RESUMO
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to detect the critical view of safety during elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: This was a prospective, observational study evaluating the detection of the critical view of safety with an AI software in a consecutive series of elective laparoscopic cholecystectomies compared with the blinded evaluation of 3 surgeons. The program was created using the digital tools PyCharm (JetBrains), Google Colab Pro (https://colab.google/), and YOLOv8 (Ultralytics). RESULTS: A total of 40 consecutive elective laparoscopic cholecystectomies were included in the study. The program was able to detect the critical view of safety in all cases following the experts' blinded opinion. CONCLUSION: In this preliminary experience, an AI software was able to detect the critical view of safety in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomies. Its application during nonelective cases, in which the critical view of safety is harder to achieve, might warrant further studies.
Assuntos
Inteligência Artificial , Colecistectomia Laparoscópica , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos , Segurança do Paciente , Humanos , Colecistectomia Laparoscópica/efeitos adversos , Colecistectomia Laparoscópica/métodos , Estudos Prospectivos , Feminino , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos/efeitos adversos , Software , Adulto , IdosoRESUMO
RESUMEN Antecedentes: la pancreatectomía posneoadyuvancia en paciente sin progresión de la enfermedad es el tratamiento estándar en el cáncer pancreático "borderline"; sin embargo, no existe hasta ahora ninguna serie nacional publicada. Objetivo: evaluar la morbilidad y mortalidad de la pancreatectomía en pacientes con cáncer de páncreas resecable "borderline" tratados previamente con neoadyuvancia. Material y métodos: se analizaron 15 pacientes tratados en el período 2011-2018. Se evaluaron los datos epidemiológicos, el tipo de neoadyuvancia, la respuesta radiológica posneoadyuvancia, la morbilidad, mortalidad y supervivencia. Se compararon los 15 pacientes pancretectomizados posneoadyuvancia con 15 pacientes pancreatectomizados sin neoadyuvancia previa. Resultados: de los 15 pacientes, 8 eran del sexo masculino y el promedio de edad fue de 66,5 años. El tipo de neoadyuvancia más frecuente fue folforinox (n = 6) y gemcitabina/placitaxel (n = 5); se adicionó radioterapia en 8 pacientes. La evaluación radiológica posneoadyuvancia mostró enfermedad estable en 10 pacientes y respuesta parcial en 4. Se realizaron 11 duodenopancreatectomías y 4 esplenopancreatectomías. En 10 pacientes fue necesario algún tipo de resección vascular. La morbilidad fue del 60% (9/6), no se registró mortalidad y la supervivencia media fue de 23,4 meses. No hubo diferencias significativas en la morbilidad, mortalidad y supervivencia cuando se comparó con los 15 pacientes pancreatectomizados sin neaodyuvancia. Conclusión: el tratamiento con neoadyuvancia en cáncer de páncreas avanzado permite ampliar su resecabilidad. La pancreatectomía posneoadyuvancia, en centros de alto volumen, tiene morbilidad, mortalidad y supervivencia similares a las de las pancreatectomías que no requieren neaoadyuvancia.
ABSTRACT Background: Pancreatectomy after neoadjuvant therapy in patients without disease progression is the standard treatment for borderline pancreatic cancer; however, no national series have been published to date. Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate morbidity and mortality of patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer undergoing pancreatectomy after neoadjuvant therapy. Material and methods: A total of 15 patients treated between 2011 and 2018 were analyzed. The epidemiologic data, type of neodajuvant therapy, radiological evaluation of the response to neoadjuvant therapy, morbidity, mortality and survival were evaluated. These 15 patients who underwent pancreatectomy after neoadjuvant therapy were compared with 15 pancreatectomized patients without previous neoadjuvant therapy. Results: Mean age was 66.5 years and 8 patients were men. The most common neoadjuvant therapy regimens were FOLFIRINOX (n = 6) and gemcitabine/paclitaxel (n = 5); 8 patients required additional radiation therapy. The radiological evaluation of the response to neoadjuvant therapy showed stable disease in 10 patients and partial response in 4. Eleven patients underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy and 4 underwent splenectomy and pancreatectomy. Ten patients required some type of vascular resection. Morbidity was 60% (9/15), there were no deaths and mean survival was 23.4 months. There were no significant differences in morbidity, mortality and survival with the 15 pancreatectomized patients without previous neoadjuvant therapy. Conclusion: Neoadjuvant therapy has extended resectability of advanced pancreatic cancer. In high volume centers, pancreatectomy after neoadjuvant therapy has similar morbidity, and survival to those of pancreatic resections without previous neoadjuvant therapy.
