Marco Montorsi

Objective: The REDISCOVER consensus conference aimed at developing and validating guidelines on the perioperative care of patients with borderline-resectable (BR-) and locally advanced (LA) pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Background: Coupled with improvements in chemotherapy and radiation, the contemporary approach to pancreatic surgery supports the resection of BR-PDAC and, to a lesser extent, LA-PDAC. Guidelines outlining the selection and perioperative care for these patients are lacking. Methods: The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology was used to develop the REDISCOVER guidelines and create recommendations. The Delphi approach was used to reach a consensus (agreement ≥80%) among experts. Recommendations were approved after a debate and vote among international experts in pancreatic surgery and pancreatic cancer management. A Validation Committee used the AGREE II-GRS tool to assess the methodological quality of the guidelines. Moreover, an independent multidisciplinary advisory group revised the statements to ensure adherence to nonsurgical guidelines. Results: Overall, 34 recommendations were created targeting centralization, training, staging, patient selection for surgery, possibility of surgery in uncommon scenarios, timing of surgery, avoidance of vascular reconstruction, details of vascular resection/reconstruction, arterial divestment, frozen section histology of perivascular tissue, extent of lymphadenectomy, anticoagulation prophylaxis, and role of minimally invasive surgery. The level of evidence was however low for 29 of 34 clinical questions. Participants agreed that the most conducive means to promptly advance our understanding in this field is to establish an international registry addressing this patient population (https://rediscover.unipi.it/). Conclusions: The REDISCOVER guidelines provide clinical recommendations pertaining to pancreatectomy with vascular resection for patients with BR-PDAC and LA-PDAC, and serve as the basis of a new international registry for this patient population.

The incidence of rectal cancer (RC) is increasing in the population aged ≤ 49 (early-onset RC-EORC). EORC patients are more likely to present with locally advanced disease at diagnosis than late-onset RC (LORC; aged ≥ 50) patients. As a consequence, more EORC patients undergo neoadjuvant therapies. The response to treatment in EORC patients is still unknown. This study aims to explore the effect of age of onset on the pathological response to neoadjuvant therapies in sporadic locally advanced RC (LARC) patients. Based on an institutional prospectively maintained database, LARC patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapies and radical surgery between January 2010 and December 2022 were allocated to the EORC and LORC groups. The primary endpoint was the rate of incomplete response (Dworak 0–2). A total of 326 LORC and 79 EORC patients were included. Pre-neoadjuvant tumor features were comparable. A significantly higher rate of incomplete response was observed in EORC patients (49% vs. 35%; p = 0.028). From multivariable analysis, early age of onset, smoking and extramural invasion presented as independent risk factors for a worse response. This study demonstrates that an early age of onset is related to a worse response and calls for different multimodal strategies in this group of patients.

Background: Neuromuscular blocking agent (NMBA) monitoring and reversals are key to avoiding residual curarization and improving patient outcomes. Sugammadex is a NMBA reversal with favorable pharmacological properties. There is a lack of real-world data detailing how the diffusion of sugammadex affects anesthetic monitoring and practice. Methods: We conducted an electronic health record analysis study, including all adult surgical patients undergoing general anesthesia with orotracheal intubation, from January 2016 to December 2019, to describe changes and temporal trends of NMBAs and NMBA reversals administration. Results: From an initial population of 115,046 surgeries, we included 37,882 procedures, with 24,583 (64.9%) treated with spontaneous recovery from neuromuscular block and 13,299 (35.1%) with NMBA reversals. NMBA reversals use doubled over 4 years from 25.5% to 42.5%, mainly driven by sugammadex use, which increased from 17.8% to 38.3%. Rocuronium increased from 58.6% (2016) to 94.5% (2019). Factors associated with NMBA reversal use in the multivariable analysis were severe obesity (OR 3.33 for class II and OR 11.4 for class III obesity, p-value < 0.001), and high ASA score (OR 1.47 for ASA III). Among comorbidities, OSAS, asthma, and other respiratory diseases showed the strongest association with NMBA reversal administration. Conclusions: Unrestricted availability of sugammadex led to a considerable increase in pharmacological NMBA reversal, with rocuronium use also rising. More research is needed to determine how unrestricted and safer NMBA reversal affects anesthesia intraoperative monitoring and practice.

