Bohumil Jon

Intraoperative enteroscopy: ten years' experience at a single tertiary center.

Background and methodsIntraoperative enteroscopy is an invasive technique for small bowel investigation. It enables us to investigate the entire small intestine and to treat pathological findings by endoscopic or surgical means at the same time. The investigation is invasive and that is why the proper indication is mandatory.ResultsForty-one intraoperative enteroscopies were performed at our center within a 10-year period. The procedure was diagnostic in 37/41 patients (90.2%); in 3 patients no pathology was found, and in 1 patient we found only previously diagnosed celiac disease. The investigation was therapeutic in 35/41 (85.4%) patients; 2 patients with small bowel ulcers did not require any intraoperative therapy. The pathological findings were arteriovenous malformations (found in 12 patients), small bowel NSAID-induced or Crohn’s ulcers (8 patients)—ulcerations and arteriovenous malformations were simultaneously found in three patients; carcinoid of the small intestine (5 patients); Peutz-Jeghers syndrome (5 patients); bleeding polyps (2 gastrointestinal stromal tumors, 1 paraganglioma, and 1 lipoma—in 4 patients); Rendu-Osler-Weber disease (2 patients); multiple cavernous hemangiomas in blue rubber bleb nevus syndrome (1 patient); Henoch-Schönlein purpura (1 patient); aortoenteral fistula (1 patient); and retrograde intussusception of Meckel’s diverticulum (1 patient). In five patients with Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, 6-22 hamartomas (median of 18 per session) were removed by means of endoscopic polypectomy during intraoperative enteroscopy. There were no major procedure-related complications in our series.ConclusionsIntraoperative enteroscopy is accepted as the ultimate diagnostic procedure for complete investigation of the small bowel. Despite the introduction of double-balloon enteroscopy into clinical practice, intraoperative enteroscopy will be reserved for those cases where double-balloon enteroscopy cannot be performed or fails to investigate the entire small intestine, especially to prevent excessive bowel resection.

Dissection of the infrarenal aorta treated by stent graft placement

Aortic dissection is primarily localized in the thoracic aorta. Dissection of the abdominal aorta is exceedingly rare, especially in the absence of a blunt abdominal trauma. Two cases of a primarily infrarenal aortic dissection were diagnosed by US, CT and angiography. The patients were treated by stent graft placement. The stent grafts were introduced via a femoral arteriotomy through the introducer sheath and were placed so that they occluded entry and reentry of aortic dissection. The stent graft placement caused total obliteration of a false channel of the dissection immediately after endoprosthesis deployment. The patients were followed-up by CT and angiography at 16 and 3 months after surgery without complication.

Juxtarenal aortic aneurysm: endoluminal transfemoral repair?

Endoluminal transfermoral repair of an abdominal aortic aneurysm by a stent graft placement requires a segment of the nondilated infrarenal aorta of at least 15 mm long for safe stent graft attachment. The possibility of endoluminal treatment of a juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm with partially covered spiral Z stent was assessed in experiment and in three clinical cases. In the experiment, the noncovered spiral Z stent was placed into the abdominal aorta, across the origins of renal arteries and mesenteric arteries, in six dogs. In the clinical cases, a partially covered stent graft was attached in 3 patients with the juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (of the group of 12 patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm). The stent grafts were attached with proximal uncovered parts across the origins of the renal arteries. In experiment, the renal artery occlusions or stenoses were not observed 36 months after stent placement, and in clinic 3 patients with the juxtarenal aortic aneurysm were successfully treated by stent graft placement. There were no signs of flow impairment into the renal arteries 14 months after stent graft implantation. This approach can possibly expand the indications for endoluminal grafting in the treatment of juxtarenal aortic aneurysms in patients who are at high risk for surgery.

