ABSTRACT
Importance: Cancer is one of the leading causes of death in the United States, with the obesity epidemic contributing to its steady increase every year. Recent cohort studies find an association between bariatric surgery and reduced longitudinal cancer risk, but with heterogeneous findings. Observations: This review summarizes how obesity leads to an increased risk of developing cancer and synthesizes current evidence behind the potential for bariatric surgery to reduce longitudinal cancer risk. Overall, bariatric surgery appears to have the strongest and most consistent association with decreased incidence of developing breast, ovarian, and endometrial cancers. The association of bariatric surgery and the development of esophageal, gastric, liver, and pancreas cancer is heterogenous with studies showing either no association or decreased longitudinal incidences. Conversely, there have been preclinical and cohort studies implying an increased risk of developing colon and rectal cancer after bariatric surgery. A review and synthesis of the existing literature reveals epidemiologic shortcomings of cohort studies that potentially explain incongruencies observed between studies. Conclusions and Relevance: Studies examining the association of bariatric surgery and longitudinal cancer risk remain heterogeneous and could be explained by certain epidemiologic considerations. This review provides a framework to better define subgroups of patients at higher risk of developing cancer who would potentially benefit more from bariatric surgery, as well as subgroups where more caution should be exercised.
Subject(s)
Bariatric Surgery , Endometrial Neoplasms , Obesity, Morbid , Female , Humans , United States , Bariatric Surgery/adverse effects , Obesity/surgery , Risk , Incidence , Obesity, Morbid/surgeryABSTRACT
The implementation of upfront, preoperative habilitation ("prehabilitation"), as opposed to postoperative habilitation (rehabilitation), provides a unique opportunity to optimize surgical outcomes, while ensuring that patients receive necessary conditioning that may otherwise be significantly delayed by postoperative complications. In this review, opportunities to design, implement, monitor, and evaluate a surgical prehabilitation program in colorectal surgery are discussed, and broken down to include emotional, physical, and nutritional aspects of care in the preoperative setting.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To perform an unbiased assessment of first postoperative day (POD 1) drain amylase level and pancreatic fistula (PF) after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). BACKGROUND: Recent evidence demonstrated that drain abandonment in PD is unsafe. Early drain amylase levels have been proposed as predictors of PF after PD, allowing for selection of patients for early drain removal. METHODS: Daily drain amylase levels were correlated with the development of PF in 2 independent cohorts of patients undergoing PD: training cohort (n = 126; year 2008) and validation cohort (n = 369; years 2009-2012). RESULTS: POD 1 drain amylase level had the highest predictive ability (concordance index: 0.911) for PF in the training cohort. An amylase level of 612 U/L or higher showed the best accuracy (86%), sensitivity (93%), and specificity (79%). Thus, a cutoff value of 600 U/L was utilized. In the validation cohort, 229 (62.1%) patients had a POD 1 drain amylase level of lower than 600 U/L, and PF developed in only 2 (0.9%) cases; whereas in patients with POD 1 drain amylase level of 600 U/L or higher (n = 140) the PF rate was 31.4% (odds ratio [OR] = 52, P < 0.0001). On multivariate analysis, POD 1 drain amylase level of lower than 600 U/L (OR = 0.0192, P < 0.0001) was a stronger predictor of the absence of PF than pancreatic gland texture (OR = 0.193, P = 0.002) and duct diameter (OR = 0.861, P = 0.835). CONCLUSIONS: After PD, the risk of PF is less than 1% if POD 1 drain amylase level is lower than 600 U/L. We propose that in this group, which comprise more than 60% of patients, drains should be removed on POD 1.
