-
HPB : the Official Journal of the... Jul 2023Mucinous Cystic Neoplasms (MCN) of the pancreas are premalignant cysts for which current guidelines support pancreatic resection. The primary aim of this systematic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Mucinous Cystic Neoplasms (MCN) of the pancreas are premalignant cysts for which current guidelines support pancreatic resection. The primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to define the pooled rate of malignancy for MCN.
METHODS
A systematic review of eligible studies published between 2000 and 2021 was performed on PubMed and Embase. Primary outcome was rate of malignancy. Data regarding high-risk features, including cyst size and mural nodules, were collected and analyzed.
RESULTS
A total of 40 studies and 3292 patients with resected MCN were included in the final analysis. The pooled rate of malignancy was 16.1% (95%CI 13.1-19.0). The rate of malignant MCN in studies published before 2012 was significantly higher than that of studies published after recent guidelines were published (21.0% vs 14.9%, p < 0.001). Malignant MCN were larger than benign (mean difference 25.9 mm 95%CI 14.50-37.43, p < 0.001) with a direct correlation between size and presence of malignant MCN (R2 = 0.28, p = 0.020). A SROC identified a threshold of 65 mm to be associated with the diagnosis of malignant MCN. Presence of mural nodules was associated with the diagnosis of a malignant MCN (OR = 4.34, 95%CI 3.00-6.29, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION
Whereas guidelines recommend resection of all MCN, the rate of malignancy in resected MCN is 16%, implying that surveillance has a role in most cases, and that surgical selection criteria are warranted. Size and presence of mural nodules are significantly associated with an increased risk of malignant degeneration, small MCN and without mural nodules can be considered for surveillance.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Pancreas; Neoplasms, Cystic, Mucinous, and Serous; Precancerous Conditions; Risk Factors; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37003852
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2023.03.001 -
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery :... Nov 2023Pancreatic benign, cystic, and neuroendocrine neoplasms are increasingly detected and recommended for surgical treatment. In multiorgan resection pancreatoduodenectomy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Pancreatic benign, cystic, and neuroendocrine neoplasms are increasingly detected and recommended for surgical treatment. In multiorgan resection pancreatoduodenectomy or parenchyma-sparing, local extirpation is a challenge for decision-making regarding surgery-related early and late postoperative morbidity.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Libraries were searched for studies reporting early surgery-related complications following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and duodenum-preserving total (DPPHRt) or partial (DPPHRp) pancreatic head resection for benign tumors. Thirty-four cohort studies comprising data from 1099 patients were analyzed. In total, 654 patients underwent DPPHR and 445 patients PD for benign tumors. This review and meta-analysis does not need ethical approval.
RESULTS
Comparing DPPHRt and PD, the need for blood transfusion (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.10-0.41, p<0.01), re-intervention for serious surgery-related complications (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.31-0.73, p<0.001), and re-operation for severe complications (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.26-0.95, p=0.04) were significantly less frequent following DPPHRt. Pancreatic fistula B+C (19.0 to 15.3%, p=0.99) and biliary fistula (6.3 to 4.3%; p=0.33) were in the same range following PD and DPPHRt. In-hospital mortality after DPPHRt was one of 350 patients (0.28%) and after PD eight of 445 patients (1.79%) (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.10-1.09, p=0.07). Following DPPHRp, there was no mortality among the 192 patients.
CONCLUSION
DPPHR for benign pancreatic tumors is associated with significantly fewer surgery-related, serious, and severe postoperative complications and lower in-hospital mortality compared to PD. Tailored use of DPPHRt or DPPHRp contributes to a reduction of surgery-related complications. DPPHR has the potential to replace PD for benign tumors and premalignant cystic and neuroendocrine neoplasms of the pancreatic head.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy; Pancreas; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Duodenum; Neuroendocrine Tumors; Pancreatic Cyst
PubMed: 37670106
DOI: 10.1007/s11605-023-05789-4 -
HPB : the Official Journal of the... May 2022Major abdominal surgery and malignancy lead to a hypercoagulable state, with a risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) of approximately 3% after pancreatic surgery. No... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Major abdominal surgery and malignancy lead to a hypercoagulable state, with a risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) of approximately 3% after pancreatic surgery. No guidelines exist to assist surgeons in managing VTE prophylaxis or anticoagulation in patients undergoing elective pancreatic surgery for malignancy or premalignant lesions. A systematic review specific to VTE prophylaxis and anticoagulation after resectional pancreatic surgery is herein provided.