RESUMO
RESUMEN Antecedentes: el manejo laparoscópico en un tiempo de la coledocolitiasis se acompaña de una tasa de éxito elevada en la mayoría de los casos. Una excepción a esto son los cálculos coledocianos difi cultosos. Objetivo: describir los resultados del manejo de cálculos coledocianos dificultosos. Material y métodos: revisión retrospectiva de una serie consecutiva de casos de cálculos coledocianos dificultosos tratados durante el período 2018-2020. Resultados: 8 pacientes cumplieron con el criterio de inclusión. El manejo en un tiempo por videola paroscopia (5 casos) tuvo un 60% de conversión a cirugía abierta. Los otros pacientes (3 casos) fueron manejados inicialmente con endoscopia biliar por colangitis grave y fueron resueltos luego en forma electiva por instrumentación transcística. Conclusión: esta experiencia inicial sugiere que el abordaje en dos tiempos podría favorecer la resolu ción mininvasiva de los cálculos coledocianos dificultosos.
ABSTRACT Background: Single-stage procedure for the treatment of choledocholithiasis by laparoscopy is associated with high success rate in most cases. Difficult common bile duct stones are an exception to this rule. Objective: The aim of this study is to describe the results obtained with the management of difficult common bile duct stones. Material and methods: We conducted a retrospective review of a consecutive series of cases of difficult common bile duct stones treated between 2018-2020. Results: Eight patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Of the 5 patients managed with single-stage approach through video-assisted laparoscopy, 60% required conversion to open surgery. The other 3 cases were initially managed with endoscopic cholangiography due to severe cholangitis and were solved with elective transcystic instrumentation. Conclusion: This initial experience suggests that the two-stage approach could be better to treat difficult common bile duct stones with a minimally invasive approach.
RESUMO
RESUMEN Antecedentes: la prevalencia conjunta de litiasis vesicular y coledociana aumenta con la edad y llega al 15% en la octava década de la vida. Su manejo continúa siendo controvertido: algunos profesionales prefieren el abordaje en un tiempo por videolaparoscopia, y otros, el abordaje en dos tiempos con endoscopia (CPRE preoperatoria) seguida de colecistectomía laparoscópica. Objetivo: evaluar la eficacia y seguridad del manejo en un tiempo por videolaparoscopia en pacientes consecutivos con diagnóstico de litiasis vesicular y coledociana. Material y métodos: estudio retrospectivo con datos de una base de datos prospectiva, entre julio de 2008 y julio de 2018. Resultados: sobre un total de 2447 colecistectomías laparoscópicas realizadas en el citado período, 416 (17%) presentaron litiasis coledociana. El éxito global de la vía transcística en la extracción de litiasis coledociana fue del 81,2%: del 70,4% en los casos con diagnóstico prequirúrgico de colestasis extrahepática litiásica y del 92,9% en los otros diagnósticos. La morbilidad fue del 4%, sin mortalidad ni lesiones quirúrgicas de la vía biliar. Conclusión : el manejo en un tiempo por videolaparoscopia es eficaz y seguro debido al elevado éxito global de la instrumentación transcística (ITC). El diagnóstico preoperatorio de coledocolitiasis condi ciona una disminución de esa eficacia, por mayor indicación de coledocotomía, con un aumento de la morbilidad y del tiempo de internación.
ABSTRACT Background: The prevalence of common bile duct stones associated with cholelithiasis increases with age and is about 15 % in the 8th decade of life but its management is still controversial. Some surgeons prefer the single-stage approach with laparoscopy while others suggest the two-stage management with preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Objective: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of feasibility of single-stage laparoscopic surgery in patients with cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis. Material and methods: We conducted a retrospective study with prospectively collected data between July 2008 and July 2018. Results: Of 2447 laparoscopic cholecystectomies performed during the study period, 416 presented common bile duct stones. The global success of the transcystic approach to clear common bile duct stones was 81.2%, 70.4% in the cases with preoperative diagnosis of choledocholithiasis and 92.9% for other diagnoses. The rate of complications was 4% without deaths or bile duct injuries. Conclusion: Single-stage laparoscopic surgery is an efficient and safe approach based on the high global success of transcystic exploration. The preoperative diagnosis of choledocholithiasis reduces the efficacy of the procedure due to greater indication of choledocotomy, with complications and longer length of hospital stay.
