Marta Gimeno

Introduction Although several studies report that the robotic approach is more costly than laparoscopy, the cost-effectiveness of robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) over laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is still an issue. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of the RDP and LDP approaches across several Spanish centres. Methods This study is an observational, multicenter, national prospective study (ROBOCOSTES). For one year from 2022, all consecutive patients undergoing minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy were included, and clinical, QALY, and cost data were prospectively collected. The primary aim was to analyze the cost-effectiveness between RDP and LDP. Results During the study period, 80 procedures from 14 Spanish centres were analyzed. LDP had a shorter operative time than the RDP approach (192.2 min vs 241.3 min, p = 0.004). RDP showed a lower conversion rate (19.5% vs 2.5%, p = 0.006) and a lower splenectomy rate (60% vs 26.5%, p = 0.004). A statistically significant difference was reported for the Comprehensive Complication Index between the two study groups, favouring the robotic approach (12.7 vs 6.1, p = 0.022). RDP was associated with increased operative costs of 1600 euros (p < 0.031), while overall cost expenses resulted in being 1070.92 Euros higher than the LDP but without a statistically significant difference (p = 0.064). The mean QALYs at 90 days after surgery for RDP (0.9534) were higher than those of LDP (0.8882) (p = 0.030). At a willingness-to-pay threshold of 20,000 and 30,000 euros, there was a 62.64% and 71.30% probability that RDP was more cost-effective than LDP, respectively. Conclusions The RDP procedure in the Spanish healthcare system appears more cost-effective than the LDP.

Background: Radical gastrectomy remains the main treatment for gastric cancer, despite its high mortality. A clinical predictive model of 90-day mortality (90DM) risk after gastric cancer surgery based on the Spanish EURECCA registry database was developed using a matching learning algorithm. We performed an external validation of this model based on data from an international multicenter cohort of patients. Methods: A cohort of patients from the European GASTRODATA database was selected. Demographic, clinical, and treatment variables in the original and validation cohorts were compared. The performance of the model was evaluated using the area under the curve (AUC) for a random forest model. Results: The validation cohort included 2546 patients from 24 European hospitals. The advanced clinical T- and N-category, neoadjuvant therapy, open procedures, total gastrectomy rates, and mean volume of the centers were significantly higher in the validation cohort. The 90DM rate was also higher in the validation cohort (5.6%) vs. the original cohort (3.7%). The AUC in the validation model was 0.716. Conclusion: The externally validated model for predicting the 90DM risk in gastric cancer patients undergoing gastrectomy with curative intent continues to be as useful as the original model in clinical practice.

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate different preoperative immune, inflammatory, and nutritional scores and their best cut-off values as predictors of poorer overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) in patients who underwent curative gastric cancer resection. Methods: This was a retrospective observational multicentre study based on data of the Spanish EURECCA Esophagogastric Cancer Registry. Time-dependent Youden index and log-rank test were used to obtain the best cut-offs of 18 preoperative biomarkers for OS and DFS. An adjusted Cox model with variables selected by bootstrapping was used to identify the best preoperative biomarkers, which were also analysed for every TNM stage. Results: High neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), high monocyte systemic inflammation index (moSII), and low prognostic nutritional index (PNI) were identified as independent predictors of poor outcome: NLR > 5.91 (HR:1.73; 95%CI [1.23–2.43]), moSII >2027.12 (HR:2.26; 95%CI [1.36–3.78]), and PNI >40.31 (HR:0.75; 95%CI [0.58–0.96]) for 5-year OS and NLR > 6.81 (HR:1.75; 95%CI [1.24–2.45]), moSII > 2027.12 (HR:2.46; 95%CI [1.49–4.04]), and PNI > 40.31 (HR:0.77; 95%CI [0.60,0.97]) for 5-year DFS. These outcomes were maintained in the whole cohort for NLR and moSII (p < 0.05) but not in stage II and for PNI in all tumoral stages. The associations of NLR-PNI and moSII-PNI were also a relevant prognostic factor for OS. Conclusions: High NLR, high moSII (for stages I and III), and low PNI (regardless of tumour stage) were the most promising preoperative biomarkers to predict poor OS and DFS in gastric cancer patients treated with curative intent.

Purpose The Spanish Incisional Hernia Surgery Registry (EVEREG) was promoted by the Abdominal Wall Section of the Spanish Association of Surgeons, starting data collection in July 2012 and currently has more than 14,000 cases. The objective of this study was to validate the data collected through a pilot audit process. Methods A sample of hospitals participating in the EVEREG registry since the beginning was selected. Patients registered in these centers in the 2012–2020 period were included. A stratified random sampling was carried out, with the inclusion of 10% of registered cases per center with a minimum of 20 cases per center. At each participating center, two researchers not belonging to the center undergoing the audit checked (on site or telematically) the concordance between the data in the registry and the data contained in the case history of each patient. Results 330 patients have been analyzed, out of a total of 2673 registered, in 9 participating centers. The average accuracy has been 95.7%. Incorrect data 1.5% and missing data 2.3% Conclusion The group of pilot hospitals from this EVERG incisional hernia surgery registry shows a very high precision of 95.7%. The confirmation of these findings in all the centers participating in the registry will make it possible to guarantee the quality of the studies made and their comparability with other similar national registries. Trial registration nnTrial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov ID:NCT03899012.

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of perioperative blood transfusion and infectious complications on postoperative changes of inflammatory markers, as well as on disease-free survival (DFS) in patients undergoing curative gastric cancer resection. Methods: Multicenter cohort study in all patients undergoing gastric cancer resection with curative intent. Patients were classified into four groups based on their perioperative course: one, no blood transfusion and no infectious complication; two, blood transfusion; three, infectious complication; four, both transfusion and infectious complication. Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) was determined at diagnosis, immediately before surgery, and 10 days after surgery. A multivariate Cox regression model was used to analyze the relationship of perioperative group and dynamic changes of NLR with disease-free survival. Results: 282 patients were included, 181 in group one, 23 in group two, 55 in group three, and 23 in group four. Postoperative NLR changes showed progressive increase in the four groups. Univariate analysis showed that NLR change > 2.6 had a significant association with DFS (HR 1.55; 95% CI 1.06–2.26; p = 0.025), which was maintained in multivariate analysis (HR 1.67; 95% CI 1.14–2.46; p = 0.009). Perioperative classification was an independent predictor of DFS, with a progressive difference from group one: group two, HR 0.80 (95% CI: 0.40–1.61; p = 0.540); group three, HR 1.42 (95% CI: 0.88–2.30; p = 0.148), group four, HR 2.85 (95% CI: 1.64–4.95; p = 0.046). Conclusions: Combination of perioperative blood transfusion and infectious complications following gastric cancer surgery was related to greater NLR increase and poorer DFS. These findings suggest that perioperative blood transfusion and infectious complications may have a synergic effect creating a pro-inflammatory activation that favors tumor recurrence.