Complexity and Experience Grading to Guide Patient Selection for Minimally-invasive Pancreatoduodenectomy: An ISGPS Consensus.

OBJECTIVE: The ISGPS aims to develop a universally accepted complexity and experience grading system to guide the safe implementation of robotic and laparoscopic minimally-invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD). BACKGROUND: Despite the perceived advantages of MIPD, its global adoption has been slow due to the inherent complexity of the procedure and challenges to acquiring surgical experience. Its wider adoption must be undertaken with an emphasis towards appropriate patient selection according to adequate surgeon and center experience. METHODS: The ISGPS developed a complexity and experience grading system to guide patient selection for MIPD based on an evidence-based review and a series of discussions. RESULTS: The ISGPS complexity and experience grading system for MIPD is subclassified into patient-related risk factors and provider experience-related variables. The patient-related risk factors include anatomical (main pancreatic and common bile duct diameters), tumor-specific (vascular contact), and conditional (obesity and previous complicated upper abdominal surgery/disease) factors, all incorporated in an A-B-C classification, graded as no, a single, and multiple risk factors. The surgeon and center experience-related variables include surgeon total MIPD experience (cut-offs 40 and 80) and center annual MIPD volume (cut-offs 10 and 30), all also incorporated in an A-B-C classification. CONCLUSION: This ISGPS complexity and experience grading system for robotic and laparoscopic MIPD may enable surgeons to optimally select patients after duly considering specific risk factors known to influence the complexity of the procedure. This grading system will likely allow for a thoughtful and stepwise implementation of MIPD and facilitate a fair comparison of outcome between centers and countries.

European fellowship training opportunities for hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery: an international survey of fellows and program directors.

BACKGROUND: There are no established training pathways for hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) surgery in Europe. This study aims to overview the current status of fellowship training from both fellows' and institutions' perspectives. METHODS: A web-based snapshot survey was distributed to all members of the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (E-AHPBA) to reach for former fellows and program directors of European HPB surgery fellowships held between 2013 and 2023. RESULTS: A total of 37 fellows and 13 program directors replied describing 32 different programs in 13 European countries. The median (range) age at fellowship start was 34 (30-45 years). Fellowship duration was most commonly one (36 %) or two (40 %) years. Fellowships were funded in 70 % and fellows were required to learn a new language in 27 %. Most fellows performed between none and 10 pancreatic (68 %), major (67 %) and minor (60 %) liver resections as 1st surgeon, while the number of operations performed as 1st assistant were more heterogeneous. Program directors estimated a higher number of operations performed by fellows as first surgeons. The percentage of procedures performed minimally invasively did not exceed 10 %. CONCLUSION: There is substantial heterogeneity between HPB fellowship programs in Europe. A wider standardization of clinical curriculum, including minimally invasive surgery, is desirable.

Benefits and barriers to accreditation of HPB center and fellowship programs in Europe: a strength-weakness-opportunity-and-threats (SWOT) analysis by an E-AHPBA-ESSO-UEMS ad hoc working committee.

BACKGROUND: Training in HPB surgery lacks uniformity across regions covered by the E-AHPBA. Accreditation has been in place for centers and fellowship programs, but with low uptake. The decision whether to continue, change or cease such accreditation is being discussed. Thus, a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis was conducted. METHODS: A mixed-methods, cross-sectional study among stakeholders in E-AHPBA, ESSO and UEMS under the E-AHPBA executive council was founded, ensuring representation by gender and geographic distribution. RESULTS: Responses were collected from across E-AHPBA regions, with response from 15 of 24 subchapters. The most frequent and recurring themes are presented in a SWOT matrix which allows for paired evaluations of factors deemed to be helpful (Strengths and Opportunities), those that are harmful (Weaknesses and Threats). CONCLUSION: This study identified both helpful and harmful effects to an accreditation process of HPB centers or HPB fellowship training across the E-AHPBA membership region. Formal accreditation of centers is not within the scope, nor jurisdiction nor financial capacity for E-AHPBA in the current situation. A strong interest in formal HPB training should be capitalized into E-AHPBA strategic planning towards a structured accreditation system for HPB fellowship programs or HPB training tracks.

