Pick Topic
Review Topic
List Experts
Examine Expert
Save Expert
  Site Guide ··   
Pancreatic Neoplasms: HELP
Articles by Mohammed Abu-Hilal
Based on 9 articles published since 2010
(Why 9 articles?)
||||

Between 2010 and 2020, Mohammed Abu Hilal wrote the following 9 articles about Pancreatic Neoplasms.
 
+ Citations + Abstracts
1 Editorial Pancreatic cancer tissue banks: where are we heading? 2016

Balarajah, Vickna / Ambily, Archana / Dayem Ullah, Abu Z / Imrali, Ahmet / Dowe, Thomas / Al-Sarireh, Bilal / Abu Hilal, Mohammed / Davidson, Brian R / Soonawalla, Zahir / Metcalfe, Matthew / Chin Aleong, Jo-Anne / Chelala, Claude / Kocher, Hemant M. ·Barts Cancer Institute - a Cancer Research UK Centre of Excellence, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK. · Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK. · Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Health Board, Port Talbot, UK. · University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK. · Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. · Oxford University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK. · University Hospital of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK. ·Future Oncol · Pubmed #27541064.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

2 Review Cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer. 2017

Gurusamy, Kurinchi Selvan / Riviere, Deniece / van Laarhoven, C J H / Besselink, Marc / Abu-Hilal, Mohammed / Davidson, Brian R / Morris, Steve. ·Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, United Kingdom. · Department of Surgery, Radboud University, Nijmegen, Netherlands. · Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands. · Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, Hampshire, United Kingdom. · Applied Health Research, University College London, London, United Kingdom. ·PLoS One · Pubmed #29272281.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: A recent Cochrane review compared laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for people with for cancers of the body and tail of the pancreas and found that laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy may reduce the length of hospital stay. We compared the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer. METHOD: Model based cost-utility analysis estimating mean costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per patient from the perspective of the UK National Health Service. A decision tree model was constructed using probabilities, outcomes and cost data from published sources. A time horizon of 5 years was used. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were undertaken. RESULTS: The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that the incremental net monetary benefit was positive (£3,708.58 (95% confidence intervals (CI) -£9,473.62 to £16,115.69) but the 95% CI includes zero, indicating that there is significant uncertainty about the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy versus open distal pancreatectomy. The probability laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy was cost-effective compared to open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer was between 70% and 80% at the willingness-to-pay thresholds generally used in England (£20,000 to £30,000 per QALY gained). Results were sensitive to the survival proportions and the operating time. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable uncertainty about whether laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is cost-effective compared to open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer in the NHS setting.

3 Article International validation and update of the Amsterdam model for prediction of survival after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer. 2019

van Roessel, Stijn / Strijker, Marin / Steyerberg, Ewout W / Groen, Jesse V / Mieog, J Sven / Groot, Vincent P / He, Jin / De Pastena, Matteo / Marchegiani, Giovanni / Bassi, Claudio / Suhool, Amal / Jang, Jin-Young / Busch, Olivier R / Halimi, Asif / Zarantonello, Laura / Groot Koerkamp, Bas / Samra, Jaswinder S / Mittal, Anubhav / Gill, Anthony J / Bolm, Louisa / van Eijck, Casper H / Abu Hilal, Mohammed / Del Chiaro, Marco / Keck, Tobias / Alseidi, Adnan / Wolfgang, Christopher L / Malleo, Giuseppe / Besselink, Marc G. ·Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands. · Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands. · Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands. · Department of Surgery, The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. · Department of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, University and Hospital Trust of Verona, Verona, Italy. · Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK. · Department of Surgery and Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea. · Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Division of Surgery, Karolinska Institute at Center for Digestive Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. · Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. · Department of Surgery, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. · Cancer Diagnosis and Pathology Group Kolling Institute of Medical Research and University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. · Department of Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany. · Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Colorado at Denver-Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA. · Section of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary & Endocrine Surgery, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA. · Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Electronic address: m.g.besselink@amsterdamumc.nl. ·Eur J Surg Oncol · Pubmed #31924432.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to validate and update the Amsterdam prediction model including tumor grade, lymph node ratio, margin status and adjuvant therapy, for prediction of overall survival (OS) after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We included consecutive patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer between 2000 and 2017 at 11 tertiary centers in 8 countries (USA, UK, Germany, Italy, Sweden, the Netherlands, Korea, Australia). Model performance for prediction of OS was evaluated by calibration statistics and Uno's C-statistic for discrimination. Validation followed the TRIPOD statement. RESULTS: Overall, 3081 patients (53% male, median age 66 years) were included with a median OS of 24 months, of whom 38% had N2 disease and 77% received adjuvant chemotherapy. Predictions of 3-year OS were fairly similar to observed OS with a calibration slope of 0.72. Statistical updating of the model resulted in an increase of the C-statistic from 0.63 to 0.65 (95% CI 0.64-0.65), ranging from 0.62 to 0.67 across different countries. The area under the curve for the prediction of 3-year OS was 0.71 after updating. Median OS was 36, 25 and 15 months for the low, intermediate and high risk group, respectively (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This large international study validated and updated the Amsterdam model for survival prediction after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer. The model incorporates readily available variables with a fairly accurate model performance and robustness across different countries, while novel markers may be added in the future. The risk groups and web-based calculator www.pancreascalculator.com may facilitate use in daily practice and future trials.