Long-term survival of a patient after resection of a gastrointestinal stromal tumor arising from the pancreas

BACKGROUND Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) may arise in any part of the gastrointestinal tract; extra-gastrointestinal locations are extremely rare. Only a few cases of extragastrointestinal stromal tumor arising from the pancreas were reported. None of the reports described a long-term follow-up of the patients. METHOD This report describes an interesting and unusual case of GIST arising from the pancreas. RESULTS A 74-year-old female presented with a palpable abdominal mass. CT scan showed a large mass 11 x 8 x 4 cm originating from the tail of the pancreas. Percutaneous biopsy revealed a GIST predominantly with spindle cells, but some parts also contained epitheloid cells. The patient was treated by distal pancreatic resection with splenectomy. Immunohistochemistry of the tumor showed a staining pattern characteristic of GIST. The patient has achieved a long-term survival of five years and six months without any sign of recurrence of the disease. CONCLUSION This is the first reported case of an extra-gastrointestinal stromal tumor arising from the pancreas treated surgically, with a long-term survival.

Surgical technique in distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review of randomized trials.

Despite recent improvements in surgical technique, the morbidity of distal pancreatectomy remains high, with pancreatic fistula being the most significant postoperative complication. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) dealing with surgical techniques in distal pancreatectomy was carried out to summarize up-to-date knowledge on this topic. The Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, Embase, Web of Science, and Pubmed were searched for relevant articles published from 1990 to December 2013. Ten RCTs were identified and included in the systematic review, with a total of 1286 patients being randomized (samples ranging from 41 to 450). The reviewers were in agreement for application of the eligibility criteria for study selection. It was not possible to carry out meta-analysis of these studies because of the heterogeneity of surgical techniques and approaches, such as varying methods of pancreas transection, reinforcement of the stump with seromuscular patch or pancreaticoenteric anastomosis, sealing with fibrin sealants and pancreatic stent placement. Management of the pancreatic remnant after distal pancreatectomy is still a matter of debate. The results of this systematic review are possibly biased by methodological problems in some of the included studies. New well designed and carefully conducted RCTs must be performed to establish the optimal strategy for pancreatic remnant management after distal pancreatectomy.

Pancreatic Castleman disease treated with laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND Castleman disease is an uncommon lymphoproliferative disorder most frequently occurring in the mediastinum. Abdominal forms are less frequent, with pancreatic localization of the disease in particular being extremely rare. Only seventeen cases have been described in the world literature. METHOD This report describes an interesting and unusual case of pancreatic Castleman disease treated with laparoscopic resection. RESULTS A 48-year-old woman presented with epigastric pain. CT scan showed a well-encapsulated mass on the ventral border of the pancreas. Endosonography with fine needle aspiration biopsy was performed. Biopsy showed lymphoid elements and structures of a normal lymph node. The patient was treated with laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. The pancreas was transected with a Ligasure device and the pancreatic stump was secured with a manual suture. One year after surgery the patient was complaint-free and showed no signs of recurrence of the disease. CONCLUSIONS Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is a feasible and safe method for the treatment of lesions in the body and tail of the pancreas. Transection of the pancreas with a Ligasure device offers the advantages of low bleeding and low risk of pancreatic fistula.

Impact of postoperative complications on clinical and economic consequences in pancreatic surgery

Purpose Patients who develop complications consume a disproportionately large share of available resources in surgery; therefore the attention of healthcare funders focuses on the economic impact of complications. The main objective of this work was to assess the clinical and economic impact of postoperative complications in pancreatic surgery, and furthermore to assess risk factors for increased costs. Methods In all, 161 consecutive patients underwent pancreatic resection. The costs of the treatment were determined and analyzed. Results The overall morbidity rate was 53.4%, and the in-hospital mortality rate was 3.7%. The median of costs for all patients without complication was 3,963 Euro, whereas the median of costs for patients with at least one complication was significantly increased at 10,670 Euro (P < 0.001). In multivariate analysis American Society of Anesthesiologists ≥ 3 (P = 0.006), multivisceral resection (P < 0.001) and any complication (P < 0.001) were independently associated with increased costs. Conclusion Postoperative complications are associated with an increase in mortality, length of hospital stay, and hospital costs. The treatment costs increase with the severity of the postoperative complications. Those factors that are known to increase the treatment costs in pancreatic resection should be considered when planning patients for surgery.