International survey on opinions and use of robot-assisted and laparoscopic minimally invasive pancreatic surgery: 5-year follow up.

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the value of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS) has been increasing but it is unclear how this has influenced the view of pancreatic surgeons on MIPS. METHODS: An anonymous survey was sent to members of eight international Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Associations. Outcomes were compared with the 2016 international survey. RESULTS: Overall, 315 surgeons from 47 countries participated. The median volume of pancreatic resections per center was 70 (IQR 40-120). Most surgeons considered minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) superior to open (ODP) (94.6%) and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) superior to minimally invasive (MIPD) (67.9%). Since 2016, there has been an increase in the number of surgeons performing both MIDP (79%-85.7%, p = 0.024) and MIPD (29%-45.7%, p < 0.001), and an increase in the use of the robot-assisted approach for both MIDP (16%-45.6%, p < 0.001) and MIPD (23%-47.9%, p < 0.001). The use of laparoscopy remained stable for MIDP (91% vs. 88.1%, p = 0.245) and decreased for MIPD (51%-36.8%, p = 0.024). CONCLUSION: This survey showed considerable changes of MIPS since 2016 with most surgeons considering MIDP superior to ODP and an increased use of robot-assisted MIPS. Surgeons prefer OPD and therefore the value of MIPD remains to be determined in randomized trials.

An International Expert Delphi Consensus on Defining Textbook Outcome in Liver Surgery (TOLS).

OBJECTIVE: To reach global expert consensus on the definition of TOLS in minimally invasive and open liver resection among renowned international expert liver surgeons using a modified Delphi method. BACKGROUND: Textbook outcome is a novel composite measure combining the most desirable postoperative outcomes into one single measure and representing the ideal postoperative course. Despite a recently developed international definition of Textbook Outcome in Liver Surgery (TOLS), a standardized and expert consensus-based definition is lacking. METHODS: This international, consensus-based, qualitative study used a Delphi process to achieve consensus on the definition of TOLS. The survey comprised 6 surgical domains with a total of 26 questions on individual surgical outcome variables. The process included 4 rounds of online questionnaires. Consensus was achieved when a threshold of at least 80% agreement was reached. The results from the Delphi rounds were used to establish an international definition of TOLS. RESULTS: In total, 44 expert liver surgeons from 22 countries and all 3 major international hepato-pancreato-biliary associations completed round 1. Forty-two (96%), 41 (98%), and 41 (98%) of the experts participated in round 2, 3, and 4, respectively. The TOLS definition derived from the consensus process included the absence of intraoperative grade ≥2 incidents, postoperative bile leakage grade B/C, postoperative liver failure grade B/C, 90-day major postoperative complications, 90-day readmission due to surgery-related major complications, 90-day/in-hospital mortality, and the presence of R0 resection margin. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study providing an international expert consensus-based definition of TOLS for minimally invasive and open liver resections by the use of a formal Delphi consensus approach. TOLS may be useful in assessing patient-level hospital performance and carrying out international comparisons between centers with different clinical practices to further improve patient outcomes.

Multisocietal European consensus on the terminology, diagnosis, and management of patients with synchronous colorectal cancer and liver metastases: an E-AHPBA consensus in partnership with ESSO, ESCP, ESGAR, and CIRSE.