METHODS
Six topic areas are reviewed: pre- and perioperative VTE prophylaxis, early postoperative VTE prophylaxis, extended outpatient VTE prophylaxis, management of chronic anticoagulation, anti-coagulation after vascular reconstruction, and treatment of VTE. A Medline and PubMED search was completed with systematic medical literature review for each topic. Level of evidence was graded and strength of recommendation ranked according to the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system for practice guidelines.
RESULTS
Levels of evidence and strength of recommendations are presented.
DISCUSSION
While strong data exist to guide management of chronic anticoagulation and treatment of VTE, data for anticoagulation after reconstruction is inconclusive and support for perioperative chemoprophylaxis with pancreatic surgery is similarly limited. The risk of post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage often exceeds that of thrombosis. The role of universal chemoprophylaxis must therefore be examined critically, particularly in the preoperative setting.
Topics: Anticoagulants; Blood Coagulation; Hemorrhage; Humans; Neoplasms; Risk Factors; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 35063354
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2021.12.010 -
Journal of Hepato-biliary-pancreatic... Nov 2022Previous systematic reviews have shown that radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) had favorable outcomes including prognosis. However, recent large... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE
Previous systematic reviews have shown that radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) had favorable outcomes including prognosis. However, recent large studies have shown opposite results, thus necessitating clarification of RAMPS efficacy. We aimed to update existing evidence on the clinical outcomes of RAMPS for left-sided pancreatic cancer by comparing them to those of the conventional approach.
METHODS
Electronic databases and registries were searched until August 2021 to perform random-effect meta-analysis. Methodological quality was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. The protocol was registered at protocols.io (https://doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.bxhfpj3n).
RESULTS
Thirteen cohort studies (1641 patients) and four ongoing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified. RAMPS increased disease-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.42-0.91), but it had little effect on overall survival (HR 0.92, 95% CI = 0.79-1.09) and recurrence-free survival (HR 0.72, 95% CI = 0.37-1.38) with low certainty of evidence.
CONCLUSION
The meta-analysis of recent studies suggests that RAMPS may have little effect on clinical outcomes. These findings highlight the necessity of further studies, including RCTs to determine the efficacy and subsequent indication of RAMPS in clinical cases.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy; Splenectomy; Lymph Node Excision; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Prognosis
PubMed: 35092177
DOI: 10.1002/jhbp.1120 -
International Journal of Surgery... Jul 2023The best approach for treating benign or low-grade malignant lesions localized in the pancreatic neck or body remains debatable. Conventional pancreatoduodenectomy and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The best approach for treating benign or low-grade malignant lesions localized in the pancreatic neck or body remains debatable. Conventional pancreatoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy (DP) are associated with a risk of impairment of pancreatic function at long-term follow-up. With advances in technology and surgical skills, the use of central pancreatectomy (CP) has gradually increased.
OBJECTIVES
The objective was to compare the safety, feasibility, and short-term and long-term clinical benefits of CP and DP in matched cases.
METHODS
The PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases were systematically searched to identify studies published from database inception to February 2022 that compared CP and DP. This meta-analysis was performed using R software.
RESULTS
Twenty-six studies matched the selection criteria, including 774 CP and 1713 DP cases. CP was significantly associated with longer operative time ( P <0.0001), less blood loss ( P <0.01), overall and clinically relevant pancreatic fistula ( P <0.0001), postoperative hemorrhage ( P <0.0001), reoperation ( P =0.0196), delayed gastric emptying ( P =0.0096), increased hospital stay ( P =0.0002), intra-abdominal abscess or effusion ( P =0.0161), higher morbidity ( P <0.0001) and severe morbidity ( P <0.0001) but with a significantly lower incidence of overall endocrine and exocrine insufficiency ( P <0.01), and new-onset and worsening diabetes mellitus ( P <0.0001) than DP.
CONCLUSIONS
CP should be considered as an alternative to DP in selected cases such as without pancreatic disease, length of the residual distal pancreas is more than 5 cm, branch-duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms, and a low risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula after adequate evaluation.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Retrospective Studies; Pancreas; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 37300889
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000326 -
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Aug 2023Most studies on minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) combine patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancers even though there is substantial heterogeneity... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The clinical implication of minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for non-pancreatic periampullary cancer: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Most studies on minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) combine patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancers even though there is substantial heterogeneity between these tumors. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the role of MIPD compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) in patients with non-pancreatic periampullary cancer (NPPC).
METHODS
A systematic review of Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases was performed by two independent reviewers to identify studies comparing MIPD and OPD for NPPC (ampullary, distal cholangio, and duodenal adenocarcinoma) (01/2015-12/2021). Individual patient data were required from all identified studies. Primary outcomes were (90-day) mortality, and major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo 3a-5). Secondary outcomes were postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), blood-loss, length of hospital stay (LOS), and overall survival (OS).