DRAPA trial – closed-suction drains versus closed gravity drains in pancreatic surgery: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BackgroundThe morbidity of pancreatic resection remains high, with pancreatic fistula being the most common cause. The important question is whether any postoperative treatment adjustment may prevent the development of clinically significant postoperative pancreatic fistulae. Recent studies have shown that intraabdominal drains and manipulation using them are of great importance. Although authors of a few retrospective reports have described good results of pancreatic resection without the use of intraabdominal drains, a recent prospective randomized trial showed that routine elimination of drains in pancreaticoduodenectomy is associated with poor outcome. An important issue arises as to which type of drain is most suitable for pancreatic resection. Two types of surgical drains exist: open drains and closed drains. Open drains are considered obsolete nowadays because of frequent retrograde infection. Closed drains include two types: passive gravity drains and closed-suction drains. Closed-suction drains are more effective, as they remove fluid from the abdominal cavity under light pressure. However, some surgeons believe that closed-suction drains represent a potential hazard to patients and that negative pressure might increase the risk of pancreatic fistulae. Nobody has yet specifically dealt with the question of which kind of drainage is most appropriate in pancreatic surgery.Methods/DesignThe aim of the DRAins in PAncreatic surgery (DRAPA) trial is to compare the closed-suction drain versus the closed passive gravity drain in pancreatic resection. DRAPA is a dual-centre, prospective, randomized controlled trial. The primary endpoint is the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula; the secondary endpoint is postoperative morbidity with follow-up of 3 months.DiscussionNo study to date has compared different types of drains in pancreatic surgery. This study is designed to answer the question whether any particular type of drain might lower the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula or other complications.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01988519. Registered 13 November 2013.

Intra-abdominal drainage following pancreatic resection: A systematic review.

AIM To study all the aspects of drain management in pancreatic surgery. METHODS We conducted a systematic review according to the PRISMA guidelines. We searched the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, Web of Science, and PubMed (MEDLINE) for relevant articles on drain management in pancreatic surgery. The reference lists of relevant studies were screened to retrieve any further studies. We included all articles that reported clinical studies on human subjects with elective pancreatic resection and that compared various strategies of intra-abdominal drain management, such as drain vs no drain, selective drain use, early vs late drain extraction, and the use of different types of drains. RESULTS A total of 19 studies concerned with drain management in pancreatic surgery involving 4194 patients were selected for this systematic review. We included studies analyzing the outcomes of pancreatic resection with and without intra-abdominal drains, studies comparing early vs late drain removal and studies analyzing different types of drains. The majority of the studies reporting equal or superior results for pancreatic resection without drains were retrospective and observational with significant selection bias. One recent randomized trial reported higher postoperative morbidity and mortality with routine omission of intra-abdominal drains. With respect to the timing of drain removal, all of the included studies reported superior results with early drain removal. Regarding the various types of drains, there is insufficient evidence to determine which type of drain is more suitable following pancreatic resection. CONCLUSION The prophylactic use of drains remains controversial. When drains are used, early removal is recommended. Further trials comparing types of drains are ongoing.

The effect of somatostatin and its analogs in the prevention of pancreatic fistula after elective pancreatic surgery

SummaryBACKGROUND: The prophylactic use of somatostatin and its analogs has been suggested to lower the rate of pancreatic fistula. The aim of this review is to discuss the results of published randomized trials and meta-analyses studying the effect of somatostatin and its analogs. METHODS: We performed a Medline search for prospective randomized trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses with regard to the prophylactic use of somatostatin and its analogs. RESULTS: Eleven randomized trials and six meta-analyses were identified. The randomized trials differ in terms of study designs, diagnosis, operative procedures, drug dosage, time of administration, and the pancreatic fistula definition; therefore, it is advisable to carefully interpret the results of the individual randomized trials. CONCLUSIONS: The routine administration of somatostatin and its analogs in elective pancreatic surgery cannot be recommended. However, selective administration is advisable in cases which carry significantly higher risk of developing pancreatic fistula.