BACKGROUND: Contemporary management of patients with synchronous colorectal cancer and liver metastases is complex. The aim of this project was to provide a practical framework for care of patients with synchronous colorectal cancer and liver metastases, with a focus on terminology, diagnosis, and management. METHODS: This project was a multiorganizational, multidisciplinary consensus. The consensus group produced statements which focused on terminology, diagnosis, and management. Statements were refined during an online Delphi process, and those with 70 per cent agreement or above were reviewed at a final meeting. Iterations of the report were shared by electronic mail to arrive at a final agreed document comprising 12 key statements. RESULTS: Synchronous liver metastases are those detected at the time of presentation of the primary tumour. The term 'early metachronous metastases' applies to those absent at presentation but detected within 12 months of diagnosis of the primary tumour, the term 'late metachronous metastases' applies to those detected after 12 months. 'Disappearing metastases' applies to lesions that are no longer detectable on MRI after systemic chemotherapy. Guidance was provided on the recommended composition of tumour boards, and clinical assessment in emergency and elective settings. The consensus focused on treatment pathways, including systemic chemotherapy, synchronous surgery, and the staged approach with either colorectal or liver-directed surgery as first step. Management of pulmonary metastases and the role of minimally invasive surgery was discussed. CONCLUSION: The recommendations of this contemporary consensus provide information of practical value to clinicians managing patients with synchronous colorectal cancer and liver metastases.

E-AHPBA-ESSO-ESSR Innsbruck consensus guidelines for preoperative liver function assessment before hepatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) contributes significantly to morbidity and mortality after liver surgery. Standardized assessment of preoperative liver function is crucial to identify patients at risk. These European consensus guidelines provide guidance for preoperative patient assessment. METHODS: A modified Delphi approach was used to achieve consensus. The expert panel consisted of hepatobiliary surgeons, radiologists, nuclear medicine specialists, and hepatologists. The guideline process was supervised by a methodologist and reviewed by a patient representative. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane library, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry. Evidence assessment and statement development followed Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology. RESULTS: Based on 271 publications covering 4 key areas, 21 statements (at least 85 per cent agreement) were produced (median level of evidence 2- to 2+). Only a few systematic reviews (2++) and one RCT (1+) were identified. Preoperative liver function assessment should be considered before complex resections, and in patients with suspected or known underlying liver disease, or chemotherapy-associated or drug-induced liver injury. Clinical assessment and blood-based scores reflecting liver function or portal hypertension (for example albumin/bilirubin, platelet count) aid in identifying risk of PHLF. Volumetry of the future liver remnant represents the foundation for assessment, and can be combined with indocyanine green clearance or LiMAx® according to local expertise and availability. Functional MRI and liver scintigraphy are alternatives, combining FLR volume and function in one examination. CONCLUSION: These guidelines reflect established methods to assess preoperative liver function and PHLF risk, and have uncovered evidence gaps of interest for future research.

Liver surgery is an effective treatment for liver tumours. Liver failure is a major problem in patients with a poor liver quality or having large operations. The treatment options for liver failure are limited, with high death rates. To estimate patient risk, assessing liver function before surgery is important. Many methods exist for this purpose, including functional, blood, and imaging tests. This guideline summarizes the available literature and expert opinions, and aids clinicians in planning safe liver surgery.

Validation of VIBe bleeding scale amongst hepatopancreatobiliary surgeons: results from an IHPBA survey.

BACKGROUND: The Validated Intraoperative Bleeding (VIBe) Scale could be used to aid assessment of intraoperative bleeding and guide the use of hemostatic products. The aim of this survey was to determine if the VIBe scale would serve as a generalizable and relevant tool for hepatopancreatobiliary(HPB) surgeons and trainees. METHODS: A standardized online VIBe training module was conducted on 67 respondents from 25 countries, after which they used the VIBe scale to score videos depicting different severities of intraoperative bleeding. Interobserver agreement was assessed using Kendall's coefficient of concordance. RESULTS: Interobserver agreement was excellent amongst all respondents with a Kendall's W of 0.923. Sub-analyses showed a difference based on seniority and level of experience: Attendings/Consultants(0.947) vs Fellows/Residents(0.879); Increasing years of practice >10(0.952) vs <10 years practice(0.890). There was excellent concordance regardless of surgical volume, percentage of procedures performed minimally invasively, area of sub-specialty, and previous involvement with VIBe surveys. CONCLUSION: This international survey in the field of HPB surgery across surgeons of various levels of experience showed that the VIBe scale could serve as an excellent tool to assess the severity of bleeding. This scale would also be useful in guiding the use and choice of hemostatic adjuncts to achieve hemostasis.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) after open hepatectomy compared to minimally invasive liver resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Even though the risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) after liver resection is well recognized, the association between surgical approach and VTE risk is unknown. This study aims to compare VTE rates following open liver resection (OLR) and minimally invasive liver resection (MILR). METHODS: MEDLINE, Web Of Sciences and EMBASE databases were interrogated to identify eligible studies published between February 2016 and August 2022. Studies were considered suitable if they reported a comparison between OLR and MILR (including laparoscopic liver resection [LLR] or robotic liver resection [RLR]). RESULTS: Fourteen studies including 11 356 patients met the inclusion criteria. 5622 patients underwent OLR and 5734 patients underwent MILR. The VTE rate was higher among patients who underwent OLR compared to MILR (2.8% vs 1.4%, OR (95% CI) = 1.84, p=<00001). Similarly, the subgroup analysis showed a higher rate of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) (1.4% vs 0.7%, OR (95% CI) = 1.98, p = 0.02) and pulmonary embolism (PE) (1.3% vs 0.7%, OR (95% CI) = 1.88, p = 0.002) in patients who underwent OLR compared to MILR. DISCUSSION: Patients who undergo open hepatectomy have a higher incidence of postoperative VTE when compared to those undergoing minimally invasive liver resection. This finding was consistent for both DVT and PE.

