Minimally invasive robot-assisted and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy in a pan-European registry a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: International guidelines recommend monitoring of the use and outcome of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS). However, data from prospective international audits on minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) are lacking. This study examined the use and outcome of robot-assisted (RDP) and laparoscopic (LDP) distal pancreatectomy in the E-MIPS registry. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Post-hoc analysis in a prospective audit on MIPS, including consecutive patients undergoing MIDP in 83 centers from 19 European countries (01-01-2019/31-12-2021). Primary outcomes included intraoperative events (grade 1: excessive blood loss, grade 2: conversion/change in operation, grade 3: intraoperative death), major morbidity, and in-hospital/30-day mortality. Multivariable logistic regression analyses identified high-risk groups for intraoperative events. RDP and LDP were compared in the total cohort and in high-risk groups. RESULTS: Overall, 1672 patients undergoing MIDP were included; 606 (36.2%) RDP and 1066 (63.8%) LDP. The annual use of RDP increased from 30.5% to 42.6% (P<0.001). RDP was associated with fewer grade 2 intraoperative events compared to LDP (9.6% vs. 16.8%, P<0.001), with longer operating time (238 vs. 201 minutes,P<0.001). No significant differences were observed between RDP and LDP regarding major morbidity (23.4% vs. 25.9%, P=0.264) and in-hospital/30-day mortality (0.3% vs. 0.8%, P=0.344). Three high-risk groups were identified; BMI>25 kg/m2, previous abdominal surgery, and vascular involvement. In each group, RDP was associated with fewer conversions and longer operative times. CONCLUSION: This European registry-based study demonstrated favorable outcomes for MIDP, with mortality rates below 1%. LDP remains the predominant approach, whereas the use of RDP is increasing. RDP was associated with less conversions and longer operative time, including in high-risk subgroups. Future randomized trials should confirm these findings and assess cost differences.

Postoperative Hyperamylasemia (POH) is an Early Predictor of Pancreatic Fistula Occurrence and Severity after Distal Pancreatectomy: Results from a European Multicentric Study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this international multicentric study is to characterize postoperative hyperamylasemia (POH) after distal pancreatectomy (DP), with particular focus on its relationship with postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) occurrence and severity. BACKGROUND: The clinical relevance of POH after DP and its relationship with the occurrence and severity of POPF have not been explored yet. METHODS: All patients undergoing DP for any indication between 2015 and 2021 at three European referral Centers for pancreatic surgery were retrospectively analyzed. Drain fluid amylase (DFA), C-reactive protein (C-RP), and serum amylase were examined from postoperative-day (POD) 1 to 3. Biochemical leak (BL), POPF, POH, and post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH) were defined and graded according to ISGPS definitions. RESULTS: In total 1192 patients were included. Overall rates of POH and POPF were 18% (n= 210) and 29% (n= 344), respectively. The presence of DFA ≥2000 U/L on POD 1 (OR=2.11, 95% CI 1.68-2.86), C-RP ≥200 mg/L on POD 3 (OR=2.19, 95% CI 1.68-2.86), and POH (OR=1.58, 95% CI 1.14-2.19) were all independent early predictors of POPF (all P< 0.01). The presence of POH almost doubled the rate of POPF (43% vs. 26%, P<0.001), and higher POPF severity presented also higher POH rates (no POPF= 12%; BL= 19%; B POPF= 24%; C POPF= 52%). Among patients developing POPF, patients with POH had higher rates of PPH (22% vs 9%, P= 0.001), sepsis (24% vs 13%; P=0.011), re-operation (21% vs 8%; P< 0.01), and mortality (3% vs 0.3%; P= 0.025). CONCLUSIONS: The occurrence of POH is an early predictor of POPF and its severity after DP. The diagnosis of POH might define patients at higher risk for a complicated course, targeting them for prevention / mitigation strategies against pancreas specific complications.