RESULTS
Overall, 16 studies with 1949 patients were included, combining 928 patients with ampullary, 526 with distal cholangio, and 461 with duodenal cancer. In total, 902 (46.3%) patients underwent MIPD, and 1047 (53.7%) patients underwent OPD. The rates of 90-day mortality, major morbidity, POPF, DGE, PPH, blood-loss, and length of hospital stay did not differ between MIPD and OPD. Operation time was 67 min longer in the MIPD group (P = 0.009). A decrease in DFS for ampullary (HR 2.27, P = 0.019) and distal cholangio (HR 1.84, P = 0.025) cancer, as well as a decrease in OS for distal cholangio (HR 1.71, P = 0.045) and duodenal cancer (HR 4.59, P < 0.001) was found in the MIPD group.
CONCLUSIONS
This individual patient data meta-analysis of MIPD versus OPD in patients with NPPC suggests that MIPD is not inferior in terms of short-term morbidity and mortality. Several major limitations in long-term data highlight a research gap that should be studied in prospective maintained international registries or randomized studies for ampullary, distal cholangio, and duodenum cancer separately.
PROTOCOL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO (CRD42021277495) on the 25th of October 2021.
Topics: Humans; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Duodenal Neoplasms; Prospective Studies; Pancreas; Postoperative Complications; Laparoscopy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37581763
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-03047-4 -
Annals of Oncology : Official Journal... May 2020Aspirin has been associated with a reduced risk of colorectal cancer, and possibly of a few other digestive tract cancers. The quantification of risk reduction and the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Aspirin has been associated with a reduced risk of colorectal cancer, and possibly of a few other digestive tract cancers. The quantification of risk reduction and the optimal dose and duration of aspirin use for the prevention of colorectal and other digestive tract cancers remains unclear.
METHODS
To provide an up-to-date quantification of this association, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of all observational studies on aspirin and cancers of the digestive tract sites published through March 2019. We estimated the pooled relative risk (RR) of cancer for regular aspirin use versus non-use using random-effects models, and, whenever data were available, we investigated the dose- and duration-risk relations.
RESULTS
Regular aspirin use is associated with a reduced risk of colorectal cancer [RR = 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.69-0.78, 45 studies], squamous-cell esophageal cancer (RR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.57-0.79, 13 studies), adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and gastric cardia (RR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.49-0.77, 10 studies), stomach cancer (RR = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.51-0.82, 14 studies), hepato-biliary tract cancer (RR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.44-0.86, five studies), and pancreatic cancer (RR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.68-0.89, 15 studies), but not of head and neck cancer (RR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.76-1.16, 10 studies). The associations are somewhat stronger in case-control than in cohort and nested case-control studies and are characterized by some between-study heterogeneity. Risk estimates are consistent across sex, geographical areas, and other selected covariates. For colorectal cancer, an aspirin dose between 75 and 100 mg/day conveys a risk reduction of 10%, and a dose of 325 mg/day of 35%. For all neoplasms, except head and neck cancer, inverse duration-risk relations with aspirin use are found.
CONCLUSION
The present comprehensive meta-analysis supports and further quantifies the inverse association between regular aspirin use and the risk of colorectal and other digestive tract cancers, including some rare ones. The favorable effect of aspirin increases with longer duration of use, and, for colorectal cancer, with increasing dose.
Topics: Aspirin; Cohort Studies; Colorectal Neoplasms; Gastrointestinal Neoplasms; Humans
PubMed: 32272209
DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2020.02.012 -
Cancer Medicine Aug 2023Liver transplantation has made significant progress in recent decades. Lung cancer is one of the most frequently occurring cancers after liver transplantation. However,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Liver transplantation has made significant progress in recent decades. Lung cancer is one of the most frequently occurring cancers after liver transplantation. However, the risk of lung cancer among liver transplant patients compared with the general population is unclear. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the risk of developing lung cancer after liver transplantation.
METHODS
All eligible studies published in PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase from database inception to April 2022 were included. Standardized incidence ratio was used to describe the increased risk of lung cancer in liver transplant recipients as compared with the general population. The random-effects model was used for the calculations. A funnel plot and Egger test were performed to assess the potential publication bias.