The multi-societal European consensus on the terminology, diagnosis and management of patients with synchronous colorectal cancer and liver metastases: an E-AHPBA consensus in partnership with ESSO, ESCP, ESGAR, and CIRSE.

BACKGROUND: Contemporary management of patients with synchronous colorectal cancer and liver metastases is complex. The aim of this project was to provide a practical framework for care of patients with synchronous colorectal cancer and liver metastases with a focus on terminology, diagnosis and management. METHODS: This project was a multi-organisational, multidisciplinary consensus. The consensus group produced statements which focused on terminology, diagnosis and management. Statements were refined during an online Delphi process and those with 70% agreement or above were reviewed at a final meeting. Iterations of the report were shared by electronic mail to arrive at a final agreed document comprising twelve key statements. RESULTS: Synchronous liver metastases are those detected at the time of presentation of the primary tumour. The term "early metachronous metastases" applies to those absent at presentation but detected within 12 months of diagnosis of the primary tumour with "late metachronous metastases" applied to those detected after 12 months. Disappearing metastases applies to lesions which are no longer detectable on MR scan after systemic chemotherapy. Guidance was provided on the recommended composition of tumour boards and clinical assessment in emergency and elective settings. The consensus focused on treatment pathways including systemic chemotherapy, synchronous surgery and the staged approach with either colorectal or liver-directed surgery as first step. Management of pulmonary metastases and the role of minimally invasive surgery was discussed. CONCLUSIONS: The recommendations of this contemporary consensus provide information of practical value to clinicians managing patients with synchronous colorectal cancer and liver metastases.

Postpancreatectomy Acute Pancreatitis (PPAP): Definition and Grading From the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS).

OBJECTIVE: The ISGPS aimed to develop a universally accepted definition for PPAP for standardized reporting and outcome comparison. BACKGROUND: PPAP is an increasingly recognized complication after partial pancreatic resections, but its incidence and clinical impact, and even its existence are variable because an internationally accepted consensus definition and grading system are lacking. METHODS: The ISGPS developed a consensus definition and grading of PPAP with its members after an evidence review and after a series of discussions and multiple revisions from April 2020 to May 2021. RESULTS: We defined PPAP as an acute inflammatory condition of the pancreatic remnant beginning within the first 3 postoperative days after a partial pancreatic resection. The diagnosis requires (1) a sustained postoperative serum hyperamylasemia (POH) greater than the institutional upper limit of normal for at least the first 48 hours postoperatively, (2) associated with clinically relevant features, and (3) radiologic alterations consistent with PPAP. Three different PPAP grades were defined based on the clinical impact: (1) grade postoperative hyperamylasemia, biochemical changes only; (2) grade B, mild or moderate complications; and (3) grade C, severe life-threatening complications. DISCUSSIONS: The present definition and grading scale of PPAP, based on biochemical, radiologic, and clinical criteria, are instrumental for a better understanding of PPAP and the spectrum of postoperative complications related to this emerging entity. The current terminology will serve as a reference point for standard assessment and lend itself to developing specific treatments and prevention strategies.

