Gemcitabine-Based Neoadjuvant Treatment in Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Meta-Analysis of Individual Patient Data.

Background: Non-randomized studies have investigated multi-agent gemcitabine-based neo-adjuvant therapies (GEM-NAT) in borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (BR-PDAC). Treatment sequencing and specific elements of neoadjuvant treatment are still under investigation. The present meta-analysis aims to assess the effectiveness of GEM-NAT on overall survival (OS) in BR-PDAC. Patients and Methods: A meta-analysis of individual participant data (IPD) on GEM-NAT for BR-PDAC were performed. The primary outcome was OS after treatment with GEM-based chemotherapy. In the Individual Patient Data analysis data were reappraised and confirmed as BR-PDAC on provided radiological data. Results: Six studies investigating GEM-NAT were included in the IPD metanalysis. The IPD metanalysis was conducted on 271 patients who received GEM-NAT. Pooled median patient-level OS was 22.2 months (95%CI 19.1-25.2). R0 rates ranged between 81 and 95% (I 2 = 0%, p = 0.64), respectively. Median OS was 27.8 months (95%CI 23.9-31.6) in the patients who received NAT-GEM followed by resection compared to 15.4 months (95%CI 12.3-18.4) for NAT-GEM without resection and 13.0 months (95%CI 7.4-18.5) in the group of patients who received upfront surgery (p < 0.0001). R0 rates ranged between 81 and 95% (I 2 = 0%, p = 0.64), respectively. Overall survival in the R0 group was 29.3 months (95% CI 24.3-34.2) vs. 16.2 months (95% CI 7·9-24.5) in the R1 group (p = 0·001). Conclusions: The present study is the first meta-analysis combining IPD from a number of international centers with BR-PDAC in a cohort that underwent multi-agent gemcitabine neoadjuvant therapy (GEM-NAT) before surgery. GEM-NAT followed by surgical resection improve survival and R0 resection in BR-PDAC. Also, GEM-NAT may result in a good palliative option in non-resected patients because of progressive disease after neoadjuvant treatment. Results from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are awaited to validate these findings.

Non-mesh Desarda Technique Versus Standard Mesh-Based Lichtenstein Technique for Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The aims of the present systematic review and meta-analysis were to compare non-mesh Desarda technique with standard mesh-based Lichtenstein technique for inguinal hernia repair. METHODS: A systematic literature search for RCTs comparing between DT and LT was conducted using electronic databases and Google scholar service. Studies were evaluated for recurrence and post-operative complications. We pooled the data using fixed effects model and random effects model after assessing the heterogeneity among the included studies. RESULTS: A total number of 8 RCTs studies were included in this meta-analysis with total number of 3177 patients divided between Desarda group and Lichtenstein group as follows: 1551 patients and 1,626 patients, respectively. There was no difference in terms of recurrence between the Desarda repair and Lichtenstein repair groups [P = 0.44]. There was a lower rate of overall post-operative complications [P = 0.003], seroma [P = 0.0004] and surgical site infections (SSIs) [P = 0.04] in the Desarda group. CONCLUSION: DT and LT were found to have comparable results in terms of recurrence rate, haematoma formation, testicular atrophy and time to return to normal daily activity/work. DT is superior to LT in terms of reducing post-operative mesh-attributed complications, such as SSI and Seroma formation.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for right ventricular failure following pericardiectomy.

We report the case of a 61-year-old gentleman who underwent pericardiectomy for constrictive pericarditis. Constrictive pericarditis was diagnosed through echocardiogram, computed tomography chest and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. An elective decision was made for commencing venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) immediately postoperatively to prevent significant right ventricular failure (RVF). Postoperatively, the patient remained on ECMO for 4 days in a stable condition, showing no further signs of RVF. Venoarterial ECMO may be of use as an elective adjunct in cases at high risk of RVF following pericardiectomy.