Susan van Dieren

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop an alternative fistula risk score (a-FRS) for postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreatoduodenectomy, without blood loss as a predictor. BACKGROUND: Blood loss, one of the predictors of the original-FRS, was not a significant factor during 2 recent external validations. METHODS: The a-FRS was developed in 2 databases: the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (18 centers) and the University Hospital Southampton NHS. Primary outcome was grade B/C POPF according to the 2005 International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definition. The score was externally validated in 2 independent databases (University Hospital of Verona and University Hospital of Pennsylvania), using both 2005 and 2016 ISGPS definitions. The a-FRS was also compared with the original-FRS. RESULTS: For model design, 1924 patients were included of whom 12% developed POPF. Three predictors were strongly associated with POPF: soft pancreatic texture [odds ratio (OR) 2.58, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.80-3.69], small pancreatic duct diameter (per mm increase, OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.61-0.76), and high body mass index (BMI) (per kg/m increase, OR: 1.07, 95% CI: 1.04-1.11). Discrimination was adequate with an area under curve (AUC) of 0.75 (95% CI: 0.71-0.78) after internal validation, and 0.78 (0.74-0.82) after external validation. The predictive capacity of a-FRS was comparable with the original-FRS, both for the 2005 definition (AUC 0.78 vs 0.75, P = 0.03), and 2016 definition (AUC 0.72 vs 0.70, P = 0.05). CONCLUSION: The a-FRS predicts POPF after pancreatoduodenectomy based on 3 easily available variables (pancreatic texture, duct diameter, BMI) without blood loss and pathology, and was successfully validated for both the 2005 and 2016 POPF definition. The online calculator is available at www.pancreascalculator.com.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotics are advised in most guidelines on acute diverticulitis, despite a lack of evidence to support their routine use. This trial compared the effectiveness of a strategy with or without antibiotics for a first episode of uncomplicated acute diverticulitis. METHODS: Patients with CT-proven, primary, left-sided, uncomplicated, acute diverticulitis were included at 22 clinical sites in the Netherlands, and assigned randomly to an observational or antibiotic treatment strategy. The primary endpoint was time to recovery during 6 months of follow-up. Main secondary endpoints were readmission rate, complicated, ongoing and recurrent diverticulitis, sigmoid resection and mortality. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were done. RESULTS: A total of 528 patients were included. Median time to recovery was 14 (i.q.r. 6-35) days for the observational and 12 (7-30) days for the antibiotic treatment strategy, with a hazard ratio for recovery of 0·91 (lower limit of 1-sided 95 per cent c.i. 0·78; P = 0·151). No significant differences between the observation and antibiotic treatment groups were found for secondary endpoints: complicated diverticulitis (3·8 versus 2·6 per cent respectively; P = 0·377), ongoing diverticulitis (7·3 versus 4·1 per cent; P = 0·183), recurrent diverticulitis (3·4 versus 3·0 per cent; P = 0·494), sigmoid resection (3·8 versus 2·3 per cent; P = 0·323), readmission (17·6 versus 12·0 per cent; P = 0·148), adverse events (48·5 versus 54·5 per cent; P = 0·221) and mortality (1·1 versus 0·4 per cent; P = 0·432). Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the observation group (2 versus 3 days; P = 0·006). Per-protocol analyses were concordant with the intention-to-treat analyses. CONCLUSION: Observational treatment without antibiotics did not prolong recovery and can be considered appropriate in patients with uncomplicated diverticulitis. Registration number: NCT01111253 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare oncological outcomes after minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). BACKGROUND: Cohort studies have suggested superior short-term outcomes of MIDP vs. ODP. Recent international surveys, however, revealed that surgeons have concerns about the oncological outcomes of MIDP for PDAC. METHODS: This is a pan-European propensity score matched study including patients who underwent MIDP (laparoscopic or robot-assisted) or ODP for PDAC between January 1, 2007 and July 1, 2015. MIDP patients were matched to ODP patients in a 1:1 ratio. Main outcomes were radical (R0) resection, lymph node retrieval, and survival. RESULTS: In total, 1212 patients were included from 34 centers in 11 countries. Of 356 (29%) MIDP patients, 340 could be matched. After matching, the MIDP conversion rate was 19% (n = 62). Median blood loss [200 mL (60-400) vs 300 mL (150-500), P = 0.001] and hospital stay [8 (6-12) vs 9 (7-14) days, P < 0.001] were lower after MIDP. Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications (18% vs 21%, P = 0.431) and 90-day mortality (2% vs 3%, P > 0.99) were comparable for MIDP and ODP, respectively. R0 resection rate was higher (67% vs 58%, P = 0.019), whereas Gerota's fascia resection (31% vs 60%, P < 0.001) and lymph node retrieval [14 (8-22) vs 22 (14-31), P < 0.001] were lower after MIDP. Median overall survival was 28 [95% confidence interval (CI), 22-34] versus 31 (95% CI, 26-36) months (P = 0.929). CONCLUSIONS: Comparable survival was seen after MIDP and ODP for PDAC, but the opposing differences in R0 resection rate, resection of Gerota's fascia, and lymph node retrieval strengthen the need for a randomized trial to confirm the oncological safety of MIDP.