Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death in the USA and Europe; early symptoms and screenings are lacking, and it is usually diagnosed late with a poor prognosis. Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) have been promising new biomarkers in solid tumors. In the last twenty years (1999–2019), 140 articles have contained the key words “Circulating tumor cells, pancreatic cancer, prognosis and diagnosis.” Articles were evaluated for the use of CTCs as prognostic markers and their correlation to survival in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). In the final selected 17 articles, the CTC detection rate varied greatly between different enrichment methodologies and ranged from 11% to 92%; the majority of studies used the antigen-dependent CellSearch^© system for CTC detection. Fifteen of the reviewed studies showed a correlation between CTC presence and a worse overall survival. The heterogeneity of CTC-detection methods and the lack of uniform results hinder a comparison of the evaluated studies. However, CTCs can be detected in pancreatic cancer and harbor a hope to serve as an early detection tool. Larger studies are needed to corroborate CTCs as valid biomarkers in pancreatic cancer.

Background: Acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) is an uncommon, but life-threatening clinical entity due to late diagnosis resulting in irreversible ischemic bowel necrosis. The most common causes of AMI are the embolic occlusion and the acute thrombosis of the mesenteric circulation. Typical treatment is composed of an early revascularization of the mesenteric circulation followed by abdominal surgery for resection of nonviable intestine and restoration of the intestinal continuity, but the mortality rates remain high. Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted, aiming to evaluate clinical characteristics, performed surgical procedures and outcomes of patients with acute mesenteric ischemia who underwent emergency abdominal surgery at a high volume surgical center in Germany. Results: Overall, 53 patients were identified with the intraoperatively proven diagnosis of AMI. Overall hospital mortality was with 62% comparable to the literature. Nineteen patients presented with an intraoperatively verified complete and non-reversible intestinal infarction without any angiographic or surgical option for a revascularization of the mesenteric circulation or an option for intestinal resection. From the rest of the patients, 14 underwent intestinal resection of the ischemic area without restoration of intestinal continuity; the other 20 underwent resection with a primary anastomosis to restore intestinal continuity. The mortality rate of these patients with curative-intended surgery remained high (41% of patients died). Pre- and postoperative hyperlactatemia were associated with lower survival of these patients. Conclusion: AMI remains a life-threatening abdominal emergency. Therapeutic approaches are highly depended on acting surgeon’s decision, being affected by subjectively rated bowel viability and physical condition of the affected patient. Only selected patients with good bowel viability appear to be suitable for receiving primary anastomosis. The results clearly indicate the need for further research to develop therapeutic approaches for a better management of AMI and to improve outcome of affected patients.

Background: Isolation of circulating tumor cells (CTC) holds the promise to improve response-prediction and personalization of cancer treatment. In this study, we test a filtration device for CTC isolation in patients with non-metastatic esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) within recent multimodal treatment protocols. Methods: Peripheral blood specimens were drawn from EAC patients before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (FLOT)/chemoradiation (CROSS) as well as after surgery. Filtration using ScreenCell^® devices captured CTC for cytologic analysis. Giemsa-stained specimens were evaluated by a cytopathologist; the cut-off was 1 CTC/specimen (6 mL). Immunohistochemistry with epithelial (pan-CK) and mesenchymal markers (vimentin) was performed. Results: Morphologically diverse malignant CTCs were found in 12/20 patients in at least one blood specimen. CTCs were positive for both vimentin and pan-CK. More patients were CTC positive after neoadjuvant therapy (6/20 vs. 9/15) and CTCs per/ml increased in most of the CTC-positive patients. After surgery, 8/13 patients with available blood specimens were still CTC positive. In clinical follow-up, 5/9 patients who died were CTC-positive. Conclusions: Detection of CTC by filtration within multimodal treatment protocols of non-metastatic EAC is feasible. The rate of CTC positive findings and the quantity of CTCs changes in the course of multimodal neoadjuvant chemoradiation/chemotherapy and surgery.

Background: In Germany and Western Europe, gastroesophageal junction cancer (AEG) and proximal gastric cancer are currently treated with (transhiatal-extended) total gastrectomy (TG) according to the latest treatment guidelines. TG leads to a severe and long-lasting impairment of postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of the treated patients. Recent studies have suggested that HRQoL of these patients could be improved by proximal gastrectomy with double-tract reconstruction (PG-DTR) without compromising oncologic safety. Our aim is therefore to conduct a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial comparing PG-DTR with TG in AEG II/III and gastric cancer patients with overall survival as primary endpoint and HRQoL as key secondary endpoint. Methods: This protocol is written with reference to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P 2015) statement. We will conduct searches in the electronic databases MEDLINE, Web of Science Core Collection, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane Library. We will also check references of relevant studies and perform a cited reference research. Titles and abstracts of the records identified by the searches will be screened, and full texts of all potentially relevant articles will be obtained. We will consider randomized trials and non-randomized studies. The selection of studies, data extraction, and assessment of risk of bias of the included studies will be conducted independently by two reviewers. Meta-analysis will be performed using RevMan 5.4 (Review Manager (RevMan) Version 5.4, The Cochrane Collaboration). Discussion: This systematic review will identify the current study pool concerning the comparison of TG and PG-DTR and help to finally refine the research questions and to allow an evidence-based trial design of the planned multicenter randomized-controlled trial. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval is not required for this systematic review. Study findings will be shared by publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42021291500.

Due to the increasing number of patients after kidney transplantation, elective and emergency surgery of transplanted patients is becoming a relevant challenge in clinical routine. The current data on complication rate of patients after kidney transplantation, which must undergo another elective or emergency abdominal surgery, is inhomogeneous. Therefore, the aim of our study was to evaluate the outcome of renal transplant patients undergoing abdominal and abdominal wall surgery. We performed an observational study of patients after kidney transplantation undergoing graft-unrelated abdominal surgery between 2005 and 2015. We randomly created a non-transplanted control for a case-matched controlled analysis. Primary endpoint was the comparison of complication rate. Secondary, a risk analysis of all patients was performed and differences in mortality, length of hospital stay and reoperation rates were calculated. Overall 101 kidney transplanted patients were eligible for inclusion. 20 (19.8%) died after graft-unrelated surgery and 60 (59.4%) suffered from postoperative complications. Case-matched analysis could be performed for 84 out of these 101 patients. We found no significant difference in morbidity rate (58.3% vs. 45.2%, p = 0.090). Transplanted patients had, however, a significantly higher mortality (19% vs. 2.4%, p = 0.001), a longer hospital stay (28.2 vs. 16.9 days, p = 0.020) and a higher rate of re-operations (38.1% vs. 20.2%, p = 0.017). . Patients after renal transplantation undergoing graft-unrelated abdominal surgery have a significantly increased mortality risk, are more frequently re-operated and have to stay significantly longer in hospital than non-transplanted patients.