Randomized clinical trial of the effect of a fibrin sealant patch on pancreatic fistula formation after pancreatoduodenectomy.

BACKGROUND: The potential for a fibrin sealant patch to reduce the risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains uncertain. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether a fibrin sealant patch is able to reduce POPF in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy with pancreatojejunostomy. METHODS: In this multicentre trial, patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy were randomized to receive either a fibrin patch (patch group) or no patch (control group), and stratified by gland texture, pancreatic duct size and neoadjuvant treatment. The primary endpoint was POPF. Secondary endpoints included complications, drain-related factors and duration of hospital stay. Risk factors for POPF were identified by logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 142 patients were enrolled. Forty-five of 71 patients (63 per cent) in the patch group and 40 of 71 (56 per cent) in the control group developed biochemical leakage or POPF (P = 0·392). Fistulas were classified as grade B or C in 16 (23 per cent) and ten (14 per cent) patients respectively (P = 0·277). There were no differences in postoperative complications (54 patients in patch group and 50 in control group; P = 0·839), drain amylase concentration (P = 0·494), time until drain removal (mean(s.d.) 11·6(1·0) versus 13·3(1·3) days; P = 0·613), fistula closure (17·6(2·2) versus 16·5(2·1) days; P = 0·740) and duration of hospital stay (22·1(2·2) versus 18·2(0·9) days; P = 0·810) between the two groups. Multivariable logistic regression analysis confirmed that obesity (odds ratio (OR) 5·28, 95 per cent c.i. 1·20 to 23·18; P = 0·027), soft gland texture (OR 9·86, 3·41 to 28·54; P < 0·001) and a small duct (OR 5·50, 1·84 to 16·44; P = 0·002) were significant risk factors for POPF. A patch did not reduce the incidence of POPF in patients at higher risk. CONCLUSION: The use of a fibrin sealant patch did not reduce the occurrence of POPF and complications after pancreatoduodenectomy with pancreatojejunostomy. Registration number: 2013-000639-29 (EudraCT register).

The faith of non-surveilled pancreatic cysts: a bicentric retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Incidental discovery of pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCLs) is a common and steadily increasing occurrence. The aim of this study was to investigate a cohort of patients presenting with incidentally detected PCLs which were not included in a surveillance protocol, and to compare their risk of malignant evolution with that of systematically surveilled lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A population of PCLs which did not receive surveillance over a period >10 years (population A) was selected at the Medical University of Vienna. A group of "low risk" branch duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm ≤15 mm in size upon diagnosis undergoing a regular follow-up of at least 5 years at the University of Verona was selected as control (population B). The incidence of pancreatic cancer (PC), cumulative risk of PC and disease-specific survival were compared. RESULTS: Overall, 376 patients with non-surveilled PCLs were included in study group A and compared to 299 patients in group B. This comparison resulted in similar incidence rates of PC (1.6% vs 1.7%, p = 0.938), a strong similarity in terms of disease-specific mortality rates (1.3% vs 0.3%, p = 0.171) and the 5- and 10-year cumulative risk of PC (≅ 1% and 2%, p = 0.589) and DSS (≅ 100% and 98%, p = 0.050). CONCLUSION: The "price to pay" for a negligence-based policy in the population of non-surveilled PCLs was reasonable, and the incidence of PC was comparable to that reported for a population of low-risk cysts enrolled to a standardized surveillance protocol.

Metachronous hepatic resection for liver only pancreatic metastases.

