Metastatic and Malignant Phyllodes Tumors of the Breast: An Update for Current Management.

Metastatic, malignant phyllodes tumor (PT) of the breast is a rare and aggressive neoplasm. Currently, there is no agreed upon consensus as to best management practices. A systematic review of literature was conducted investigating surgical, chemotherapeutic, and radiotherapeutic management for metastatic PT. Databases employed to identify articles included Embase, PubMed, and SAGE Journals. Diagnosis of metastatic PT has been of significant difficulty to radiologists as it is often confused with fibroadenomas. Surgically, metastatectomy has been correlated with increased overall survival (of 25.9 versus 9.9 months; P = .01). Radiotherapy has often been associated with palliation and pain control in metastatic, malignant neoplasia. However, one study showed that in malignant PT, radiation was associated with significantly lower rates of local recurrence (OR: 0.048 versus 0.209). Anthracycline containing chemotherapy regimens has been associated with improved overall survival (22.4 months versus 13.2 months; P = .040). Further research must be conducted into this rare malignancy to elucidate accurate diagnosis and care for patients with advanced metastatic or malignant phyllodes tumors.

Gastric Neuroendocrine Tumor Treatment and Survival Outcome Depends on Facility Type.

BACKGROUND: Gastric neuroendocrine tumors (gNETs) are rare cancers for which surgery may improve survival. We aim to determine if facility type affects treatment and survival outcomes. METHODS: The NCDB was queried for patients with gNET from 2004-2016 and stratified into Academic/Research Program (ARP), Community Cancer Program (CCP), Comprehensive Community Cancer Program (CCCP), or Integrated Network Cancer Program (INCP). Overall survival along with clinical and demographic features was compared. RESULTS: Median survival was improved in patients treated at an academic program: 137.3 months versus 88.0, 96.3, and 100.2 for CCP, CCCP, INCP, respectively (P < .0001). Patients treated at academic centers were more likely to have surgery (64.2% vs 59.1%, 57.5%, 51.4%, P < .0001). After propensity matching for age, race, grade, stage, insurance status, and comorbidity score, survival benefit from treatment at an academic center remained (P = .03), particularly for patients undergoing surgery (P < .0001) and chemotherapy (P = .04). CONCLUSION: Patients with gNET treated at an academic hospital had improved median survival after propensity matching and may benefit from treatment at academic rather than community medical centers.

Hepatocellular-Cholangiocarcinoma Collision Tumors: An Update of Current Management Practices.

Combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CC) is a rare form of primary hepatic collision tumor, with an incidence ranging from 0.4 to 14.2%. Given the diagnostic challenges and lack of randomized trials, standardized treatment has yet to be established. We aim to review the literature to summarize the diagnosis, molecular characteristics, current treatment modalities, and challenges for cHCC-CC. A literature review was performed using PubMed. We included studies investigating and describing cHCC-CC, focusing on surgical, medical, and radiologic treatments. Overall prognosis is poor, with a 5-year survival rate under 30%. Minor or major hepatectomy with R0 resection is the only curative treatment; however, recurrence is likely (as high as 50% within 5 years). The role of liver transplantation is also highly debated given the biliary nature of these tumors, with cHCC-CC as a relative contraindication for liver transplantation. Although gemcitabine-based treatments had higher progression-free survival over sorafenib, there is no standard chemotherapy regimen. Treatment with gemcitabine and platinum demonstrates improved disease control rates compared to gemcitabine in conjunction with 5-fluorouracil (78.4% verse 38.5% respectively). Additionally, platinum-containing chemotherapy regimens exhibit a higher overall response rate than non-platinum regimens (21.4% verse 7.0% respectively). These molecular-directed therapies have prolonged survival for HCC, but further investigation needs to be done to assess their utility in patients with cHCC-CC. cHCC-CC is a rare and complex subset of primary hepatic neoplasms with a dismal prognosis and unstandardized treatment options. Further trials need to be performed to investigate systemic chemotherapy and immunotherapy options for patients with unresectable disease.

Utilization of Natural Language Processing Software to Identify Worrisome Pancreatic Lesions.

