Pick Topic
Review Topic
List Experts
Examine Expert
Save Expert
  Site Guide ··   
Pancreatic Neoplasms: HELP
Articles by Lorenzo Crepaz
Based on 2 articles published since 2010
(Why 2 articles?)
||||

Between 2010 and 2020, Lorenzo Crepaz wrote the following 2 articles about Pancreatic Neoplasms.
 
+ Citations + Abstracts
1 Article The Evolution of Surgical Strategies for Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors (Pan-NENs): Time-trend and Outcome Analysis From 587 Consecutive Resections at a High-volume Institution. 2019

Landoni, Luca / Marchegiani, Giovanni / Pollini, Tommaso / Cingarlini, Sara / D'Onofrio, Mirko / Capelli, Paola / De Robertis, Riccardo / Davì, Maria V / Amodio, Antonio / Impellizzeri, Harmony / Malpaga, Anna / Miotto, Marco / Boninsegna, Letizia / Crepaz, Lorenzo / Nessi, Chiara / Zingaretti, Caterina C / Paiella, Salvatore / Esposito, Alessandro / Casetti, Luca / Malleo, Giuseppe / Tuveri, Massimiliano / Butturini, Giovanni / Salvia, Roberto / Scarpa, Aldo / Falconi, Massimo / Bassi, Claudio. ·General and Pancreatic Surgery Department, The Pancreas Institute-University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy. · Department of Oncology, The Pancreas Institute-University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy. · Department of Radiology, The Pancreas Institute-University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy. · Department of Pathology, The Pancreas Institute-University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy. · Department of Radiology, Pederzoli Hospital, Peschiera del Garda, Verona, Italy. · Department of Medicine, The Pancreas Institute-University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy. · Division of Surgery, Ospedale "Sacro Cuore-Don Calabria", Negrar (VR), Italy. · Department of Surgery, Pederzoli Hospital, Peschiera del Garda, Verona, Italy. · Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational & Clinical Research Center, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, "Vita-Salute" University, Milan, Italy. ·Ann Surg · Pubmed #29189384.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present analysis is 2-fold: first, to define the evolution of time trends on the surgical approach to pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (Pan-NENs); second, to perform a complete analysis of the predictors of oncologic outcome. BACKGROUND: Reflecting their rarity and heterogeneity, Pan-NENs represent a clinical dilemma. In particular, there is a scarcity of data regarding their long-term follow-up after surgical resection. METHODS: From the Institutional Pan-NEN database, 587 resected cases from 1990 to 2015 were extracted. The time span was arbitrarily divided into 3 discrete clusters enabling a balanced comparison between patient groups. Analyses for predictors of recurrence and survival were performed, together with conditional survival analyses. RESULTS: Among the 587 resected Pan-NENs, 75% were nonfunctioning tumors, and 5% were syndrome-associated tumors. The mean age was 54 years (±14 years), and 51% of the patients were female. The median tumor size was 20 mm (range 4 to 140), 62% were G1, 32% were G2, and 4% were G3 tumors. Time trends analysis revealed that the number of resected Pan-NENs constantly increased, while the size (from 25 to 20 mm) and G1 proportion (from 65% to 49%) decreased during the study period. After a mean follow-up of 75 months, recurrence analysis revealed that nonfunctioning tumors, tumor grade, N1 status, and vascular invasion were all independent predictors of recurrence. Regardless of size, G1 nonfunctioning tumors with no nodal involvement and vascular invasion had a negligible risk of recurrence at 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Pan-NENs have been increasingly diagnosed and resected during the last 3 decades, revealing reliable predictors of outcome. Functioning and nodal status, tumor grade, and vascular invasion accurately predict survival and recurrence with resulting implications for patient follow-up.

2 Article A prospective non-randomised single-center study comparing laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy. 2015

Butturini, Giovanni / Damoli, Isacco / Crepaz, Lorenzo / Malleo, Giuseppe / Marchegiani, Giovanni / Daskalaki, Despoina / Esposito, Alessandro / Cingarlini, Sara / Salvia, Roberto / Bassi, Claudio. ·General Surgery B, The Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital Trust, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, 10, 37134, Verona, Italy. giovanni.butturini@ospedaleuniverona.it. · General Surgery B, The Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital Trust, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, 10, 37134, Verona, Italy. · Department of Oncology, The Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital Trust, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, 10, 37134, Verona, Italy. ·Surg Endosc · Pubmed #25552231.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is increasing in popularity thanks to the benefits that have been recently demonstrated by many authors. The Da Vinci(®) Surgical System could overcome some limits of laparoscopy, helping the surgeons to perform safer and faster difficult procedures. Nowadays, prospective clinical trials comparing LDP to robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) are lacking. The aim of this study is to present a prospective comparison between the two techniques. METHODS: Since November 2011, all patients suitable for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy were assigned either to LDP or RDP, depending on the availability of the Da Vinci(®) Surgical System for our Surgical Unit. Demographics, clinical, and intra- and postoperative data, including estimated costs of the procedure, were prospectively collected. Follow-up included cross-sectional imaging ended on April 2014. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients underwent RDP and 21 LDP; patients' characteristics were similar. The median operative time was longer and procedures' cost was double in RDP group. The conversion to open rate and the median length of postoperative hospital stay were 4.5 % and 7 days, respectively, in both groups. Pancreatic fistula developed in 57.1 % (12/21) and 50 % (11/22) of LDP and RDP, respectively (p = 0.870), being grade A the most frequent. Mortality was nil and an R0 resection was achieved in all Patients. The overall number of lymph nodes harvested was similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both RDP and LDP are valid techniques for the treatment of distal pancreatic tumors. The advantages of RDP are claimed by many but still under investigation. Some of these advantages are more subjective than objective, and it seems difficult to demonstrate a real superiority of one technique over the other in a standardized fashion. In our experience, laparoscopy has not been abandoned in favor of the robot: we continue to perform both approaches choosing upon single patient's characteristics.