmoid colon. Among diverticulosis patients, 4.3% develop diverticulitis, a frequent pathology that can entail major functional disorders. Following sigmoid diverticulitis, few studies have assessed functional disorders and quality of life, a multidimensional concept comprising physical, psychological and mental dimensions, as well as social relations. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this work is to report current published data on the quality of life of patients having had sigmoid diverticulitis. RESULTS: Following uncomplicated sigmoid diverticulitis, long-term quality of life does not substantially differ between patients having undergone antibiotic therapy and those having only received symptomatic treatment. As for patients having experienced recurrent events, their quality of life seems improved by elective surgery. Following Hinchey I/II sigmoid diverticulitis, elective surgery seems to improve quality of life, notwithstanding a 10% risk of postoperative complications. Following sigmoid diverticulitis, while emergency surgery seems not to have greater impact on quality of life than elective surgery, the surgical technique employed in an emergency setting seems to have an impact, particularly with regard to the physical and mental components of quality of life. CONCLUSION: Assessment of quality of life is of fundamental importance in diverticular disease and should orient operative indications, particularly in an elective context.

Prognostication algorithm for non-cirrhotic non-B non-C hepatocellular carcinoma-a multicenter study under the aegis of the French Association of Hepato-Biliary Surgery and liver Transplantation.

Background: Liver resection and local ablation are the only curative treatment for non-cirrhotic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Few data exist concerning the prognosis of patients resected for non-cirrhotic HCC. The objectives of this study were to determine the prognostic factors of recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) and to develop a prognostication algorithm for non-cirrhotic HCC. Methods: French multicenter retrospective study including HCC patients with non-cirrhotic liver without underlying viral hepatitis: F0, F1 or F2 fibrosis. Results: A total of 467 patients were included in 11 centers from 2010 to 2018. Non-cirrhotic liver had a fibrosis score of F0 (n=237, 50.7%), F1 (n=127, 27.2%) or F2 (n=103, 22.1%). OS and RFS at 5 years were 59.2% and 34.5%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, microvascular invasion and HCC differentiation were prognostic factors of OS and RFS and the number and size were prognostic factors of RFS (P<0.005). Stratification based on RFS provided an algorithm based on size (P=0.013) and number (P<0.001): 2 HCC with the largest nodule ≤10 cm (n=271, Group 1); 2 HCC with a nodule >10 cm (n=176, Group 2); >2 HCC regardless of size (n=20, Group 3). The 5-year RFS rates were 52.7% (Group 1), 30.1% (Group 2) and 5% (Group 3). Conclusions: We developed a prognostication algorithm based on the number (≤ or >2) and size (≤ or >10 cm), which could be used as a treatment decision support concerning the need for perioperative therapy. In case of bifocal HCC, surgery should not be a contraindication.

The Angers CT Score is a Risk Factor for the Failure of the Conservative Management of Adhesive Small Bowel Obstruction: A Prospective Observational Multicentric Study.

BACKGROUND: Identifying the 30% of adhesive small bowel obstructions (aSBO) for which conservative management will require surgery is essential. The association between the previously described radiological score and failure of the conservative management of aSBO remains to be confirmed in a large prospective multicentric cohort. Our aim was to assess the risk factors of failure of the conservative management of aSBO considering the radiological score. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This prospective observational study took place in 15 French centers over 3 months. Consecutive patients experiencing aSBO with no early surgery were included. The six radiological features from the Angers radiological computed tomography (CT) score were noted (beak sign, closed loop, focal or diffuse intraperitoneal liquid, focal or diffuse mesenteric haziness, focal or diffuse mesenteric liquid, and diameter of the most dilated small bowel loop > 40 mm). RESULTS: Two hundred and seventy nine patients with aSBO were screened. Sixty patients (21.5%) underwent early surgery, and 219 (78.5%) had primary conservative management. In the end, 218 patients were included in the analysis of the risk factors for conservative treatment failure. Among them, 162 (74.3%) had had successful management while for 56 (25.7%) management had failed. In multivariate analysis, a history of surgery was not a significant risk factor for the failure of conservative treatment (OR = 0.11; 95%CI = 0-1.23). A previous episode of aSBO was protective against the failure of conservative treatment (OR = 0.36; 95%CI = 0.15-0.85) and an Angers CT score ≥ 5 as the only individual risk factor (OR = 2.39; 95%CI = 1.01-5.69). CONCLUSION: The radiological score of aSBO is a promising tool in improving the management of aSBO patients. A first episode of aSBO and/or a radiological score ≥5 should lead physicians to consider early surgical management.

Defining Benchmark Outcomes for Distal Pancreatectomy: Results of a French Multicentric Study.

OBJECTIVE: Defining robust and standardized outcome references for distal pancreatectomy (DP) by using Benchmark analysis. BACKGROUND: Outcomes after DP are recorded in medium or small-sized studies without standardized analysis. Therefore, the best results remain uncertain. METHODS: This multicenter study included all patients undergoing DP for resectable benign or malignant tumors in 21 French expert centers in pancreas surgery from 2014 to 2018. A low-risk cohort defined by no significant comorbidities was analyzed to establish 18 outcome benchmarks for DP. These values were tested in high risk, minimally invasive and benign tumor cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 1188 patients were identified and 749 low-risk patients were screened to establish Benchmark cut-offs. Therefore, Benchmark rate for mini-invasive approach was ≥36.8%. Benchmark cut-offs for postoperative mortality, major morbidity grade ≥3a and clinically significant pancreatic fistula rates were 0%, ≤27%, and ≤28%, respectively. The benchmark rate for readmission was ≤16%. For patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma, cut-offs were ≥75%, ≥69.5%, and ≥66% for free resection margins (R0), 1-year disease-free survival and 3-year overall survival, respectively. The rate of mini-invasive approach in high-risk cohort was lower than the Benchmark cut-off (34.1% vs ≥36.8%). All Benchmark cut-offs were respected for benign tumor group. The proportion of benchmark cases was correlated to outcomes of DP. Centers with a majority of low-risk patients had worse results than those operating complex cases. CONCLUSION: This large-scale study is the first benchmark analysis of DP outcomes and provides robust and standardized data. This may allow for comparisons between surgeons, centers, studies, and surgical techniques.