RESULTS
Our meta-analysis included 15 studies, which involved 76,897 liver transplantation patients. Studies included in this review showed significant heterogeneity (I = 65.3%; p < 0.001), which required a random-effects model for effect pooling. The results indicated a significant higher risk of developing lung cancer in liver transplant patients than the general population with a pooled SIR of 2.06 (95% CI: 1.73, 2.46, p < 0.001). When stratified by region, no significant regional difference was observed. It showed a similarly doubled risk of lung cancer in Europe and North America, but an insignificantly increased risk in Asian populations. The sensitivity analysis by removal and substitution of each literature did not change the results.
CONCLUSION
Our meta-analysis suggests that liver transplant patients are twice as likely as the general population to develop lung cancer. Further research on risk factors for the development of lung cancer after liver transplantation should be conducted and appropriate surveillance protocols should be developed to reduce the risk of its occurrence.
Topics: Humans; Liver Transplantation; Incidence; Risk Factors; Lung Neoplasms; North America
PubMed: 37351559
DOI: 10.1002/cam4.6265 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine May 2023Pulmonary carcinoids (PCs) are part of a spectrum of well-differentiated neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) and are classified as typical carcinoid (TC) and atypical... (Review)
Review
Pulmonary carcinoids (PCs) are part of a spectrum of well-differentiated neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) and are classified as typical carcinoid (TC) and atypical carcinoid (AC). TC differ from AC not only for its histopathological features but also for its "functional imaging pattern" and prognosis. ACs are more undifferentiated and characterized by higher aggressiveness. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) with somatostatin analogs (SSA) labeled with Gallium-68 (Ga-DOTA-TOC, Ga-DOTA-NOC, Ga-DOTA-TATE) has widely replaced conventional imaging with gamma camera using In- or Tc-labelled compounds and represents now the gold standard for diagnosis and management of NENs. In this setting, as already described for gastro-entero-pancreatic NENs, F-Fluorodeoxiglucose ([F]FDG) in addition to Ga-SSA can play an important role in clinical practice, particularly for ACs that show a more aggressive behavior compared to TCs. The aim of this systematic review is to analyze all original studies collected from the PubMed and Scopus databases regarding PCs in which both Ga-SSA PET/CT and [F]FDG PET/CT were performed in order to evaluate the clinical impact of each imaging modality. The following keywords were used for the research: "F, Ga and (bronchial carcinoid or carcinoid lung)". A total of 57 papers were found, of which 17 were duplicates, 8 were reviews, 10 were case reports, and 1 was an editorial. Of the remaining 21 papers, 12 were ineligible because they did not focus on PC or did not compare Ga-SSA and [F]FDG. We finally retrieved and analyzed nine papers (245 patients with TCs and 110 patients with ACs), and the results highlight the importance of the combined use of Ga-SSA and [F]FDG PET/CT for the correct management of these neoplasms.
PubMed: 37297914
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12113719 -
The risk of malignancy in patients with IgG4-related disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Arthritis Research & Therapy Jan 2022The relationship between IgG4-related disease (IgG4-RD) and the risk of malignancy is still controversial. This article focused on assessing the risk of cancer in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The relationship between IgG4-related disease (IgG4-RD) and the risk of malignancy is still controversial. This article focused on assessing the risk of cancer in patients with IgG4-RD by meta-analysis.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis characterizing the associated risk of overall malignancy and four site-specific malignancies (pancreas, lung, gastric and lymphoma) in patients with IgG4-RD. A search from 2003 to 2020 was performed using specified terms from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and SinoMed. Random-effects model analysis was used to pool standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were conducted to clarify the heterogeneity of the included studies. Begg's funnel plot and Egger's linear regression test were used to evaluate the bias of the meta-analysis. A P value < 0.05 indicated the existence of publication bias.
RESULTS
A total of 10 studies were included in the article. The overall SIR estimates suggested an increased risk of overall cancer in IgG4-RD patients (SIR 2.57 95% CI 1.72-3.84) compared with the general population. The specific SIRs for pancreas and lymphoma were higher than those of the general population in IgG4-RD patients (SIR 4.07 95% CI 1.04-15.92, SIR 69.17 95% CI 3.91-1223.04, respectively). No significant associations were revealed in respiratory and gastric cancer (SIR 2.14 95% CI 0.97-4.75, SIR 0.95 95% CI 0.24-3.95, respectively). Four studies were found to be the major sources of heterogeneity by sensitivity analysis. There was no evidence of publication bias via Egger's test.
CONCLUSION
Compared with the general population, patients with IgG4-RD appear to have a higher risk of overall cancer, especially pancreatic and lymphoma. The risk of lung and gastric cancer was not different between IgG4-RD patients and the general population.
Topics: Humans; Immunoglobulin G4-Related Disease; Incidence; Neoplasms
PubMed: 34986892
DOI: 10.1186/s13075-021-02652-2