4 Article Minimally Invasive versus Open Distal Pancreatectomy for Ductal Adenocarcinoma (DIPLOMA): A Pan-European Propensity Score Matched Study. 2019

van Hilst, Jony / de Rooij, Thijs / Klompmaker, Sjors / Rawashdeh, Majd / Aleotti, Francesca / Al-Sarireh, Bilal / Alseidi, Adnan / Ateeb, Zeeshan / Balzano, Gianpaolo / Berrevoet, Frederik / Björnsson, Bergthor / Boggi, Ugo / Busch, Olivier R / Butturini, Giovanni / Casadei, Riccardo / Del Chiaro, Marco / Chikhladze, Sophia / Cipriani, Federica / van Dam, Ronald / Damoli, Isacco / van Dieren, Susan / Dokmak, Safi / Edwin, Bjørn / van Eijck, Casper / Fabre, Jean-Marie / Falconi, Massimo / Farges, Olivier / Fernández-Cruz, Laureano / Forgione, Antonello / Frigerio, Isabella / Fuks, David / Gavazzi, Francesca / Gayet, Brice / Giardino, Alessandro / Groot Koerkamp, Bas / Hackert, Thilo / Hassenpflug, Matthias / Kabir, Irfan / Keck, Tobias / Khatkov, Igor / Kusar, Masa / Lombardo, Carlo / Marchegiani, Giovanni / Marshall, Ryne / Menon, Krish V / Montorsi, Marco / Orville, Marion / de Pastena, Matteo / Pietrabissa, Andrea / Poves, Ignaci / Primrose, John / Pugliese, Raffaele / Ricci, Claudio / Roberts, Keith / Røsok, Bård / Sahakyan, Mushegh A / Sánchez-Cabús, Santiago / Sandström, Per / Scovel, Lauren / Solaini, Leonardo / Soonawalla, Zahir / Souche, F Régis / Sutcliffe, Robert P / Tiberio, Guido A / Tomazic, Aleš / Troisi, Roberto / Wellner, Ulrich / White, Steven / Wittel, Uwe A / Zerbi, Alessandro / Bassi, Claudio / Besselink, Marc G / Abu Hilal, Mohammed / Anonymous5620925. ·Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. · Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom. · Department of Surgery, San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy. · Department of Surgery, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, United Kingdom. · Department of Surgery, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, United States. · Department of Surgery, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden. · Department of General and HPB surgery and liver transplantation, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium. · Department of Surgery, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. · Department of Surgery, Universitá di Pisa, Pisa, Italy. · Department of Surgery, Pederzoli Hospital, Peschiera, Italy. · Department of Surgery, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy. · Department of Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. · Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands. · Department of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy. · Department of Surgery, Hospital of Beaujon, Clichy, France. · Department of Surgery, Oslo University Hospital and Institute for Clinical Medicine, Oslo, Norway. · Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. · Department of Surgery, Hopital Saint Eloi, Montpellier, France. · Department of Surgery, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. · Department of Surgery, Niguarda Ca' Granda Hospital, Milan, Italy. · Department of Surgery, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France. · Department of Surgery, Humanitas University Hospital, Milan, Italy. · Department of Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany. · Department of Surgery, Oxford University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom. · Clinic for Surgery, UKSH Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany. · Department of Surgery, Moscow Clinical Scientific Center, Moscow, Russian Federation. · Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia. · Department of Surgery, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom. · Department of Surgery, University hospital Pavia, Pavia, Italy. · Department of Surgery, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain. · Department of Surgery, University Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom. · Surgical Clinic, Department of clinical and experimental sciences, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy. · Department of Surgery, The Freeman Hospital Newcastle Upon Tyne, Newcastle, United Kingdom. ·Ann Surg · Pubmed #29099399.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare oncological outcomes after minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). BACKGROUND: Cohort studies have suggested superior short-term outcomes of MIDP vs. ODP. Recent international surveys, however, revealed that surgeons have concerns about the oncological outcomes of MIDP for PDAC. METHODS: This is a pan-European propensity score matched study including patients who underwent MIDP (laparoscopic or robot-assisted) or ODP for PDAC between January 1, 2007 and July 1, 2015. MIDP patients were matched to ODP patients in a 1:1 ratio. Main outcomes were radical (R0) resection, lymph node retrieval, and survival. RESULTS: In total, 1212 patients were included from 34 centers in 11 countries. Of 356 (29%) MIDP patients, 340 could be matched. After matching, the MIDP conversion rate was 19% (n = 62). Median blood loss [200 mL (60-400) vs 300 mL (150-500), P = 0.001] and hospital stay [8 (6-12) vs 9 (7-14) days, P < 0.001] were lower after MIDP. Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications (18% vs 21%, P = 0.431) and 90-day mortality (2% vs 3%, P > 0.99) were comparable for MIDP and ODP, respectively. R0 resection rate was higher (67% vs 58%, P = 0.019), whereas Gerota's fascia resection (31% vs 60%, P < 0.001) and lymph node retrieval [14 (8-22) vs 22 (14-31), P < 0.001] were lower after MIDP. Median overall survival was 28 [95% confidence interval (CI), 22-34] versus 31 (95% CI, 26-36) months (P = 0.929). CONCLUSIONS: Comparable survival was seen after MIDP and ODP for PDAC, but the opposing differences in R0 resection rate, resection of Gerota's fascia, and lymph node retrieval strengthen the need for a randomized trial to confirm the oncological safety of MIDP.

