BackgroundMalignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) is a debilitating condition that frequently occurs in patients with malignancies of the distal stomach and (peri)ampullary region. The standard... Show moreBackgroundMalignant gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) is a debilitating condition that frequently occurs in patients with malignancies of the distal stomach and (peri)ampullary region. The standard palliative treatment for patients with a reasonable life expectancy and adequate performance status is a laparoscopic surgical gastrojejunostomy (SGJ). Recently, endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) emerged as a promising alternative to the surgical approach. The present study aims to compare these treatment modalities in terms of efficacy, safety, and costs.MethodsThe ENDURO-study is a multicentre, open-label, parallel-group randomized controlled trial. In total, ninety-six patients with gastric outlet obstruction caused by an irresectable or metastasized malignancy will be 1:1 randomized to either SGJ or EUS-GE. The primary endpoint is time to tolerate at least soft solids. The co-primary endpoint is the proportion of patients with persisting or recurring symptoms of gastric outlet obstruction for which a reintervention is required. Secondary endpoints are technical and clinical success, quality of life, gastroenterostomy dysfunction, reinterventions, time to reintervention, adverse events, quality of life, time to start chemotherapy, length of hospital stay, readmissions, weight, survival, and costs.DiscussionThe ENDURO-study assesses whether EUS-GE, as compared to SGJ, results in a faster resumption of solid oral intake and is non-inferior regarding reinterventions for persistent or recurrent obstructive symptoms in patients with malignant GOO. This trial aims to guide future treatment strategies and to improve quality of life in a palliative setting. Show less
Gorris, M.; Janssen, Q.P.; Besselink, M.G.; Broek, B.L.J. van den; Eijck, C.H.J. van; Gils, M.J. van; ... ; Hooft, J.E. van 2022
Background and objectives: Left-sided pancreatic lesions are often treated surgically. Accurate diagnostic work-up is therefore essential to prevent futile major abdominal surgery. Large series... Show moreBackground and objectives: Left-sided pancreatic lesions are often treated surgically. Accurate diagnostic work-up is therefore essential to prevent futile major abdominal surgery. Large series focusing specifically on the preoperative work-up of left-sided pancreatic lesions are lacking. This surgical cohort analysis describes the sensitivity of CT, MRI, and EUS-FNA/B in the diagnostic work-up of left-sided pancreatic lesions.Methods: We performed a post-hoc analysis of patients who underwent surgery for a left-sided pancreatic lesion between April 2010 and August 2017 and participated in the randomized CPR trial. Primary outcome was the sensitivity of CT, MRI, and EUS-FNA/B. Sensitivity was determined as the most likely diagnosis of each modality compared with the postoperative histopathological diagnosis. Additionally, the change in sensitivity of EUS versus EUS-FNA/B (i.e., cyst fluid analysis, and/or tissue acquisition) was measured.Results: Overall, 181 patients were included (benign: 23%, premalignant: 27%, malignant: 50%). Most patients had solid lesions (65%). Preoperative imaging included CT (86%), MRI (41%), EUS (68%). Overall, CT and EUS-FNA/B reached a sensitivity of both 71%, compared with 66% for MRI. When EUS was combined with FNA/B, sensitivity rose from 64% to 71%. For solid lesions, CT reached the highest sensitivity (75%) when compared with MRI (70%) and EUS-FNA/B (69%). For cystic lesions, EUS-FNA/B reached the highest sensitivity (75%) when compared with CT and MRI (both 62%).Conclusions: CT is the most sensitive diagnostic modality for solid and EUS-FNA/B for cystic left-sided pancreatic lesions. EUS-FNA/B was associated with an increased sensitivity when compared to EUS alone. (C) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of IAP and EPC. Show less
Background: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) have a high prevalence in patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) and are the leading cause of death. Tumor size is still... Show moreBackground: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) have a high prevalence in patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) and are the leading cause of death. Tumor size is still regarded as the main prognostic factor and therefore used for surgical decision-making. We assessed reliability and agreement of radiological and pathological tumor size in a population-based cohort of patients with MEN1-related pNETs. Methods: Patients were selected from the Dutch MEN1 database if they had undergone a resection for a pNET between 2003 and 2018. Radiological (MRI, CT, and endoscopic ultrasonography [EUS]) and pathological tumor size were collected from patient records. Measures of agreement (Bland-Altman plots with limits of agreement [LoA] and absolute agreement) and reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC] and unweighted kappa) were calculated for continuous and categorized (< or >= 2 cm) pNET size. Results: In 73 included patients, the median radiological and pathological tumor sizes measured were 22 (3-160) and 21 (4-200) mm, respectively. Mean bias between radiological and pathological tumor size was -0.2 mm and LoA ranged from -12.9 to 12.6 mm. For the subgroups of MRI, CT, and EUS, LoA of radiological and pathological tumor size ranged from -9.6 to 10.9, -15.9 to 15.8, and -13.9 to 11.0, respectively. ICCs for the overall cohort, MRI, CT, and EUS were 0.80, 0.86, 0.75, and 0.76, respectively. Based on the 2 cm criterion, agreement was 81.5%; hence, 12 patients (18.5%) were classified differently between imaging and pathology. Absolute agreement and kappa values of MRI, CT, and EUS were 88.6, 85.7, and 75.0%, and 0.77, 0.71, and 0.50, respectively. Conclusion: Within a population-based cohort, MEN1-related pNET size was not systematically over- or underestimated on preoperative imaging. Based on agreement and reliability measures, MRI is the preferred imaging modality. Show less
Bartheld, M.B. von; Breda, A. van; Annema, J.T. 2014