Assuntos
Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica , Colecistectomia Laparoscópica , Laparoscopia , Colelitíase , Eficácia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Coledocolitíase , EndoscopiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Because infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) has multiple presentations, not all patients are likely to benefit from the same first-line treatment. Our objective was to evaluate morbidity and mortality in a series of patients treated with a multimodal therapeutic approach. METHODS: Between May 2012 and May 2019, 51 patients diagnosed with IPN were treated. The 5 initial treatment alternatives were as follows: percutaneous drainage, minimally invasive necrosectomy, antibiotics alone, transgastric necrosectomy, and temporizing percutaneous/endoscopic drainage. Initial treatment selection depended on evolution, clinical condition, and extension of pancreatic necrosis. Success, morbidity, and mortality rates were determined. RESULTS: In terms of determinant-based classification, 37 were classified as severe, and 14 as critical. Percutaneous, temporizing drainage, minimally invasive necrosectomy, antibiotics alone and transgastric necrosectomy approaches were used in 21, 10, 11, 4, and 5 patients, respectively. Necrosectomy was not required in 18 patients (35%). There were no significant differences in mortality among the different treatment approaches (P < 0.45). Overall success, morbidity, and mortality rates were 68.6%, 52.9%, and 7.8%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The multimodal approach seems to be a rational and efficient strategy for the initial treatment of IPN.
Assuntos
Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Desbridamento/métodos , Drenagem/métodos , Endoscopia/métodos , Pâncreas/efeitos dos fármacos , Pâncreas/cirurgia , Pancreatite Necrosante Aguda/terapia , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Infecções/complicações , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Necrose , Pâncreas/diagnóstico por imagem , Pancreatite Necrosante Aguda/complicações , Pancreatite Necrosante Aguda/mortalidade , Taxa de Sobrevida , Tomografia Computadorizada por Raios X , Resultado do Tratamento , Adulto JovemRESUMO
RESUMEN Antecedentes: la pandemia de COVID-19 ha introducido cambios drásticos en el sistema de salud. Las cirugías electivas son una de las actividades quirúrgicas que más han descendido durante la pandemia. Objetivo: analizar el impacto de la pandemia de COVID-19 en la cirugía pancreática en una institución pública y otra privada. Se comparó, en cada institución, con el número de cirugías en el mismo período del año pasado. Material y métodos: se revisaron en una base prospectiva los pacientes que recibieron una cirugía pancreática en las dos instituciones entre el 10/3/20 y el 24/6/20. Se determinaron los datos epide miológicos, el tipo de resección pancreática, el diagnóstico anatomopatológico, la morbilidad y la mor talidad. Se compararon con los pacientes en ambas instituciones que recibieron cirugía pancreática durante el período 10/3/19 al 24/6/19. Resultados: durante la pandemia se realizaron 23 resecciones pancreáticas (13 duodenopancreatec tomías cefálicas, 9 pancreatectomías izquierdas y 1 pancreatectomía total). El 70% (16/23) fueron adenocarcinomas. La morbilidad alcanzó el 34,7% y no se registró mortalidad. Ningún paciente ni miembro del equipo quirúrgico se infectó con coronavirus. La pandemia no tuvo impacto en el núme ro de cirugías en el centro privado (22 vs. 20, p = 0,88), mientras que en el centro público hubo una reducción significativa en el número de cirugías (14 vs. 3, p = 0,009). Conclusión: la cirugía pancreática se puede hacer con seguridad durante la pandemia. En el centro privado se mantuvo el número de cirugías pancreáticas. En el centro público, con máxima prioridad para pacientes con COVID-19, hubo un descenso significativo.
ABSTRACT Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has introduced dramatic changes in the health system. Elective surgeries are the surgical activities with greater decline during the pandemic. Objective: The aim of this paper is to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in pancreatic sur gery in a public and a private institution. The number of surgeries performed in each institution was compared with those performed in same period of the previous year. Material and methods: Data from a prospective database of all the patients who underwent pancrea tic surgery between March 10, 2020, and June 3, 2020, were analyzed. The epidemiological data, type of pancreatic resection, pathology diagnosis, morbidity and mortality were determined in each insti tution and compared with patients who underwent pancreatic surgery in both institutions between March 3, 2019, and June 24, 2019. Results: 23 pancreatic resections were performed during the pandemic (13 cephalic pancreaticoduo denectomies, 9 left pancreatectomies and 1 total pancreatectomy); 70% (16/23) were adenocarcino mas. There were 34.7% complications and no deaths were reported. None of the patients was infected with coronavirus. The pandemic had no impact on the number of pancreatic resections in the private institution (22 vs. 20, p = 0.88), while the number of pancreatic surgeries was significantly lower in the public center (14 vs. 3, p = 0.009). Conclusion: Pancreatic surgery can be safely performed during the pandemic. The number of pancrea tic surgeries did not decline during the pandemic. The priority for treating patients with COVID-19 at the public center resulted in a significant decrease in pancreatic surgeries.
Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Pancreatectomia/estatística & dados numéricos , Morbidade , COVID-19 , Pâncreas , Pancreatectomia/mortalidade , Centro Cirúrgico Hospitalar , Hospitais Privados , Hospitais PúblicosRESUMO
Antecedentes: en las últmas décadas se han extendido las indicaciones de duodenopancreatectomía cefálica (DPC). Sin embargo, las series con más de 1000 DPC provienen de unos pocos centros de los Estados Unidos y Europa y ninguna de Latinoamérica. Objetivo: evaluar la morbilidad y mortalidad de 1028 DPC consecutivas realizadas por un mismo equipo quirúrgico. Material y métodos: se analizaron los datos de una base prospectiva de 1028 DPC consecutivas. Se determinaron los datos demográficos, la indicación de la cirugía, el intervalo de tempo entre el inicio de los síntomas y la primera consulta, la clasificación de la American Society of Anesthesiologistis (ASA), el tipo de técnica quirúrgica, el tempo operatorio, la colocación de drenaje biliar previo, el diagnóstico anatomopatológico, la morbilidad y la mortalidad. Se compararon la morbilidad y la mortalidad de la DPC en dos centros de salud. Resultados: las 1028 DPC se realizaron en un período comprendido entre julio de 1994 y diciembre de 2014. La edad promedio fue 59,6 años y 565 pacientes (55%) fueron de sexo masculino. Las indicaciones más frecuentes fueron tumor de páncreas (n=262) y tumor de papila (n=249). En 670 casos se diagnosticó patología maligna. El promedio de tempo entre el inicio de los síntomas y la primera consulta fue de 71 días (rango 10 a 123 días). En 461 pacientes (44%) se drenó la vía biliar antes de la cirugía. En 399 pacientes (35,3%) se registraron una o varias complicaciones. La fistula pancreática (21%) y el vaciamiento gástrico retardado (11%) fueron las complicaciones más frecuentes. Se registró una mortalidad del 3,1% (32 pacientes). Todas las DPC fueron realizadas en dos centros, uno público (n=642) y el otro privado (n=386). Los pacientes operados en el centro público tuvieron en forma signi-ficativa mayor morbilidad (46% vs. 27%, p> 0,001) y mortalidad (4% vs. 1,5%, p< 0,001). Conclusión: la DPC realizada por cirujanos de alto volumen en cirugía pancreática tene elevada morbilidad, pero baja mortalidad. A pesar de los buenos resultados globales, la morbimortalidad de la DPC en un centro público fue significativamente mayor que la del centro privado.
Background: in recent decades the indicatons for pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) has been extended. However, series of patentis with more than 1000 PD come from a few center in the USA and Europe and none from Latin America. Objective: to evaluate the morbidity and mortality of 1028 consecutive PD performed by the same surgical team. Material and methods: we analyzed data from a prospective data base of 1028 consecutive PD. The demographic data, the indicaton of surgery, the tme interval between the onset of symptoms and the frst consultaton, the classificaton of the ASA, the type of surgical technique, operative tme, placement of biliary drainage, the anatomopathological diagnosis, the morbidity and the mortality was determined. We compared the morbidity and mortality of the PD at two diferent health centers Resultis: the 1028 PD were performed in a period between July 1994 and December 2014. The mean age was 59.6 years and 565 (55%) were male. The most frequent indicatons were pancreatic tumor (n = 262) and ampullary tumor (n = 249). Malignant tumors were found in 670 patentis. The average tme between onset of symptoms and the frst consultaton was 71 days (range 10-123 days). Preoperative biliary drainage were performed in 461 (44%) patentis. Morbility was 35.3% (399 patentis). Pancreatic fistula (21%) and delayed gastric emptying (11%) were the most frequent complicatons. All PD were performed at two centers, one public (n = 642) and the other private (n = 386). Patentis operated at the private center had significantly lower morbidity (27% vs 46%, p <0.001) and mortality (1.5% vs 4%, p <0.001) Conclusion: the DPC performed by high-volume surgeons in pancreatic surgery has high morbility, but low mortality. Despite the overall good performance, morbidity and mortality of the DPC in a public center was significantly higher than the private center.
Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Adolescente , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Adulto Jovem , Morbidade , Pancreaticoduodenectomia/mortalidade , Pâncreas , Pancreatectomia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/epidemiologia , Adenocarcinoma/epidemiologia , Câncer Papilífero da Tireoide/epidemiologiaRESUMO
In Argentina there are no multicenter studies evaluating the management of patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) nationwide. OBJECTIVES: The main objective of this study is to know how the patients with AP are treated in Argentina. The secondary objective is to assess whether the results comply with the recommendation of the American College of Gastroenterology Guide. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty three center participated in the study. They include in a database hosted online consecutive patients with acute pancreatitis from june 2010 to june 2013. RESULTS: 854 patients entered the study. The average age was 46.6 years and 495 (58%) belonged to the female sex. The most common cause (88.2%) of AP was biliary. Some prognostic system was used in 99 % of patients and the most used was Ranson (74.5%). Were classified as mild 714 (83.6%) patients and severe 140 (16.4%). Systemic complications occurred in 43 patients and local complications in 21. 86 patients underwent dynamic CT scans and 73 patients had pancreatic and / or peripancreatic necrosis. Mortality was 1.5%. There was no difference in mortality in relation to the size, complexity or affiliation of the center. The comply of key recommendations of the American College of Gastroenterology Guide was over 80%. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis and treatment of patients with AP in 23 health centers located throughout the country was optimal. The management complied with most of the recommendations of the American College of Gastroenterology Guide.
Assuntos
Pancreatite/diagnóstico , Pancreatite/cirurgia , Doença Aguda , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Argentina/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pancreatite/etiologia , Pancreatite/mortalidade , Estudos Prospectivos , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Adulto JovemRESUMO
In Argentina there are no multicenter studies evaluating the management of patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) nationwide. OBJECTIVES: The main objective of this study is to know how the patients with AP are treated in Argentina. The secondary objective is to assess whether the results comply with the recommendation of the American College of Gastroenterology Guide. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty three center participated in the study. They include in a database hosted online consecutive patients with acute pancreatitis from june 2010 to june 2013. RESULTS: 854 patients entered the study. The average age was 46.6 years and 495 (58%) belonged to the female sex. The most common cause (88.2%) of AP was biliary. Some prognostic system was used in 99 % of patients and the most used was Ranson (74.5%). Were classified as mild 714 (83.6%) patients and severe 140 (16.4%). Systemic complications occurred in 43 patients and local complications in 21. 86 patients underwent dynamic CT scans and 73 patients had pancreatic and / or peripancreatic necrosis. Mortality was 1.5%. There was no difference in mortality in relation to the size, complexity or affiliation of the center. The comply of key recommendations of the American College of Gastroenterology Guide was over 80%. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis and treatment of patients with AP in 23 health centers located throughout the country was optimal. The management complied with most of the recommendations of the American College of Gastroenterology Guide.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: There is considerable evidence on the direct relationship between higher volume and lower mortality in the pancreatoduodenectomy (DPC). However, there is little evidence of morbidity and mortality in the process of building a high-volume pancreatic surgery center. Objective. To evaluate the morbidity and mortality of the DPC in the process of building a high-volume center for pancreatic resection. METHODS: All consecutive patients undergoing DPC from July 2007 through July 2009 at a single center were included. High volume center was defined as that doing more than 19 DPC per year and high volume surgeon as that doing 16 or more DPC per year. The analysis of data was carried out in two periods according to the number of DPC per year: the first (1998 to 2005) as low volume center and the second (2006 to 2012) as high volume center. RESULTS: Three hundred and thirty five DPC were conducted consecutively. All surgeries were performed by a high volume surgeon. One hundred and seven patients were operated in the first period and 228 in the second period. There were no significant differences in morbidity and mortality between the both periods. In the second period there were significantly less operative time and minor length ofstay. CONCLUSIONS: High volume surgeons in pancreatic surgery can transfer their experience to the creation of a high volume pancreatic surgery center without sacrificing the morbidity and mortality.