Resection rates and intention-to-treat outcomes in borderline and locally advanced pancreatic cancer: real-world data from a population-based, prospective cohort study (NORPACT-2).

BACKGROUND: Systemic chemotherapy is the initial treatment strategy for borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer to facilitate curative resection. The aim of this study was to investigate the resection rates and overall survival in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer and locally advanced pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Consecutive patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer/locally advanced pancreatic cancer discussed by Oslo University Hospital multidisciplinary team between 2018 and 2020, serving a population of 3.1 million within a geographically defined area in south-eastern Norway, were included in this prospective Norwegian Pancreatic Cancer Trial-2 study, according to intention-to-treat principles. The total number of patients with pancreatic cancer was sought from the Cancer Registry of Norway. RESULTS: A total of 1178 patients were diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, of whom 618 were referred to Oslo University Hospital. After multidisciplinary team evaluation, 230 patients were considered to have borderline resectable pancreatic cancer/locally advanced pancreatic cancer. The final study group consisted of 188 patients (borderline resectable pancreatic cancer n = 96, locally advanced pancreatic cancer n = 92) who were fit to receive primary chemotherapy. Resection rates were 46.9% (45 of 96) for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer and 13% (12 of 92) for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (P <0.001). Median overall survival was 14.6 months (borderline resectable pancreatic cancer 16.4 months; locally advanced pancreatic cancer 13.7 months, (P = 0.2)). Adjusted for immortal time bias, median overall survival for patients undergoing resection versus only chemotherapy was 24.4 months versus 10.1 months (P <0.001) for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer and 28.4 months versus 12.6 months for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Resection rates and survival in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer and locally advanced pancreatic cancer treated at a high-volume centre in a universal healthcare system compare well with those treated at international expert centres.Registration number: NCT04423731 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Peri-firing compression in prevention of pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy: A systematic review and a cohort study.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) after distal pancreatectomy (DP) occurs in 20%-40% of patients and remains a leading cause of morbidity and increased healthcare cost in this patient group. Recently, several studies suggested decreased risk of CR-POPF with the use of peri-firing compression (PFC) technique. The aim of this report was to conduct a systematic review to get an overview of the current knowledge on the use of PFC in DP. In addition, our experience with PFC was presented. METHODS: The systematic literature review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Also, 19 patients undergoing DP with the use of PFC at Oslo University Hospital were studied. The primary endpoint was incidence of CR-POPF. RESULTS: Seven articles reporting a total of 771 patients were ultimately included in the systematic review. Only two of these were case-control studies examining outcomes in patients with and without PFC, while the rest were case series. These were heterogeneous in terms of staplers used, cartridge selection policy, and PFC technique. Both case-control studies reported significantly reduced CR- POPF incidence with PFC. Eight (21%) of our patients developed CR-POPF after DP with PFC. Only one patient developed CR-POPF among those with pancreatic transection site thickness ⩽1.5 cm. CONCLUSION: Evidence on potential benefits of PFC in DP is limited in quantity and quality. Our findings suggest that the use of PFC does not lead to reduction in the incidence of CR-POPF. Yet, there might be a benefit from PFC when dealing with a thin pancreas.

Preoperative CA19.9 level predicts lymph node metastasis in resectable adenocarcinoma of the head of the pancreas: A further plea for biological resectability criteria.

INTRODUCTION: Lymph-nodal involvement (N+) represents an adverse prognostic factor after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Preoperative diagnostic and staging modalities lack sensitivity for identifying N+. This study aimed to investigate preoperative CA19.9 in predicting the N+ stage in resectable-PDAC (R-PDAC). METHODS: Patients included in a multi-institutional retrospective database of PDs performed for R-PDAC from January 2000 to June 2021 were analyzed. A preoperative laboratory value of CA19.9 >37 U/L was used in univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis to determine a possible association with N+. Additionally, different cut-offs of CA19.9 related to the preoperative clinical T (cT) stage was assessed to evaluate the risk of N+. RESULTS: A total of 2034 PDs from thirteen centers were included in the study. CA19.9>37 U/L was significantly associated with higher N+ at univariate and multivariate analysis (P<0.001). CA19.9 levels >37 U/L were associated with N+ in 75.9%, 81.3%, and 85.7% of patients, respectively, in cT1, cT2, and cT3 tumors and with higher cut-off values for all cT stages. CONCLUSION: Lymph nodal involvement is strongly related to preoperative CA19.9 levels. Specially in patients staged as cT3 the CA 19.9 could represent a valid and easy tool to suspect nodal involvement. Due to these findings, R-PDAC patients with elevated CA19.9 values should be considered in a more biologically advanced stage.

Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy for resectable pancreatic cancer (DIPLOMA): an international randomised non-inferiority trial.

Background: The oncological safety of minimally invasive surgery has been questioned for several abdominal cancers. Concerns also exist regarding the use of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer as randomised trials are lacking. Methods: In this international randomised non-inferiority trial, we recruited adults with resectable pancreatic cancer from 35 centres in 12 countries. Patients were randomly assigned to either MIDP (laparoscopic or robotic) or open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). Both patients and pathologists were blinded to the assigned approach. Primary endpoint was radical resection (R0, ≥1 mm free margin) in patients who had ultimately undergone resection. Analyses for the primary endpoint were by modified intention-to-treat, excluding patients with missing data on primary endpoint. The pre-defined non-inferiority margin of -7% was compared with the lower limit of the two-sided 90% confidence interval (CI) of absolute difference in the primary endpoint. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN44897265). Findings: Between May 8, 2018 and May 7, 2021, 258 patients were randomly assigned to MIDP (131 patients) or ODP (127 patients). Modified intention-to-treat analysis included 114 patients in the MIDP group and 110 patients in the ODP group. An R0 resection occurred in 83 (73%) patients in the MIDP group and in 76 (69%) patients in the ODP group (difference 3.7%, 90% CI -6.2 to 13.6%; pnon-inferiority = 0.039). Median lymph node yield was comparable (22.0 [16.0-30.0] vs 23.0 [14.0-32.0] nodes, p = 0.86), as was the rate of intraperitoneal recurrence (41% vs 38%, p = 0.45). Median follow-up was 23.5 (interquartile range 17.0-30.0) months. Other postoperative outcomes were comparable, including median time to functional recovery (5 [95% CI 4.5-5.5] vs 5 [95% CI 4.7-5.3] days; p = 0.22) and overall survival (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.67-1.46, p = 0.94). Serious adverse events were reported in 23 (18%) of 131 patients in the MIDP group vs 28 (22%) of 127 patients in the ODP group. Interpretation: This trial provides evidence on the non-inferiority of MIDP compared to ODP regarding radical resection rates in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. The present findings support the applicability of minimally invasive surgery in patients with resectable left-sided pancreatic cancer. Funding: Medtronic Covidien AG, Johnson & Johnson Medical Limited, Dutch Gastroenterology Society.

The Role of Preoperative Inflammatory Markers in Pancreatectomy: a Norwegian Nationwide Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Preoperative inflammatory markers, such as Glasgow prognostic score, modified Glasgow prognostic score and C-reactive protein to albumin ratio, were shown to be associated with prognosis in patients undergoing pancreatectomy for cancer. However, little is known about their predictive role in a Western population. METHODS: The Norwegian National Registry for Gastrointestinal Surgery (NORGAST) was used to capture all pancreatectomies performed within the study period (November 2015-April 2021). The association between the preoperative inflammatory markers and postoperative outcomes was studied. Their impact on survival was examined in patients operated for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. RESULTS: A total of 1554 patients underwent pancreatectomy in this period. Glasgow prognostic score, modified Glasgow prognostic score and C-reactive protein to albumin ratio were associated with severe complications (Accordion grade ≥ III) in the univariable but not in the multivariable analysis. C-reactive protein to albumin ratio, but not Glasgow prognostic score and modified Glasgow prognostic score, was linked to survival following pancreatectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma. In the multivariable model, age, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, ECOG score, C-reactive protein to albumin ratio and total pancreatectomy correlated with survival. Also, preoperative C-reactive protein to albumin ratio was significantly associated with survival after pancreatoduodenectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative Glasgow prognostic score, modified Glasgow prognostic score and C-reactive protein to albumin ratio have no role in predicting the complications after pancreatectomy. C-reactive protein to albumin ratio is a significant predictor for survival in ductal adenocarcinoma, yet its clinical relevance should be explored in conjunction with the pathology parameters and adjuvant therapy.