5 Article International Validation of the Eighth Edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM Staging System in Patients With Resected Pancreatic Cancer. 2018

van Roessel, Stijn / Kasumova, Gyulnara G / Verheij, Joanne / Najarian, Robert M / Maggino, Laura / de Pastena, Matteo / Malleo, Giuseppe / Marchegiani, Giovanni / Salvia, Roberto / Ng, Sing Chau / de Geus, Susanna W / Lof, Sanne / Giovinazzo, Francesco / van Dam, Jacob L / Kent, Tara S / Busch, Olivier R / van Eijck, Casper H / Koerkamp, Bas Groot / Abu Hilal, Mohammed / Bassi, Claudio / Tseng, Jennifer F / Besselink, Marc G. ·Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. · Surgical Outcomes Analysis and Research, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. · Department of Pathology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. · Department of Pathology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. · Department of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy. · Department of Surgery, Boston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts. · Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital National Health Service Foundation Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom. · Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. ·JAMA Surg · Pubmed #30285076.

ABSTRACT: Importance: The recently released eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM staging system for pancreatic cancer seeks to improve prognostic accuracy but lacks international validation. Objective: To validate the eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM staging system in an international cohort of patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: This international multicenter cohort study took place in 5 tertiary centers in Europe and the United States from 2000 to 2015. Patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for nonmetastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were eligible. Data analysis took place from December 2017 to April 2018. Exposures: Patients were retrospectively staged according to the seventh and eighth editions of the TNM staging system. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prognostic accuracy on survival rates, assessed by Kaplan-Meier and multivariate Cox proportional hazards analyses and concordance statistics. Results: A total of 1525 consecutive patients were included (median [IQR] age, 66 (58-72) years; 802 (52.6%) male). Distribution among stages via the seventh edition was stage IA in 41 patients (2.7%), stage IB in 42 (2.8%), stage IIA in 200 (13.1%), stage IIB in 1229 (80.6%), and stage III in 12 (0.8%); this changed with use of the eighth edition to stage IA in 118 patients (7.7%), stage IB in 144 (9.4%), stage IIA in 22 (1.4%), stage IIB in 643 (42.2%), and stage III in 598 (39.2%). With the eighth edition, 774 patients (50.8%) migrated to a different stage; 183 (12.0%) were reclassified to a lower stage and 591 (38.8%) to a higher stage. Median overall survival for the entire cohort was 24.4 months (95% CI, 23.4-26.2 months). On Kaplan-Meier analysis, 5-year survival rates changed from 38.2% for patients in stage IA, 34.7% in IB, 35.3% in IIA, 16.5% in IIB, and 0% in stage III (log-rank P < .001) via classification with the seventh edition to 39.2% for patients in stage IA, 33.9% in IB, 27.6% in IIA, 21.0% in IIB, and 10.8% in stage III (log-rank P < .001) with the eighth edition. For patients who were node negative, the T stage was not associated with prognostication of survival in either edition. In the eighth edition, the N stage was associated with 5-year survival rates of 35.6% in N0, 20.8% in N1, and 10.9% in N2 (log-rank P < .001). The C statistic improved from 0.55 (95% CI, 0.53-0.57) for the seventh edition to 0.57 (95% CI, 0.55-0.60) for the eighth edition. Conclusions and Relevance: The eighth edition of the TNM staging system demonstrated a more equal distribution among stages and a modestly increased prognostic accuracy in patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma compared with the seventh edition. The revised T stage remains poorly associated with survival, whereas the revised N stage is highly prognostic.

6 Article PET-PANC: multicentre prospective diagnostic accuracy and health economic analysis study of the impact of combined modality 18fluorine-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography with computed tomography scanning in the diagnosis and management of pancreatic cancer. 2018

