Background: s/Aims: This study aimed to compare the minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy with venous vascular resection (MI-PDVR) and open pancreatoduodenectomy with venous vascular resection (O-PDVR) for periampullary cancer. Methods: Data of 124 patients who underwent PDVR (45 MI-PDVR, 79 O-PDVR) between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2023, was retrospectively reviewed. Results: MI-PDVR is significantly better than O-PDVR in terms of perioperative outcomes (median operation time [452.69 minutes vs. 543.91 minutes; p = 0.004], estimated blood loss [410.44 mL vs. 747.59 mL; p < 0.01], intraoperative transfusion rate [2 cases vs. 18 cases; p = 0.01], and hospital stay [18.16 days vs. 23.91 days; p = 0.008]). The complications until the discharge day showed no significant difference between the two groups (Clavien–Dindo < 3, 84.4% vs. 82.3%; Clavien–Dindo ≥ 3, 15.6% vs. 17.7%; p = 0.809). In terms of long-term oncological outcomes, there was no statistical difference in overall survival (OS, 51.55 months [95% CI: 35.95–67.14] vs.median 49.92 months [95% CI: 40.97–58.87]; p = 0.340) and disease-free survival (DFS, median 35.06 months [95% CI: 21.47–48.65] vs.median 38.77 months [95% CI: 29.80–47.75]; p = 0.585), between the two groups. Long-term oncological outcomes for subgroup analysis focusing on pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma also showed no statistical differences in OS (40.86 months [95% CI: 34.45–47.27] vs.48.48 months [95% CI: 38.16–58.59]; p = 0.270) and DFS (24.42 months [95% CI: 17.03–31.85] vs. 34.35 months, [95% CI: 25.44–43.27]; p = 0.740). Conclusions MI-PDVR can provide better perioperative outcomes than O-PDVR, and has similar oncological impact.

Background: s/Aims: This study aimed to compare the minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy with venous vascular resection (MI-PDVR) and open pancreatoduodenectomy with venous vascular resection (O-PDVR) for periampullary cancer. Methods: Data of 124 patients who underwent PDVR (45 MI-PDVR, 79 O-PDVR) between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2023, was retrospectively reviewed. Results: MI-PDVR is significantly better than O-PDVR in terms of perioperative outcomes (median operation time [452.69 minutes vs. 543.91 minutes; p = 0.004], estimated blood loss [410.44 mL vs. 747.59 mL; p < 0.01], intraoperative transfusion rate [2 cases vs. 18 cases; p = 0.01], and hospital stay [18.16 days vs. 23.91 days; p = 0.008]). The complications until the discharge day showed no significant difference between the two groups (Clavien–Dindo < 3, 84.4% vs. 82.3%; Clavien–Dindo ≥ 3, 15.6% vs. 17.7%; p = 0.809). In terms of long-term oncological outcomes, there was no statistical difference in overall survival (OS, 51.55 months [95% CI: 35.95–67.14] vs.median 49.92 months [95% CI: 40.97–58.87]; p = 0.340) and disease-free survival (DFS, median 35.06 months [95% CI: 21.47–48.65] vs.median 38.77 months [95% CI: 29.80–47.75]; p = 0.585), between the two groups. Long-term oncological outcomes for subgroup analysis focusing on pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma also showed no statistical differences in OS (40.86 months [95% CI: 34.45–47.27] vs.48.48 months [95% CI: 38.16–58.59]; p = 0.270) and DFS (24.42 months [95% CI: 17.03–31.85] vs. 34.35 months, [95% CI: 25.44–43.27]; p = 0.740). Conclusions MI-PDVR can provide better perioperative outcomes than O-PDVR, and has similar oncological impact.