Pancreatoduodenectomy after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery: Single-center experience and literature review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Bariatric surgery with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is widely used to treat morbid obesity and present diagnostic and therapeutic challenges in patients with pancreatic and periampullary tumors. The aim of this study was to describe diagnostic tools and challenges in performing pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) on patients with altered anatomy after RYGB. METHODS: Patients undergoing PD after RYGB from April 2015 to June 2022 at a tertiary referral center were identified. Preoperative workup, operative techniques, and outcomes were reviewed. A literature search was performed to identify articles reporting PD in post-RYGB patients. RESULTS: Of a total of 788 PDs, six patients had previous RYGB. The majority were women (n = 5), and median age was 59 years. The patients most commonly presented with pain (50%) and jaundice (50%) with a median of 5.5 years after RYGB. The gastric remnant was resected in all cases, and reconstruction of the pancreatobiliary drainage was achieved using the distal part of the pre-existing pancreatobiliary limb in all patients. Median follow-up was 60 months. The Clavien-Dindo grade ⩾3 complications occurred in two patients (33.3%), and 90 days mortality occurred in one patient (16.6%). The literature search revealed 9 articles reporting a total of 122 cases, specifically addressing PD after RYGB. CONCLUSIONS: Reconstruction after PD in post-RYGB patients may be challenging. Resection of the gastric remnant and use of the pre-existing biliopancreatic limb may be a safe strategy, but surgeons should be prepared for other reconstruction options for creation of a new pancreatobiliary limb.

Minimally Invasive Pancreatoduodenectomy: Contemporary Practice, Evidence, and Knowledge Gaps.

Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy has gained popularity throughout the last decade. For laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy, some high-level evidence exists, but with conflicting results. There are currently no published randomized controlled trials comparing robotic and open pancreatoduodenectomy. Comparative long-term data for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is lacking to date. Based on the existing evidence, current observed benefits of minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy over open pancreatoduodenectomy seem scarce, but retrospective data indicate the safety of these procedures in selected patients. As familiarity with the robotic platform increases, studies have shown an expansion in indications, also including patients with vascular involvement and even indicating favorable results in patients with obesity and high-risk morphometric features. Several ongoing randomized controlled trials aim to investigate potential differences in short- and long-term outcomes between minimally invasive and open pancreatoduodenectomy. Their results are much awaited.

Benchmarking of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy: European multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: Benchmarking is the process to used assess the best achievable results and compare outcomes with that standard. This study aimed to assess best achievable outcomes in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (MIDPS). METHODS: This retrospective study included consecutive patients undergoing MIDPS for any indication, between 2003 and 2019, in 31 European centres. Benchmarks of the main clinical outcomes were calculated according to the Achievable Benchmark of Care (ABC™) method. After identifying independent risk factors for severe morbidity and conversion, risk-adjusted ABCs were calculated for each subgroup of patients at risk. RESULTS: A total of 1595 patients were included. The ABC was 2.5 per cent for conversion and 8.4 per cent for severe morbidity. ABC values were 160 min for duration of operation time, 8.3 per cent for POPF, 1.8 per cent for reoperation, and 0 per cent for mortality. Multivariable analysis showed that conversion was associated with male sex (OR 1.48), BMI exceeding 30 kg/m2 (OR 2.42), multivisceral resection (OR 3.04), and laparoscopy (OR 2.24). Increased risk of severe morbidity was associated with ASA fitness grade above II (OR 1.60), multivisceral resection (OR 1.88), and robotic approach (OR 1.87). CONCLUSION: The benchmark values obtained using the ABC method represent optimal outcomes from best achievable care, including low complication rates and zero mortality. These benchmarks should be used to set standards to improve patient outcomes.