BACKGROUND: The value of liver resection (LR) for metachronous pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) metastases remains controversial. However, in light of increasing safety of liver resections, surgery might be a valuable option for metastasized PDAC in selected patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective, multicenter study including patients undergoing hepatectomy for metachronous PDAC liver metastases between 2004 and 2015 to analyze postoperative outcome and overall survival. All patients were operated with curative intent. Patients with oligometastatic metachronous liver metastasis with definitive chemotherapy (n = 8) served as controls. RESULTS: Overall 25 patients in seven centers were included in this study. The median age at the time of LR was 63.8 years (56.9-69.9) and the median number of metastases in the liver was 1 (IQR 1-2). There were eight non-anatomical resections (32%), 15 anatomical minor (60%) and 2 major LR (8%). Postoperative complications occurred in eleven patients (eight Clavien-Dindo grade I complications (32%) and three grade IIIa complications (12%), respectively). The 30-day mortality was 0%. The median length of stay was 8.6 days (IQR 5-11). Median overall survival following LR was 36.8 months compared to 9.2 months in patients with metachronous liver metastasis with chemotherapy (p = 0007). DISCUSSION: Liver resection for metachronous PDAC metastasis is safe and feasible in selected patients. To address general applicability and to find factors for patient selection, larger trials are urgently warranted.

Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms of the pancreas with concurrent pancreatic and periampullary neoplasms.

BACKGROUND: Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN) have been reported to be associated with concurrent, distinct pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (con-PDAC) in about 8% (range, 4-10%) of resected branch duct (BD) lesions. In addition, other pancreatic and ampullary tumors are occasionally diagnosed with IPMN in patients undergoing pancreatic surgery. The objective of this study is to describe the prevalence, clinicopathologic characteristics and prognosis of IPMN with concurrent pancreatic and ampullary neoplasms, especially con-PDAC. METHODS: The combined databases of pancreatic resections from the Massachusetts General Hospital and the Negrar Hospital, Italy, were analyzed for patients who had been diagnosed with IPMN and concurrent pancreatic or ampullary neoplasms. RESULTS: 2762 patients underwent pancreatic surgery from January 2000 to December 2012. Sixteen percent (n = 441) had pathologically confirmed IPMN and 11% of these (n = 50) had a different distinct synchronous pancreatic neoplasm. The majority of these, 62%, were con-PDAC, followed by neuroendocrine neoplasms (10%) and ampullary carcinoma (10%). Less frequently, mucinous (6%) as well as serous cystic neoplasms (6%), adenosquamous carcinoma (4%) and distal bile duct cancer (2%) were diagnosed. Among all patients with synchronous neoplasms, 66% harbored BD-IPMN, 28% combined IPMN and 6% main duct IPMN. Abdominal pain and/or jaundice were the leading symptoms in half of patients. CONCLUSION: IPMN, mainly BD-IPMN, are associated with con-PDAC in about 7% of patients and account for 62% of all concurrent pancreatic/ampullary neoplasms. Other synchronous neoplasms may be found sporadically with IPMN without a suspected association.

Common variables in European pancreatic cancer registries: The introduction of the EURECCA pancreatic cancer project.

BACKGROUND: Quality assurance of cancer care is of utmost importance to detect and avoid under and over treatment. Most cancer data are collected by different procedures in different countries, and are poorly comparable at an international level. EURECCA, acronym for European Registration of Cancer Care, is a platform aiming to harmonize cancer data collection and improve cancer care by feedback. After the prior launch of the projects on colorectal, breast and upper GI cancer, EURECCA's newest project is collecting data on pancreatic cancer in several European countries. METHODS: National cancer registries, as well as specific pancreatic cancer audits/registries, were invited to participate in EURECCA Pancreas. Participating countries were requested to share an overview of their collected data items. Of the received datasets, a shared items list was made which creates insight in similarities between different national registries and will enable data comparison on a larger scale. Additionally, first data was requested from the participating countries. RESULTS: Over 24 countries have been approached and 11 confirmed participation: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Germany, The Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Ukraine and United Kingdom. The number of collected data items varied between 16 and 285. This led to a shared items list of 25 variables divided into five categories: patient characteristics, preoperative diagnostics, treatment, staging and survival. Eight countries shared their first data. CONCLUSIONS: A list of 25 shared items on pancreatic cancer coming from eleven participating registries was created, providing a basis for future prospective data collection in pancreatic cancer treatment internationally.