Background: s/Aims: This study aimed to compare the minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy with venous vascular resection (MI-PDVR) and open pancreatoduodenectomy with venous vascular resection (O-PDVR) for periampullary cancer. Methods: Data of 124 patients who underwent PDVR (45 MI-PDVR, 79 O-PDVR) between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2023, was retrospectively reviewed. Results: MI-PDVR is significantly better than O-PDVR in terms of perioperative outcomes (median operation time [452.69 minutes vs. 543.91 minutes; p = 0.004], estimated blood loss [410.44 mL vs. 747.59 mL; p < 0.01], intraoperative transfusion rate [2 cases vs. 18 cases; p = 0.01], and hospital stay [18.16 days vs. 23.91 days; p = 0.008]). The complications until the discharge day showed no significant difference between the two groups (Clavien–Dindo < 3, 84.4% vs. 82.3%; Clavien–Dindo ≥ 3, 15.6% vs. 17.7%; p = 0.809). In terms of long-term oncological outcomes, there was no statistical difference in overall survival (OS, 51.55 months [95% CI: 35.95–67.14] vs.median 49.92 months [95% CI: 40.97–58.87]; p = 0.340) and disease-free survival (DFS, median 35.06 months [95% CI: 21.47–48.65] vs.median 38.77 months [95% CI: 29.80–47.75]; p = 0.585), between the two groups. Long-term oncological outcomes for subgroup analysis focusing on pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma also showed no statistical differences in OS (40.86 months [95% CI: 34.45–47.27] vs.48.48 months [95% CI: 38.16–58.59]; p = 0.270) and DFS (24.42 months [95% CI: 17.03–31.85] vs. 34.35 months, [95% CI: 25.44–43.27]; p = 0.740). Conclusions MI-PDVR can provide better perioperative outcomes than O-PDVR, and has similar oncological impact.

Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) in pancreatic cancer is primarily criticized for its technical and oncological safety. Although solid evidence has not yet been established, many institutions are performing LPD for pancreatic cancer patients, with continuous efforts to ensure oncologic safety. In this video, we demonstrated a case of standard LPD combined with vascular resection in pancreatic cancer.

Purpose: The aim of the current study was to evaluate the adverse clinical impact of intraoperative conversion during laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD). Materials and Methods: The medical records of patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) were retrospectively reviewed. Perioperative clinical variables were compared between patients who underwent converted PD (cPD) and initially planned open PD (OPD) to investigate the clinical impact and predictive factors of intraoperative conversion during LPD. Results: A total of 171 patients were included. Among them, 31 patients (19.3%) were found to have intraoperative conversion during LPD. Failure of progression due to severe adhesion (12 patients, 7%) and major vessel invasion (7 patients, 4%) were the two most frequent reasons for conversion. On multivariate analysis, age [Exp(β)=1.044, p=0.044] and pancreatic texture [Expa(β)=2.431, p=0.039) were found to be independent factors for predicting intraoperative conversion during LPD. In comparative analysis with the OPD group, the cPD group had a longer operation time (516.8 min vs. 449.9 min, p=0.001), higher rate of postoperative hemorrhage (12.1% vs. 0.85%, p=0.008), higher reoperation rate (9.1% vs. 0%, p=0.01), and higher cost (21886.4 USD vs. 17168.9 USD, p=0.018). Conclusion Intraoperative conversion during LPD can have an adverse clinical impact on the postoperative course following LPD. Appropriate patients selection and improvement of surgical techniques will be crucial for unnecessary intraoperative conversion and safe LPD.

Purpose: The aim of the current study was to evaluate the adverse clinical impact of intraoperative conversion during laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD). Materials and Methods: The medical records of patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) were retrospectively reviewed. Perioperative clinical variables were compared between patients who underwent converted PD (cPD) and initially planned open PD (OPD) to investigate the clinical impact and predictive factors of intraoperative conversion during LPD. Results: A total of 171 patients were included. Among them, 31 patients (19.3%) were found to have intraoperative conversion during LPD. Failure of progression due to severe adhesion (12 patients, 7%) and major vessel invasion (7 patients, 4%) were the two most frequent reasons for conversion. On multivariate analysis, age [Exp(β)=1.044, p=0.044] and pancreatic texture [Expa(β)=2.431, p=0.039) were found to be independent factors for predicting intraoperative conversion during LPD. In comparative analysis with the OPD group, the cPD group had a longer operation time (516.8 min vs. 449.9 min, p=0.001), higher rate of postoperative hemorrhage (12.1% vs. 0.85%, p=0.008), higher reoperation rate (9.1% vs. 0%, p=0.01), and higher cost (21886.4 USD vs. 17168.9 USD, p=0.018). Conclusion Intraoperative conversion during LPD can have an adverse clinical impact on the postoperative course following LPD. Appropriate patients selection and improvement of surgical techniques will be crucial for unnecessary intraoperative conversion and safe LPD.

Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) in pancreatic cancer is primarily criticized for its technical and oncological safety. Although solid evidence has not yet been established, many institutions are performing LPD for pancreatic cancer patients, with continuous efforts to ensure oncologic safety. In this video, we demonstrated a case of standard LPD combined with vascular resection in pancreatic cancer.

Pseudomembranous necrotizing bronchial aspergillosis (PNBA) is a rare form of invasive aspergillosis with a very poor prognosis. The symptoms are non-specific, and the necrotizing plugs cause airway obstruction. Atelectasis and respiratory failure can be the initial manifestations. Recently, we treated an immunocompromised patient with PNBA, who presented with a sudden onset of atelectasis and acute respiratory failure. There were no preceding signs except for a mild cough and one febrile episode. Bronchoscopy revealed PNBA, and Aspergillus nidulans was cultured from the bronchial wash.
Adult ; Female ; Humans ; Immunocompromised Host ; Invasive Pulmonary Aspergillosis/*complications/*diagnosis ; Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute/complications ; Neutropenia/complications ; Pulmonary Atelectasis/*etiology ; Respiratory Insufficiency/*etiology

BACKGROUND: Paronychia is a common infectious disease affecting fingernails and toenails. Although bacterial and fungal infections as well as mechanical trauma may play roles in the pathogenesis of this disease, there are few bacteriological studies about paronychia in military personnel. OBJECTIVE: To identify the causative bacteria of paronychia in military personnel. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the microbiological results of 145 patients who visited a tertiary referral hospital for Korean soldiers from August 2004 to October 2006. RESULTS: Twenty-eight different types of aerobic bacteria were identified, with the most common being Staphylococcus aureus (38.0%), Streptococcus pyogenes (7.2%), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (5.4%). Staphylococcus aureus was identified mostly in finger and toe paronychial lesions and Pseudomonas aeruginosa was recovered commonly from toe paronychial lesions. All cases of paronychia were controlled by the combination of antiseptic dressing, topical antibacterial ointment, oral antibiotics, and antimycotic agents. CONCLUSION: The types of bacteria that most commonly caused paronychia in military personnel were Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus pyogenes, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Thus, the commonly used oral antibiotics for paronychia, such as amoxicillin-clavulanate, clindamycin, and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, are good choices in the treatment of paronychia in military personnel.
Anti-Bacterial Agents ; Bacteria ; Bacteria, Aerobic ; Bandages ; Clindamycin ; Communicable Diseases ; Fingers ; Humans ; Military Personnel ; Nails ; Paronychia ; Pseudomonas aeruginosa ; Retrospective Studies ; Staphylococcus ; Staphylococcus aureus ; Streptococcus pyogenes ; Tertiary Care Centers ; Toes ; Trimethoprim, Sulfamethoxazole Drug Combination

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate efficacy and toxicity of irinotecan, leucovorin and 5-fluorouracil (FOLFIRI) as second-line treatment after failure of oxaliplatin, leucovorin and 5-fluorouracil (FOLFOX) for advanced gastric cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who received modified FOLFOX-4 as first-line treatment and then received sequential modified FOLFIRI for disease progression were included in this study. The modified FOLFIRI regimen consisted of irinotecan 150 mg/m2 in a 90-minute intravenous infusion on day 1, leucovorin (LV) 20 mg/m2 and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) 400 mg/m2 as a bolus followed by 600 mg/m2 as a 22-hour infusion on days 1 and 2 with the same dose of 5-FU/LV of modified FOLFOX-4 every 2 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 32 patients received 126 courses of FOLFIRI chemotherapy. No complete response was achieved. Three patients (9.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0 to 20.1%) achieved partial response, whereas 11 (34.4%; 95% CI, 17.0 to 51.8%) patients showed stable disease. Disease control rate (complete response, partial responses and stable diseases) was 43.8% (95% CI, 25.6 to 61.9%) and median follow up duration was 11.3 months (range, 2.23 to 37.9 months). Median time to progression was 2 months (95% CI, 1.49 to 2.51 months), and median overall survival from the start of FOLFIRI was 5.84 months (95% CI, 4.34 to 7.34 months). Toxicities were tolerable. CONCLUSION: Modified FOLFIRI as second-line chemotherapy after failure of the modified FOLFOX-4 in advanced gastric cancer was tolerable but showed a lower response rate. Further study about retrying 5-FU/LV with irinotecan after failure of the 5-FU/LV combined regimen is necessary in advanced gastric cancer.
Camptothecin ; Disease Progression ; Fluorouracil ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Infusions, Intravenous ; Leucovorin ; Organoplatinum Compounds ; Stomach Neoplasms