BACKGROUND: Computed tomography (CT) imaging is routinely obtained for diagnostics, especially in trauma and emergency rooms, often identifying incidental findings. We utilized a natural language processing (NLP) algorithm to quantify the incidence of clinically relevant pancreatic lesions in CT imaging. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We utilized the electronic medical record to perform a retrospective chart review of adult patients admitted for trauma to a level 1 tertiary care center between 2010 and 2020 who underwent abdominal CT imaging. An open-source NLP software was used to identify patients with intrapapillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN), pancreatic cysts, pancreatic ductal dilation, or pancreatic masses after optimizing the algorithm using a test group of patients who underwent pancreatic surgery. RESULTS: The algorithm identified pancreatic lesions in 27 of 28 patients who underwent pancreatic surgery and excluded 1 patient who had a pure ampullary mass. The study cohort consisted of 18,769 patients who met our inclusion criteria admitted to the hospital. Of this population, 232 were found to have pancreatic lesions of interest. There were 48 (20.7%) patients with concern for IPMN, pancreatic cysts in 36 (15.5%), concerning masses in 30 (12.9%), traumatic findings in 44 (19.0%), pancreatitis in 41 (17.7%), and ductal abnormalities in 19 (18.2%) patients. Prior pancreatic surgery and other findings were identified in 14 (6.0%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we propose a novel use of NLP software to identify potentially malignant pancreatic lesions annotated in CT imaging performed for other purposes. This methodology can significantly increase the screening and automated referral for the management of precancerous lesions.

Medicaid expansion is associated with earlier diagnosis of gastric cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The 2014 Medicaid expansion was intended to improve access to care. We hypothesized that Medicaid expansion would be associated with improved gastric cancer (GC) outcomes. METHODS: We selected patients with a new primary diagnosis of GC from the National Cancer Database. We compared states that expanded Medicaid in 2014 to those that did not. We compared pre-and post-expansion intervals 2012-2013 and 2015-2016. RESULTS: There was an increase in patients diagnosed with stage 0-2 GC from 38% to 41.5% [p < 0.01] in expansion states (ES), but no change at 38.9% in non-expansion states (NES). Uninsured and Medicaid patients diagnosed with stages 0-2 GC increased in ES from 32.4% to 37.8% [p = 0.01] and decreased in NES from 29.7% to 27.3% [p = n.s.]. Uninsured and Medicaid patients receiving treatment rose from 87.0% to 90.3% in ES [p < 0.01] and in NES 83.9%-84.9% [p = n.s.]. Twelve-month survival for ES rose from 68.1% to 70.6% [p = 0.03] and in NES decreased 65.2%-65.1% [p = n.s.]. CONCLUSION: Increased healthcare access may be related to earlier diagnosis and improved outcomes in GC.

Cost-Benefit Analysis of Robotic vs. Laparoscopic Hepatectomy: A Propensity-Matched Retrospective Cohort Study of American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database.

BACKGROUND: Robotic and laparoscopic hepatectomies having increased utilization as minimally invasive techniques are explored for hepatobiliary malignancies. Although the data on outcomes from these 2 approaches are emerging, the cost-benefit analysis of these approaches remains sparse. This study compares the costs associated with robotic vs. laparoscopic liver resections, taking into account 30-day complications. METHODS: Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, a propensity-matched cohort of patients with laparoscopic or robotic liver resections between 2014 and 2017 was identified. Costs were assigned to perioperative variables, including operating room (OR) time, length of stay, blood transfusions, and 30-day complications. Cost estimates were obtained from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services billing data (2017), American Hospital Association data (2017), relevant literature, and local institutional cost data. RESULTS: In our matched cohort of 454 patients (227 per group), total costs associated with laparoscopic liver resections were estimated at $5.5 M ($24 K per patient) vs. $6.8 M ($29.8 K per patient) for robotic liver resections (21.3% difference, P < .001). The higher cost associated with robotic hepatectomies was related to blood transfusions ($22.0 K vs. $12.1 K, P = .02), length of stay ($2.05 M vs. $1.76 M, P = .046), and OR time ($4.01 M vs. $3.24 M, P < .0001). DISCUSSION: Robotic hepatectomies were associated with higher costs compared to laparoscopic hepatectomies. The 2 major contributors to the cost disparity were increased OR time and increased length of stay. Future studies are warranted to analyze high-volume Minimally Invasive Surgery surgeons' impact in specialty centers on potentially mitigating this current cost disparity.