Ghaneh, Paula / Hanson, Robert / Titman, Andrew / Lancaster, Gill / Plumpton, Catrin / Lloyd-Williams, Huw / Yeo, Seow Tien / Edwards, Rhiannon Tudor / Johnson, Colin / Abu Hilal, Mohammed / Higginson, Antony P / Armstrong, Tom / Smith, Andrew / Scarsbrook, Andrew / McKay, Colin / Carter, Ross / Sutcliffe, Robert P / Bramhall, Simon / Kocher, Hemant M / Cunningham, David / Pereira, Stephen P / Davidson, Brian / Chang, David / Khan, Saboor / Zealley, Ian / Sarker, Debashis / Al Sarireh, Bilal / Charnley, Richard / Lobo, Dileep / Nicolson, Marianne / Halloran, Christopher / Raraty, Michael / Sutton, Robert / Vinjamuri, Sobhan / Evans, Jonathan / Campbell, Fiona / Deeks, Jon / Sanghera, Bal / Wong, Wai-Lup / Neoptolemos, John P. ·Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. · Liverpool Cancer Research UK Cancer Trials Unit, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. · Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK. · Centre for Health Economics and Medicines Evaluation, Bangor University, Bangor, UK. · Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. · Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK. · Department of Radiology, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Portsmouth, UK. · Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK. · Department of Radiology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK. · Department of Surgery, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK. · Department of Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK. · Department of General Surgery, Wye Valley NHS Trust, Hereford, UK. · Barts Cancer Institute, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, UK. · Gastrointestinal and Lymphoma Unit, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. · Institute for Liver and Digestive Health, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. · Department of Surgery, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. · Department of Surgery, Royal Blackburn Hospital, East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust, Blackburn, UK. · Department of Surgery, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UK. · Department of Surgery, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, NHS Tayside, Dundee, UK. · Department of Oncology, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. · Department of Surgery, Morriston Hospital, Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Health Board, Swansea, UK. · Department of Surgery, Newcastle Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. · Faculty of Medicine and Life Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. · Department of Oncology, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, NHS Grampian, Aberdeen, UK. · Department of Surgery, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK. · Department of Nuclear Medicine, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK. · Department of Radiology, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK. · Department of Pathology, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK. · Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK. · Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital, Middlesex, UK. ·Health Technol Assess · Pubmed #29402376.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer diagnosis and staging can be difficult in 10-20% of patients. Positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) adds precise anatomical localisation to functional data. The use of PET/CT may add further value to the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic cancer. OBJECTIVE: To determine the incremental diagnostic accuracy and impact of PET/CT in addition to standard diagnostic work-up in patients with suspected pancreatic cancer. DESIGN: A multicentre prospective diagnostic accuracy and clinical value study of PET/CT in suspected pancreatic malignancy. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with suspected pancreatic malignancy. INTERVENTIONS: All patients to undergo PET/CT following standard diagnostic work-up. