Simultaneous occurrence of autoimmune pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer in patients resected for focal pancreatic mass

AIM To assess the occurrence of autoimmune pancreatitis(AIP) in pancreatic resections performed for focal pancreatic enlargement.METHODS We performed a retrospective analysis of medical records of all patients who underwent pancreatic resection for a focal pancreatic enlargement at our tertiary center from January 2000 to July 2013. The indication for surgery was suspicion of a tumor based on clinical presentation, imaging findings and laboratory evaluations. The diagnosis of AIP was based on histology findings. An experienced pathologist specialized in pancreatic disease reviewed all the cases and confirmed the diagnosis in pancreatic resection specimens suggestive of AIP. The histological diagnosis of AIP was set according to the international consensus diagnostic criteria.RESULTS Two hundred ninety-five pancreatic resections were performed in 201 men and 94 women. AIP was diagnosed in 15 patients(5.1%, 12 men and 3 women) based on histology of the resected specimen. Six of them had AIP type 1, nine were diagnosed with AIP type 2. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma(PC) was also present in six patients with AIP(40%), all six were men. Patients with AIP + PC were significantly older(60.5 vs 49 years of age, P = 0.045), more likely to have been recently diagnosed with diabetes(67% vs 11%, P = 0.09), and had experienced greater weight loss(15.5 kg vs 8.5 kg, P = 0.03) than AIP patients without PC. AIP was not diagnosed in any patients prior to surgery; however, the diagnostic algorithm was not fully completed in every case. CONCLUSION The possible co-occurrence of PC and AIP suggests that preoperative diagnosis of AIP does not rule out simultaneous presence of PC.

Patient and physician perception of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic appendectomy

AIM:To investigate perception of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery(NOTES)as a potential technique for appendectomy.METHODS:One hundred patients undergoing endoscopy and 100 physicians were given a questionnaire describing in detail the techniques of NOTES and laparoscopic appendectomy.They were asked about the reasons for their preference,choice of orifice,and extent of complication risk they were willing to accept.RESULTS:Fifty patients(50%)and only 21 physicians(21%)preferred NOTES(P<0.001).Patients had previously heard of NOTES less frequently(7%vs73%,P<0.001)and had undergone endoscopy more frequently(88%vs 36%,P<0.001)than physicians.Absence of hernia was the most common reason for NOTES preference in physicians(80%vs 44%,P= 0.003),whereas reduced pain was the most common reason in patients(66%vs 52%).Physicians were more likely to refuse NOTES as a novel and unsure technique(P<0.001)and having an increased risk of infection(P<0.001).The preferred access site in both groups was colon followed by stomach,with vagina being rarely preferred.In multivariable modeling,those with high-school education[odds ratio(OR):2.68,95% confidence interval(CI):1.23-5.83]and prior colonoscopy(OR:2.10,95%CI:1.05-4.19)were more likely to prefer NOTES over laparoscopic appendectomy.There was a steep decline in NOTES preference with increased rate of procedural complications.Male patients were more likely to consent to their wives vaginal NOTES appendectomy than male physicians(P=0.02).CONCLUSION:The preference of NOTES for appendectomy was greater in patients than physicians and was related to reduced pain and absence of hernia rather than lack of scarring.