What to do When Decompressive Gastrostomies and Jejunostomies are not Options? A Scoping Review of Transesophageal Gastrostomy Tubes for Advanced Malignancies.

BACKGROUND: In advanced malignant bowel obstruction, decompressive gastrostomy tubes (GTs) may not be feasible due to ascites, peritoneal carcinomatosis, and altered gastric anatomy. Whereas nasogastric tubes (NGTs) allow temporary decompression, percutaneous transesophageal gastrostomy tubes (PTEGs) are an alternative method for long-term palliative decompression. This study performed a scoping review to determine outcomes with PTEG in advanced malignancies. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed to include all studies that reported the clinical results of PTEGs for malignancy. No language, national, or publication status restrictions were used. RESULTS: The analysis included 14 relevant studies with a total of 340 patients. In 11 studies, standard PTEGs were inserted with a rupture-free balloon's placement into the mouth or nose and esophageal puncture under fluoroscopy or ultrasound, followed by a guidewire into the stomach with placement of a single-lumen tube. Of 340 patients, 65 (19.1%) had minor complications, and 5 (2.1%) had significant complications, including bleeding and severe aspiration pneumonia. Of 171 patients, 169 with PTEGs (98.8%) reported relief of nasal discomfort from NGT and alleviation of obstructive symptoms. The one randomized controlled trial reported a significantly higher quality of life with PTEGs than with NGTs. CONCLUSIONS: When decompression for advanced malignancy is technically not feasible with a gastrostomy tube, the PTEG is a viable, safe option for palliation. The PTEG is associated with lower significant complication rates than the gastrostomy tube and significantly higher patient-derived outcomes than the NGT.

Simple Versus Radical Resection for Duodenal Adenocarcinoma: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis of National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: Duodenal adenocarcinoma treatment consists of either simple or radical surgical resection. Existing evidence suggests similar survival outcomes between the two but is limited by small numbers and single-institution analysis. We aim to compare survival after partial versus radical resection for duodenal adenocarcinoma using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). METHODS: Using NCDB results from 2004 to 2014, we compared patients with duodenal adenocarcinoma undergoing partial resection (n = 1247) and radical resection (n = 1240) by age, sex, facility type, facility location, cancer stage, cancer grade, lymph node sampling, node status, tumor size, margin status, neoadjuvant therapy, and adjuvant therapy using chi-square analysis. Survival was compared using propensity matching. RESULTS: Patients undergoing partial resection had overall earlier cancer stage, more favorable tumor grade, and were less likely to undergo lymph node sampling and neoadjuvant therapy. When overall survival was compared between the 2 propensity-matched groups, the median survival was 46.7 months after partial resection and 43.2 months after radical resection (P = .329), and overall survival was similar between the 2 groups (P = .894). The use of adjuvant therapy demonstrated improved survival over either surgery alone (P < .0001, P = .0037). CONCLUSION: Partial resection did not demonstrate worse survival outcomes than radical resection for duodenal adenocarcinoma. The use of adjuvant therapy in addition to surgery demonstrated improved survival regardless of surgery type and played a larger role in survival than the type of surgery. Our findings provide evidence to support the continued use of both partial and radical surgical resections to treat duodenal malignancy.

Omental patch versus gastric resection for perforated gastric ulcer: Systematic review and meta-analysis for an unresolved debate.

BACKGROUND: Perforated gastric ulcers are surgical emergencies with paucity of data on the preferred treatment modality of resection versus omental patch. We aim to compare outcomes with ulcer repair and gastric resection surgeries in perforated gastric ulcers after systematic review of literature. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed for publications in PubMed Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We included all studies which compared ulcer repair vesus gastric resection surgeries for perforated gastric ulcers. We excluded studies which did not separate outcomes gastric and duodenal ulcer perforations. RESULTS: The search included nine single-institution retrospective reviews comparing ulcer repair (449 patients) versus gastric resection surgeries (212 patients). Meta-analysis was restricted to perforated gastric ulcers and excluded perforated duodenal ulcers. The majority of these studies did not control for baseline characteristics, and surgical strategies were often chosen in a non-randomized manner. All of the studies included were at high risk of bias. The overall odds ratio of mortality in ulcer repair surgery compared to gastric resection surgery was 1.79, with 95% CI 0.72 to 4.43 and p-value 0.209. CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis, there was no difference in mortality between the two surgical groups. The overall equivalence of clinical outcomes suggests that gastric resection is a potentially viable alternative to ulcer repair surgery and should not be considered a secondary strategy. We would recommend a multicenter randomized control trial to evaluate the surgical approach that yields superior outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review and meta-analysis, level III.