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the incremental diagnostic value of PET/CT in addition to standard diagnostic work-up with multidetector computed tomography (MDCT). Secondary outcomes were (1) changes in patients' diagnosis, staging and management as a result of PET/CT; (2) changes in the costs and effectiveness of patient management as a result of PET/CT; (3) the incremental diagnostic value of PET/CT in chronic pancreatitis; (4) the identification of groups of patients who would benefit most from PET/CT; and (5) the incremental diagnostic value of PET/CT in other pancreatic tumours. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2013, 589 patients with suspected pancreatic cancer underwent MDCT and PET/CT, with 550 patients having complete data and in-range PET/CT. Sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer were 88.5% and 70.6%, respectively, for MDCT and 92.7% and 75.8%, respectively, for PET/CT. The maximum standardised uptake value (SUV CONCLUSION: PET/CT provided a significant incremental diagnostic benefit in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer and significantly influenced the staging and management of patients. PET/CT had limited utility in chronic pancreatitis and other pancreatic tumours. PET/CT is likely to be cost-effective at current reimbursement rates for PET/CT to the UK NHS. This was not a randomised controlled trial and therefore we do not have any information from patients who would have undergone MDCT only for comparison. In addition, there were issues in estimating costs for PET/CT. Future work should evaluate the role of PET/CT in intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm and prognosis and response to therapy in patients with pancreatic cancer. STUDY REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN73852054 and UKCRN 8166. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

7 Article Impact of obesity on short and long term results following a pancreatico-duodenectomy. 2017

Shamali, Awad / Shelat, Vishal / Jaber, Bashar / Wardak, Aisha / Ahmed, Mohamed / Fontana, Martina / Armstrong, Thomas / Abu Hilal, Mohammed. ·University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK. · University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK. Electronic address: mohammed.abuhilal@uhs.nhs.uk. ·Int J Surg · Pubmed #28461146.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The impact of obesity on short and long term outcomes following a pancreatico-duodenectomy (PD) is still unclear and needs further clarification. METHODS: Demographic, operative and outcomes data in 524 patients undergoing PD were analysed. RESULTS: Ninety-seven patients (18.5%) had BMI greater than or equal to 30 kg/m CONCLUSION: Patients with BMI ≥ 30 are at an increased risk of developing pancreatic fistula following PD. Obesity does not appear to have an impact on long term outcomes in patients undergoing a PD for adenocarcinomas.

8 Article Laparoscopic multivisceral resection for infiltrating primary pancreatic non-hodgkin's lymphoma mimicking a vast cystic neoplasm. 2011

Abu Hilal, Mohammed / El Ghoul, Wessam / Zeidan, Shadi / Scio, Antonio / Di Fabio, Francesco. ·Hepatobiliary-Pancreatic and Laparoscopic Surgical Unit, Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom. abu_hlal@yahoo.com ·Am Surg · Pubmed #21944615.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

9 Minor Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Time for a Randomized Controlled Trial? Results of an All-inclusive National Observational Study. 2017

de Rooij, Thijs / van Hilst, Jony / Busch, Olivier R / Dijkgraaf, Marcel G / Kooby, David A / Abu Hilal, Mohammed / Besselink, Marc G. ·Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands Clinical Research Unit, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Winship Cancer Institute, Atlanta, GA Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. ·Ann Surg · Pubmed #29137000.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --