Impact of resection margin status on recurrence and survival in pancreatic cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: The prognosis of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is poor and selection of patients for surgery is challenging. This study examined the impact of a positive resection margin (R1) on locoregional recurrence (LRR) and overall survival (OS); and also aimed to identified tumour characteristics and/or technical factors associated with a positive resection margin in patients with PDAC. METHODS: Patients scheduled for pancreatic resection for PDAC between 2006 and 2016 were identified from an institutional database. The effect of resection margin status, patient characteristics and tumour characteristics on LRR, distant metastasis and OS was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 322 patients underwent pancreatectomy for PDAC. A positive resection (R1) margin was found in 129 patients (40·1 per cent); this was associated with decreased OS compared with that in patients with an R0 margin (median 15 (95 per cent c.i. 13 to 17) versus 22 months; P < 0·001). R1 status was associated with reduced time to LRR (median 16 versus 36 (not estimated, n.e.) months; P = 0·002). Disease recurrence patterns were similar in the R1 and R0 groups. Risk factors for early recurrence were tumour stage, positive lymph nodes (N1) and perineural invasion. Among 100 patients with N0 disease, R1 status was associated with shorter OS compared with R0 resection (median 17 (10 to 24) versus 45 (n.e.) months; P = 0·002), whereas R status was not related to OS in 222 patients with N1 disease (median 14 (12 to 16) versus 17 (15 to 19) months after R1 and R0 resection respectively; P = 0·068). CONCLUSION: Although pancreatic resection with a positive margin was associated with poor survival and early recurrence, particularly in patients with N1 disease, disease recurrence patterns were similar between R1 and R0 groups.

Traumatic rupture of a Meckel's diverticulum due to blunt abdominal trauma in a soccer game: A case report.

INTRODUCTION: a Meckel's diverticulum is one of the most common congenital anomalies of the digestive tract. The reported lifetime complication rate is 4%, mostly due to hemorrhage, obstruction, perforation or inflammation. A symptomatic Meckel's diverticulum due to rupture after blunt abdominal trauma is very rare. We believe this case report is the first reporting a rupture of a Meckel's diverticulum after a low velocity blunt abdominal trauma and outlining the importance of a thorough and complete examination of the patient after blunt abdominal trauma. PRESENTATION OF CASE: a 17-year-old male presented with abdominal pain after blunt abdominal trauma during a soccer game. Physical examination showed signs of peritonitis in all quadrants of the abdomen. During admission the patient deteriorated with decreasing blood pressure and raising pulse rate. A CT-scan showed free abdominal fluid. Our patient was scheduled for an emergent laparotomy where a perforated Meckel's diverticulum with fecal spill was found. A segmental ileal resection was performed. Post-operative, patient developed a pneumonia and also intra-abdominal abscesses treated with percutaneous drainage. After an admission period of 17-days the patient was discharged. CONCLUSION: perforation of a Meckel's diverticulum is rarely suspected as a cause of acute deterioration following blunt abdominal trauma. This case shows the importance of awareness of this kind of injury especially in male patients.

Role of focused assessment with sonography for trauma as a screening tool for blunt abdominal trauma in young children after high energy trauma.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the study was to review the utility of focused assessement with sonography for trauma (FAST) as a screening tool for blunt abdominal trauma (BAT) in children involved in high energy trauma (HET), and to determine whether a FAST could replace computed tomography (CT) in clinical decision-making regarding paediatric BAT. METHOD: Children presented at the Trauma Unit of the Red Cross War Memorial Children's Hospital, Cape Town, after HET, and underwent both a physical examination and a FAST. The presence of free fluid in the abdomen and pelvis was assessed using a FAST. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) for identifying intraabdominal injury were calculated for the physical examination and the FAST, both individually and when combined. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients were included as per the criteria for HET as follows: pedestrian motor vehicle crashes (MVCs) (n = 46), assault (n = 14), fall from a height (n = 9), MVC passenger (n = 4) and other (n = 2). The ages of the patients ranged from 3 months to 13 years. The sensitivity of the physical examination was 0.80, specificity 0.83, PPV 0.42 and NPV 0.96. The sensitivity of the FAST was 0.50, specificity 1.00, PPV 1.00 and NPV 0.93. Sensitivity increased to 0.90 when the physical examination was combined with the FAST. Nonoperative management was used in 73 patients. Two underwent an operation. CONCLUSION: A FAST should be performed in combination with a physical examination on every paediatric patient involved in HET to detect BAT. When both are negative, nonoperative management can be implemented without fear of missing a clinically significant injury. FAST is a safe, effective and easily accessible alternative to CT, which avoids ionising radiation and aids in clinical decision-making.