Role of metastasectomy for liver metastasis in stage IV anal cancer.

INTRODUCTION: There is a paucity of data on the role of metastasectomy for metastatic anal cancer on survival outcomes. We aim to define the role of metastasectomy in stage IV anal cancer. METHODS: National Cancer Database (NCDB) from 2004 to 2014 was accessed to include patients with metastatic anal cancer, excluding adenocarcinoma, neuroendocrine, and 'other' histologies. We compared patients undergoing metastasectomy (n = 165) to those who did not have metastasectomy (n = 2093) by age, sex, cancer grade, and site of metastasis, including metastasis to bone, liver, and lung, using chi-square analysis. The primary outcome was overall survival. RESULTS: Patients had equal distribution of metastatic sites between those who underwent metastasectomy versus no metastasectomy: bone (7.64% vs 4.85%, p = 0.22), brain (0.24% vs 0%, p = 1.0), liver (23.22% vs 29.70%, p = 0.07), and lung (11.85% vs 9.09%, p = 0.38). Survival following metastasectomy was increased at one year (71% vs. 61%, p = 0.016), two years (50% vs. 38%, p = 0.014), and five years (30% vs. 19%, p = 0.025). Median overall survival was increased (23 months vs. 16 months; p = 0.015) for patients with metastasectomy. Survival increases were demonstrated only in the group with liver metastasis undergoing metastasectomy. When stratifying for liver metastases only, median overall survival time was further increased (34 months vs. 16 months; p < 0.0001) following metastasectomy. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate a survival benefit for hepatic metastasectomy in stage IV anal cancer. Our findings demonstrate a potential survival benefit in highly select patients with metastatic anal cancer to the liver. These findings support further investigation in a randomized clinical trial to delineate these findings.

The Role of Neoadjuvant Versus Adjuvant Therapy for Duodenal Adenocarcinoma: A National Cancer Database Propensity Score Matched Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Adjuvant therapy is recommended in duodenal adenocarcinoma (DA), but the role of neoadjuvant therapy remains undefined. We compared the effect of neoadjuvant therapy to adjuvant therapy on overall survival, 30-day, and 90-day mortality following the resection of DA. METHODS: A retrospective review of the National Cancer Database was performed on patients with DA who received either adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy in addition to surgical resection. Propensity score matching was done for patient, socioeconomic, and tumor characteristics. Overall survival, 30-day, and 90-day mortality were compared. RESULTS: A total of 112 patients were identified; 55 received adjuvant therapy; 57 received neoadjuvant therapy. There was no difference in 30-day (0% vs. 1.75%; P = 1.00), 90-day mortality (1.82% vs. 7.02%; P = .36), nor overall survival (1 yr: 86% vs. 76; 3 yr: 49% vs. 46%; 5 yr: 42% vs. 39%; P = .28). CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in overall survival after propensity score matched analysis.

Implications for Telemedicine for Surgery Patients After COVID-19: Survey of Patient and Provider Experiences.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has expanded the utilization of telemedicine in clinical practice to minimize potential risks to both patients and providers. We aim to describe the perception of telemedicine by both surgical patients and providers to understand the preferences for future incorporation in future surgical practice. METHODS: An anonymous survey was administered to providers that transitioned clinic visits to telemedicine encounters since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. In the second part of the study, patients who underwent video telemedicine appointments answered survey questions via telephone. RESULTS: Twenty-six out of 36 (72.7%) providers responded. Over 75% reported that they could effectively communicate with patients over telemedicine. Six (23.1%) reported that they could adequately assess surgical sites. Of 361 patients, 187 consented to the study (consent rate 51.8%). Among patients, the most common result to choose a telemedicine appointment was to avoid the risk of COVID-19 transmission (84, 44.9%), though the minority reported that they would choose telemedicine after the pandemic (64, 34.2%). Those patients who would choose an in-person visit were more likely to have a higher Charlson Comorbidity Score, body mass index, and use friends or family for transportation. In open-ended feedback, patients suggested that telemedicine would be better suited for long-term follow-up rather than the immediate postoperative setting. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and providers reported a high degree of satisfaction using telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic but noted concern with limited physical examinations. Telemedicine may be suited for preoperative evaluation and medium-term and long-term postoperative follow-up for surgical patients.

