Dimitrios Vouros

Background/Objectives: Malnutrition is among the most consequential yet inconsistently addressed comorbidities in hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) cancer, arising at the intersection of cachexia, sarcopenia, systemic inflammation, hepatic dysfunction, and biliary obstruction. The Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA), the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) framework, and the Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) score are often used interchangeably, but they serve different purposes: nutritional assessment, malnutrition diagnosis, and prognostic risk stratification, respectively. This narrative review compares what the three tools measure, summarizes the HPB-specific evidence for each, and proposes a framework for matching the tool to the clinical question. Methods: A structured narrative review was performed. PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar were searched for studies applying PG-SGA, GLIM, or CONUT in pancreatic cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, or biliary tract cancer. HPB-specific evidence was prioritized and the evidence supporting each tool–tumor combination was classified by directness and study design. Results: Applied to the same populations, the tools report different prevalences and classify different patients. In the few HPB cohorts that directly compare tools, PG-SGA classified the largest proportion of patients as malnourished and is the only one of the three designed to record nutrition-impact symptoms and to guide intervention, but it is effort-dependent and may underdetect occult sarcopenia in cirrhosis. GLIM yields a criteria-based diagnosis with severity grading whose prevalence and prognostic value depend on how the muscle mass criterion is operationalized, for example from staging computed tomography. CONUT, computed from three routine laboratory values, is the least resource-intensive and is associated with survival across HPB tumor types in predominantly retrospective cohorts, but its components are confounded by hepatic dysfunction, cholestasis, and inflammation. Conclusions: PG-SGA, GLIM, and CONUT are complementary rather than interchangeable. Because direct comparative evidence in HPB cancer is limited, we propose a framework for matching each tool to the clinical question, tumor subtype, treatment phase and available resources, which requires prospective validation.

Background and Objectives: Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is the primary treatment for patients with resectable, non-metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma and periampullary tumors. Although surgical methods and perioperative management have improved, the procedure still carries a high risk of complications, with postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) being the most significant. This study focuses on identifying current risk factors for POPF after PD in a single HPB center. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed prospectively collected data from patients undergoing PD in our department between October 2018 and April 2024. Data included demographics, comorbidities, lifestyle factors, preoperative tests (bilirubin, CA19-9, HbA1c), intraoperative variables (pancreatic texture, duct diameter), and postoperative outcomes. POPF was classified using the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) criteria. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed. Results: A total of 118 patients underwent PD (82 males, 36 females; mean age 67 (45–85) years; mean body mass index (BMI) 26.6 kg/m²). POPF occurred in 37 patients (31%), with 27 Grade B (23%) and 10 Grade C (9%). The 30- and 90-day mortality rates were 5% and 12.7%, respectively. Univariate analysis showed associations between POPF and soft pancreas (p = 0.018), c-reactive protein (CRP) on postoperative day (POD) 5 (p = 0.004), and serum amylase on POD 0 (p = 0.008). Diabetes mellitus was associated with a lower incidence of POPF (p = 0.014). Multivariate analysis confirmed CRP on POD 5 (OR 1.007, p = 0.025) and DM (OR 0.254, p = 0.015), as independent factors. ROC analysis identified POD 0 amylase >113.5 U/L (AUC 0.717) and POD 5 CRP >125.3 mg/dL (AUC 0.669) as predictive values. Conclusions: POPF remains an important complication after PD. CRP > 126 mg/dL on POD 5 was associated with POPF and may serve as an adjunctive signal to guide further assessment, including imaging. The observed inverse association with diabetes mellitus is hypothesis-generating and should be interpreted cautiously, considering potential confounding and the influence of center volume, surgeon heterogeneity, and institutional protocols.

Background: Colorectal cancer surgery has been associated with surgical site infections (SSIs), leading to an increase in postoperative morbidity, length of stay and total cost. The aim of the present randomized study was to investigate the relationship between the preoperative administration of oral antibiotic therapy and SSI rate, as well as other postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery. Material and Methods: Patients who underwent colorectal cancer surgery in a university surgical department were included in the present study. Patients were randomized into two groups using the “block randomization” method. The intervention group received three doses of 400 mg rifaximin and one dose of 500 mg metronidazole per os, as well as mechanical bowel preparation the day before surgery. The control group underwent only mechanical bowel preparation the day before surgery. The study has been registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03563586). Results: Two hundred and five patients were finally included in the present study, 97 of whom received preoperative antibiotic therapy per os (intervention group). Patients of this group demonstrated a significantly lower SSI rate compared with patients who did not receive preoperative antibiotic therapy (7% vs. 16%, p = 0.049). However, preoperative antibiotic administration was not correlated with any other postoperative outcome (anastomotic leak, overall complications, readmissions, length of stay). Conclusions: Preoperative antibiotic therapy in combination with mechanical bowel preparation seemed to be correlated with a lower SSI rate after colorectal cancer surgery.

Background/Objective (s): Completion pancreatectomy (C.P.) is one acceptable treatment of choice in clinical scenarios such as management of post-pancreatectomy complications and recurrence in the pancreatic remnant. Studies referring to completion pancreatectomy as a distinct operation are limited, without emphasizing at the operation itself, rather reporting completion pancreatectomy as a possible option for treatment of various diseases. The identification of indications of CP in various pathologies and the clinical outcomes are therefore mandatory. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in the Pubmed and Scopus Databases (February 2020),guided by the PRISMA protocol, for all studies reporting CP as a surgical procedure with reference at indications for performing it combined with postoperative morbidity and/or mortality. Results: Out of 1647 studies, 32 studies from 10 countries with 2775 patients in total, of whom 561 (20.2%) CPs met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Inclusion year ranged from 1964 to 2018 and were published from 1992 until 2019. 17 studies with a total number of 249 CPs were performed for post-pancreatectomy complications. Mortality rate was 44.5% (111 out of 249). Morbidity rate was (72.6%). 12 studies with 225 CPs were performed for isolated local recurrence after initial resection with a morbidity rate of 21.5% and 0% mortality rate in the early postoperative period. Two studies with a total number of 12 patients reported CP as a treatment option for recurrent neuroendocrine neoplasms. The mortality in those studies was 8% (1/12) and the mean morbidity rate was 58.3% (7/12). Finally, CP for refractory chronic pancreatitis was presented in one study with morbidity and mortality rates of 19% and 0%, respectively. Conclusion: Completion pancreatectomy is a distinct treatment option for various pathologies. Morbidity and mortality rates depend on the indications of performing CP, the status performance of the patients and whether the operation is performed electively or urgently.

Pancreatoduodenectomy remains a complex abdominal operation for hpb surgeons. Significant complications keep on occurring to many patients undergoing Whipple procedure. We present ten patients, who required completion pancreatectomy in the early postoperative period after Whipples procedure, due to postoperative complications. Indications for completion pancreatectomy included: Sepsis secondary to uncontrolled GRADE C postoperative pancreatic fistula, pancreatic leak and bleeding, postoperative hemorrhage, pancreatic leak with gastrointestinal anastomosis dehiscence, and hepaticojejunal anastomosis dehiscence combined with hemorrhage. Completion pancreatectomy was carried out at a mean interval of 9 days following Whipple procedure. Six patients (60%) survived the operation and discharged from the hospital, with a median survival of 21.3 months. Four patients (40%) died in the early post-operative period due to sepsis (10%) and multiple organ failure (30%). Completion pancreatectomy after pancreatoduodenectomy is rarely indicated and it can be considered as a salvage procedure in the management of severe life-threatening post pancreatic surgery complications.