Prognostic Impact of Resection Margin Status in Distal Pancreatectomy for Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Resection margin status is considered one of the few surgeon-controlled parameters affecting prognosis in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). While studies mostly focus on resection margins in pancreatoduodenectomy, little is known about their role in distal pancreatectomy (DP). This study aimed to investigate resection margins in DP for PDAC. METHODS: Patients who underwent DP for PDAC between October 2004 and February 2020 were included (n = 124). Resection margins and associated parameters were studied in two consecutive time periods during which different pathology examination protocols were used: non-standardized (period 1: 2004-2014) and standardized (period 2: 2015-2020). Microscopic margin involvement (R1) was defined as ≤1 mm clearance. RESULTS: Laparoscopic and open resections were performed in 117 (94.4%) and 7 (5.6%) patients, respectively. The R1 rate for the entire cohort was 73.4%, increasing from 60.4% in period 1 to 83.1% in period 2 (p = 0.005). A significantly higher R1 rate was observed for the posterior margin (35.8 vs. 70.4%, p < 0.001) and anterior pancreatic surface (based on a 0 mm clearance; 18.9 vs. 35.4%, p = 0.045). Pathology examination period, poorly differentiated PDAC, and vascular invasion were associated with R1 in the multivariable model. Extended DP, positive anterior pancreatic surface, lymph node ratio, perineural invasion, and adjuvant chemotherapy, but not R1, were significant prognostic factors for overall survival in the entire cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Pathology examination is a key determinant of resection margin status following DP for PDAC. A high R1 rate is to be expected when pathology examination is meticulous and standardized. Involvement of the anterior pancreatic surface affects prognosis.

Implementation and training with laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: 23-year experience from a high-volume center.

BACKGROUND: Distal pancreatectomy is the most common procedure in minimally-invasive pancreatic surgery. Data in the literature suggest that the learning curve flattens after performing up to 30 procedures. However, the exact number remains unclear. METHODS: The implementation and training with laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) in a high-volume center were studied between 1997 and 2020. Perioperative outcomes and factors related to conversion were assessed. The individual experiences of four different surgeons (pioneer and adopters) performing LDP on a regular basis were examined. RESULTS: Six hundred forty LDPs were done accounting for 95% of all distal pancreatectomies performed throughout the study period. Conversion was needed in 14 (2.2%) patients due to intraoperative bleeding or tumor adherence to the major vasculature. Overall morbidity and mortality rates were 35 and 0.6%, respectively. Intra- and postoperative outcomes did not change for any of the surgeons within their first 40 cases. Operative time significantly decreased after the first 80 cases for the pioneer surgeon and did not change afterwards although the proportion of ductal adenocarcinoma increased. Tumor size increased after the first 80 cases for the first adopter without affecting the operative time. CONCLUSIONS: In this nearly unselected cohort, no significant changes in surgical outcomes were observed throughout the first 40 LDPs for different surgeons. The exact number of procedures required to overcome the learning curve is difficult to determine as it seems to depend on patient selection policy and specifics of surgical training at the corresponding center.

Gastro- or Duodenojejunostomy Leaks After Pancreatoduodenectomy: Single Center Experience and Narrative Literature Review.

