Patients receiving mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit (ICU) frequently develop contractile weakness of the diaphragm. Consequently, they may experience difficulty weaning from mechanical ventilation, which increases mortality and poses a high economic burden. Because of a lack of knowledge regarding the molecular changes in the diaphragm, no treatment is currently available to improve diaphragm contractility. We compared diaphragm biopsies from ventilated ICU patients ( N = 54) to those of non-ICU patients undergoing thoracic surgery ( N = 27). By integrating data from myofiber force measurements, x-ray diffraction experiments, and biochemical assays with clinical data, we found that in myofibers isolated from the diaphragm of ventilated ICU patients, myosin is trapped in an energy-sparing, super-relaxed state, which impairs the binding of myosin to actin during diaphragm contraction. Studies on quadriceps biopsies of ICU patients and on the diaphragm of previously healthy mechanically ventilated rats suggested that the super-relaxed myosins are specific to the diaphragm and not a result of critical illness. Exposing slow- and fast-twitch myofibers isolated from the diaphragm biopsies to small-molecule compounds activating troponin restored contractile force in vitro. These findings support the continued development of drugs that target sarcomere proteins to increase the calcium sensitivity of myofibers for the treatment of ICU-acquired diaphragm weakness.

Objective: This study aimed to compare surgical and oncological outcomes after minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) for distal cholangiocarcinoma (dCCA). Background: A dCCA might be a good indication for MIPD, as it is often diagnosed as primary resectable disease. However, multicenter series on MIPD for dCCA are lacking. Methods: This is an international multicenter propensity score-matched cohort study including patients after MIPD or OPD for dCCA in 8 centers from 5 countries (2010-2021). Primary outcomes included overall survival (OS) and disease-free interval (DFI). Secondary outcomes included perioperative and postoperative complications and predictors for OS or DFI. Subgroup analyses included robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD). Results: Overall, 478 patients after pancreatoduodenectomy for dCCA were included of which 97 after MIPD (37 RPD, 60 LPD) and 381 after OPD. MIPD was associated with less blood loss (300 vs 420 mL, P=0.025), longer operation time (453 vs 340 min; P<0.001), and less surgical site infections (7.8% vs 19.3%; P=0.042) compared with OPD. The median OS (30 vs 25 mo) and DFI (29 vs 18) for MIPD did not differ significantly between MIPD and OPD. Tumor stage (Hazard ratio: 2.939, P<0.001) and administration of adjuvant chemotherapy (Hazard ratio: 0.640, P=0.033) were individual predictors for OS. RPD was associated with a higher lymph node yield (18.0 vs 13.5; P=0.008) and less major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo 3b-5; 8.1% vs 32.1%; P=0.005) compared with LPD. Discussion: Both surgical and oncological outcomes of MIPD for dCCA are acceptable as compared with OPD. Surgical outcomes seem to favor RPD as compared with LPD but more data are needed. Randomized controlled trials should be performed to confirm these findings.

Background: Most studies on minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) combine patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancers even though there is substantial heterogeneity between these tumors. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the role of MIPD compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) in patients with non-pancreatic periampullary cancer (NPPC). Methods: A systematic review of Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases was performed by two independent reviewers to identify studies comparing MIPD and OPD for NPPC (ampullary, distal cholangio, and duodenal adenocarcinoma) (01/2015–12/2021). Individual patient data were required from all identified studies. Primary outcomes were (90-day) mortality, and major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo 3a-5). Secondary outcomes were postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), blood-loss, length of hospital stay (LOS), and overall survival (OS). Results: Overall, 16 studies with 1949 patients were included, combining 928 patients with ampullary, 526 with distal cholangio, and 461 with duodenal cancer. In total, 902 (46.3%) patients underwent MIPD, and 1047 (53.7%) patients underwent OPD. The rates of 90-day mortality, major morbidity, POPF, DGE, PPH, blood-loss, and length of hospital stay did not differ between MIPD and OPD. Operation time was 67 min longer in the MIPD group (P = 0.009). A decrease in DFS for ampullary (HR 2.27, P = 0.019) and distal cholangio (HR 1.84, P = 0.025) cancer, as well as a decrease in OS for distal cholangio (HR 1.71, P = 0.045) and duodenal cancer (HR 4.59, P < 0.001) was found in the MIPD group. Conclusions: This individual patient data meta-analysis of MIPD versus OPD in patients with NPPC suggests that MIPD is not inferior in terms of short-term morbidity and mortality. Several major limitations in long-term data highlight a research gap that should be studied in prospective maintained international registries or randomized studies for ampullary, distal cholangio, and duodenum cancer separately. Protocol registration: PROSPERO (CRD42021277495) on the 25th of October 2021.