Primary Malignancy Is an Independent Determinant of Morbidity and Mortality after Liver Resection.

Although outcomes after liver resection have improved, there remains considerable perioperative morbidity and mortality with these procedures. Studies suggest a primary liver cancer diagnosis is associated with poorer outcomes, but the extent to which this is attributable to a higher degree of hepatic dysfunction is unclear. To better delineate this, we performed a matched pair analysis of primary versus metastatic malignancies using a national database. The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (2005-2013) was analyzed to select elective liver resections. Diagnoses were sorted as follows: 1) primary liver cancers and 2) metastatic neoplasms. A literature review identified factors known to impact hepatectomy outcomes; these variables were evaluated by a univariate analysis. The most predictive factors were used to create similar groups from each diagnosis category via propensity matching. Multivariate regression was used to validate results in the wider study population. Outcomes were compared using chi-squared test and Fisher exact test. Matched groups of 4838 patients were similar by all variables, including indicators of liver function. A number of major complications were significantly more prevalent with a primary diagnosis; overall major morbidity rates in the metastatic and primary groups were 29.3 versus 41.6 per cent, respectively. The mortality rate for primary neoplasms was 4.6 per cent (vs 1.6%); this represents a risk of death nearly three-times greater (95% confidence interval = 2.20-3.81, P < 0.0001) in cancers of hepatic origin. Hepatectomy carries substantially higher perioperative risk when performed for primary liver cancers, independent of hepatic function and resection extent. This knowledge will help to improve treatment planning, patient education, and resource allocation in oncologic liver resection.

Evaluation of porcine dermal collagen (Permacol) used in abdominal wall reconstruction.

Various methods have been employed to reconstruct complex abdominal wall defects. Structural prosthetic materials such as polypropylene mesh and ePTFE (expanded polytetrafluoroethylene) have been widely used to close these large fascial defects, however, complications with infection and adhesions have led to the recent use of more biocompatible implants. Permacol (acellular porcine dermis) is used as a dermal scaffold, which eventually becomes vascularised and remodelled to reconstruct the abdominal wall in these complex patients. A retrospective review was performed of all patients who underwent consecutive abdominal wall reconstruction with Permacol at our institution in the year 2006. Twenty-eight patients were identified and included in our study. Factors evaluated were: body mass index, relevant co-morbidities, aetiology of hernia, hernia defect size based on CT scan and intraoperative measurement, size of Permacol implant, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications. Surgical technique was standardised among six surgeons and involved a single layer of acellular porcine dermis as a subfascial 'underlay' graft under moderate tension upon maximal hernia reduction. Tissue expanders were not required for skin closure. Out of 28 patients, 12 were male and 16 were female. Mean intraoperative hernia size was 150 cm(2) (range of 10 cm(2) to 600 cm(2)). Mean age was 55 years with an average body mass index (BMI) of 34 (largest BMI of 61.4). Defects were attributed to either a previous laparotomy incision or open abdomen. Mean hospital stay was 9.67 days. At a mean follow-up of sixteen months, there were three recurrent hernias (10.7%) based on physical examination and postoperative CT scan evaluation. One patient developed a superficial wound dehiscence which was successfully treated with local wound care and one patient developed a cellulitis which was successfully treated with antibiotic therapy. Four patients (14.3%) developed a chronic, non-infected fluid collection lasting >one month all of which resolved. No patient required removal of the implant due to infection. Permacol can be successfully used in the reconstruction of both small and large ventral hernias. This biodegradable matrix serves as a safe and useful alternative to both synthetic mesh and AlloDerm.