BACKGROUND AND METHODS: Gastro- or duodenojejunostomy leaks after pancreatoduodenectomy is rare. This study aims to analyze the incidence, management, and outcome of gastro- or duodenojejunostomy leaks after pancreatoduodenectomy based on a single center experience from 2004 to 2020 with a narrative literature review. RESULTS: Of a total of 1494 pancreatoduodenectomies, eight patients with gastrojejunostomy (n=1) or duodenojejunostomy (n=7) leak were identified from the institutional pancreatic database. All leaks were treated operatively. In two patients dismantling of the duodenojejunostomy, distal gastrectomy, and closure of the pyloric and jejunal side, a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy and a feeding jejunostomy ultimately had to be performed after an unsuccessful attempt of gastrojejunostomy and suture of the duodenojejunostomy, respectively. The literature search revealed three more studies specifically addressing this complication after pancreatoduodenectomy (36 patients of a total of 4739 pancreatoduodenectomies). Based on an analysis of the current study and the literature review, the overall incidence of gastro- or duodenojejunostomy leaks after pancreatoduodenectomy was 0.71 % (44/6233 pancreatoduodenectomies). The occurrence of a gastro- or duodenojejunostomy leak was associated with a concomitant postoperative pancreatic fistula in 50 % of the cases, an increased length of hospital stay, and a mortality rate of 15.9 %. Surgical treatment was performed in 84 % of the cases. CONCLUSION: Gastro- or duodenojejunostomy leak is a rare complication after pancreatoduodenectomy. Prompt diagnosis and early repair is important. In most cases, a surgical intervention is necessary for a good outcome. Under salvage conditions, a bailout strategy may be to temporarily dismantle the gastro- or duodenojejunal anastomosis.

Simultaneous Resection of Primary Colorectal Cancer and Synchronous Liver Metastases: Contemporary Practice, Evidence and Knowledge Gaps.

The timing of surgical resection of synchronous liver metastases from colorectal cancer has been debated for decades. Several strategies have been proposed, but high-level evidence remains scarce. Simultaneous resection of the primary tumour and liver metastases has been described in numerous retrospective audits and meta-analyses. The potential benefits of simultaneous resections are the eradication of the tumour burden in one procedure, overall shorter procedure time, reduced hospital stay with the likely benefits on quality of life and an expected reduction in the use of health care services compared to staged procedures. However, concerns about accumulating complications and oncological outcomes remain and the optimal selection criteria for whom simultaneous resections are beneficial remains undetermined. Based on the current level of evidence, simultaneous resection should be restricted to patients with a limited liver tumour burden. More high-level evidence studies are needed to evaluate the quality of life, complication burden, oncological outcomes, as well as overall health care implications for simultaneous resections.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy in patients with poor physical status.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is advantageous over open surgery in the treatment of benign pancreatic lesions and low-grade malignancies. Yet the evidence on the relationship between comorbidities and the outcomes of LDP remains scarce. METHODS: Patients who had undergone LDP for all indications between April 1997 and December 2019 were included. Preoperative physical status was defined according to the American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) criteria. Perioperative outcomes were compared between the patients with high (ASA III-IV) and low/moderate anesthetic risk (ASA I-II). RESULTS: A total of 605 patients were eligible for analysis including 190 with ASA III-IV and 415 with ASA I-II. The former was associated with older age, male gender, preexisting medical conditions, greater total number of comorbidities and red blood cell transfusion. The rate of medical complications was significantly higher in high-risk patients. Multivariable analysis identified ASA III-IV and operative time as independent predictors for medical complications. Overall/severe morbidity, surgical complications and mortality rates were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Poor physical status defined as ASA grades III-IV predicts medical complications, but has a limited impact on surgical complications and severe morbidity of LDP. Thus, it should not be considered as a contraindication for LDP.

Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy Following Prior Upper Abdominal Surgery (Pancreatectomy and Prior Surgery).