The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) is increasing in the population aged ≤ 49 (early-onset CRC-EOCRC). Recent studies highlighted the biological and clinical differences between EOCRC and late-onset CRC (LOCRC-age ≥ 50), while comparative results about long-term survival are still debated. This study aimed to investigate whether age of onset may impact on oncologic outcomes in a surgical population of sporadic CRC patients. Patients operated on for sporadic CRC from January 2010 to January 2022 were allocated to the EOCRC and LOCRC groups. The primary endpoint was the recurrence/progression-free survival (R/PFS). A total of 423 EOCRC and 1650 LOCRC was included. EOCRC had a worse R/PFS (p < 0.0001) and cancer specific survival (p < 0.0001) compared with LOCRC. At Cox regression analysis, age of onset, tumoral stage, signet ring cells, extramural/lymphovascular/perineural veins invasion, and neoadjuvant therapy were independent risk factors for R/P. The analysis by tumoral stage showed an increased incidence of recurrence in stage I EOCRC (p = 0.014), and early age of onset was an independent predictor for recurrence (p = 0.035). Early age of onset was an independent predictor for worse prognosis, this effect was stronger in stage I patients suggesting a potentially—and still unknown—more aggressive tumoral phenotype in EOCRC.

Background: There is extreme heterogeneity in the available literature on the determination of R1 resection rate after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD); consequently, its prognostic role is still debated. The aims of this multicenter randomized study were to evaluate the effect of sampling and clearance definition in determining R1 rate after PD for periampullary cancer and to assess the prognostic role of R1 resection. Methods: PD specimens were randomized to Leeds Pathology Protocol (LEEPP) (group A) or the conventional method adopted before the study (group B). R1 rate was determined by adopting 0- and 1-mm clearance; the association between R1, local recurrence (LR) and overall survival (OS) was also evaluated. Results. One-hundred-sixty-eight PD specimens were included. With 0 mm clearance, R1 rate was 26.2% and 20.2% for groups A and B, respectively; with 1 mm, R1 rate was 60.7% and 57.1%, respectively (p > 0.05). Only in group A was R1 found to be a significant prognostic factor: at 0 mm, median OS was 36 and 20 months for R0 and R1, respectively, while at 1 mm, median OS was not reached and 30 months. At multivariate analysis, R1 resection was found to be a significant prognostic factor independent of clearance definition only in the case of the adoption of LEEPP. Conclusions. The 1 mm clearance is the most effective factor in determining the R1 rate after PD. However, the pathological method is crucial to accurately evaluate its prognostic role: only R1 resections obtained with the adoption of LEEPP seem to significantly affect prognosis.

Despite proven clinical benefits in the short term, technical difficulties limit utilization of laparoscopy in rectal cancer surgery (RCS). Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision (taTME) overcomes many technical limitations of laparoscopic RCS. However, the costs of this procedure have not been addressed yet. Our goal was to perform a comparative cost analysis of taTME and laparoscopic TME (lapTME). Consecutive patients undergoing curative TME between 1 February 2014 and 31 October 2018 were selected from a prospectively maintained database and stratified, according to the type of procedure, into taTME and lapTME groups. Patient demographics, tumour characteristics, operative parameters, and short-term outcomes were analyzed. The main outcome measure was intraoperative costs of the two procedures. Secondary outcomes were short-term outcome and the utilization of hospital resources to manage the postoperative course. Hundred and fifty-two patients with rectal cancer (66 lapTME, 86 taTME) were included in the study. Surgical supplies required for taTME procedure exceeded the cost of lapTME of 754,54 euro. The duration of surgery was not significantly different between the two approaches (266 +/- 92.85 vs 271 +/- 83.63,p = 0.50). Short-term outcomes were comparable including postoperative complication rate (17 vs 20%,p = 0.68), reintervention rate, and length of stay. There was no difference in hospital resources utilization to manage postoperative course including blood test, diagnostics, consultations, and medications. TaTME has higher intraoperative costs in terms of supplies with respect to lapTME. Short-term outcomes and hospital resources to manage postoperative course are comparable.