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Previous abdominal surgery can be a risk factor for perioperative complications in patients undergoing laparoscopic procedures. Today, distal pancreatectomy is increasingly performed laparoscopically. This study investigates the consequences of prior upper abdominal surgery (PUAS) for laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP). METHODS: Patients who had undergone LDP from April 1997 to January 2020 were included. Based on the history and type of PUAS, these were categorized into three groups: minimally invasive (I), open (II), and no PUAS (III). To reduce possible confounding factors, the groups were matched in 1:2:4 fashion based on age, sex, body mass index (BMI) and American Society of Anesthesiology grade. RESULTS: After matching, 30, 60, and 120 patients were included in the minimally invasive, open and no PUAS groups, respectively. No statistically significant differences were found in terms of intraoperative outcomes. Postoperative morbidity, mortality and length of hospital stay were similar. Open PUAS was associated with higher Comprehensive Complication Index (33.7 vs 20.9 vs 26.2, p = 0.03) and greater proportion of patients with ≥ 2 complications (16.7 vs 0 vs 6.7%, p = 0.02) compared with minimally invasive and no PUAS. Male sex, overweight (BMI 25-29.9 kg/m2), diagnosis of neuroendocrine neoplasia, and open PUAS were risk factors for severe morbidity in the univariable analysis. Only open PUAS was statistically significant in the multivariable model. CONCLUSIONS: PUAS does not impair the feasibility and safety of LDP as its perioperative outcomes are largely comparable to those in patients without PUAS. However, open PUAS increases the burden and severity of postoperative complications.

Graft type for superior mesenteric and portal vein reconstruction in pancreatic surgery - A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Contemporary practice for superior mesenteric/portal vein (SMV-PV) reconstruction during pancreatectomy with vein resection involves biological (autograft, allograft, xenograft) or synthetic grafts as a conduit or patch. The aim of this study was to systematically review the safety and feasibility of the different grafts used for SMV-PV reconstruction. METHODS: A systematic search was performed in PubMed and Embase according to the PRISMA guidelines (January 2000-March 2020). Studies reporting on ≥ 5 patients undergoing reconstruction of the SMV-PV with grafts during pancreatectomy were included. Primary outcome was rate of graft thrombosis. RESULTS: Thirty-four studies with 603 patients were included. Four graft types were identified (autologous vein, autologous parietal peritoneum/falciform ligament, allogeneic cadaveric vein/artery, synthetic grafts). Early and overall graft thrombosis rate was 7.5% and 22.2% for synthetic graft, 5.6% and 11.7% for autologous vein graft, 6.7% and 8.9% for autologous parietal peritoneum/falciform ligament, and 2.5% and 6.2% for allograft. Donor site complications were reported for harvesting of the femoral, saphenous, and external iliac vein. No cases of graft infection were reported for synthetic grafts. CONCLUSION: In selected patients, autologous, allogenic or synthetic grafts for SMV-PV reconstruction are safe and feasible. Synthetic grafts seems to have a higher incidence of graft thrombosis.

Portal vein stent placement after hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the long-term outcomes of percutaneous transhepatic stent placement for portal vein (PV) stenosis after liver transplantation (LT) and hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) surgery. METHODS: Retrospective study of 455 patients who underwent LT and 522 patients who underwent resection of the pancreatic head between June 2011 and February 2016. Technical success, clinical success, patency, and complications were evaluated for both groups. RESULTS: A total of 23 patients were confirmed to have postoperative PV stenosis and were treated with percutaneous transhepatic PV stent placement. The technical success rate was 100%, the clinical success rate was 80%, and the long-term stent patency was 91.3% for the entire study population. Two procedure-related hemorrhages and two early stent thromboses occurred in the HPB group while no complications occurred in the LT group. A literature review of selected studies reporting PV stent placement for the treatment of PV stenosis after HPB surgery and LT showed a technical success rate of 78-100%, a clinical success rate of 72-100%, and a long-term patency of 57-100%, whereas the procedure-related complication rate varied from 0-33.3%. CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous transhepatic PV stent is a safe and effective treatment for postoperative PV stenosis/occlusion in patients undergoing LT regardless of symptoms. Due to increased risk of complications, the indication for percutaneous PV stent placement after HPB surgery should be limited to patients with clinical symptoms after an individual assessment.