Management of Colorectal Cancer with Synchronous Liver Metastases: An Inception Cohort Study (CoSMIC).

BACKGROUND: Approximately one-fifth of patients with colorectal cancer present with hepatic metastases. There are limited prospective data on the outcomes of synchronous combined liver and bowel surgery and liver-first or bowel-first routes where contemporary chemo(radio)therapy is integrated into management. METHODS: Between 1 April 2014 and 31 March 2017, 125 patients with colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases were recruited. Data are reported on pathway-specific outcomes, including perioperative complications, treatment completion, and overall and disease-free survival. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02456285). RESULTS: There was no difference in age, body mass index, or Charlson score between surgical groups. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was used in 50 (40%) patients for a mean duration of 4.6 months (standard deviation [SD] 5.4), and mean time from completion of chemotherapy to surgery was 2.6 months (SD 1.9). Complications were similar between patients completing the synchronous and staged pathways (p = 0.66). Mean total inpatient stay was 16.5 days (SD 8.1) for staged surgery compared with 16.8 days (SD 10.3) for the synchronous group (t-test; p = 0.91). There was no difference in time to treatment completion between pathways. Thirty six (35%) patients were disease-free at 12 months, with no significant difference between groups (Chi-square, p = 0.448). Quality of life was similar in all surgical groups. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative complications and oncological and healthcare occupancy outcomes are equivalent between patients completing staged and synchronous pathways for the management of patients with colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases. Future studies should focus on optimizing the criteria for pathway selection, incorporation of cancer genomics data, and patient (user) preferences.

Perioperative interventions to reduce pancreatic fistula following pancreatoduodenectomy: meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Data on interventions to reduce postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) are conflicting. The aim of this study was to assimilate data from RCTs. METHODS: MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched systematically for RCTs evaluating interventions to reduce all grades of POPF or clinically relevant (CR) POPF after PD. Meta-analysis was undertaken for interventions investigated in multiple studies. A post hoc analysis of negative RCTs assessed whether these had appropriate statistical power. RESULTS: Among 22 interventions (7512 patients, 55 studies), 12 were assessed by multiple studies, and subjected to meta-analysis. Of these, external pancreatic duct drainage was the only intervention associated with reduced rates of both CR-POPF (odds ratio (OR) 0.40, 95 per cent c.i. 0.20 to 0.80) and all-POPF (OR 0.42, 0.25 to 0.70). Ulinastatin was associated with reduced rates of CR-POPF (OR 0.24, 0.06 to 0.93). Invagination (versus duct-to-mucosa) pancreatojejunostomy was associated with reduced rates of all-POPF (OR 0.60, 0.40 to 0.90). Most negative RCTs were found to be underpowered, with post hoc power calculations indicating that interventions would need to reduce the POPF rate to 1 per cent or less in order to achieve 80 per cent power in 16 of 34 (all-POPF) and 19 of 25 (CR-POPF) studies respectively. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis supports a role for several interventions to reduce POPF after PD. RCTs in this field were often relatively small and underpowered, especially those evaluating CR-POPF.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy in the Treatment of Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms of the Pancreas: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The present systematic review aimed to compare survival outcomes of invasive intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IIPMNs) treated with adjuvant chemotherapy versus surgery alone and to identify pathologic features that may predict survival benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. METHOD: A systematic search of MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE was performed using the PRISMA framework. Studies comparing adjuvant chemotherapy and surgery alone for patients with IIPMNs were included. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). A narrative synthesis was performed to identify pathologic features that predicted survival benefits from adjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: Eleven studies and 3393 patients with IIPMNs were included in the meta-analysis. Adjuvant chemotherapy significantly reduced the risk of death in the overall cohort (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38-0.87, p = 0.009) and node-positive patients (HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.13-0.64, p = 0.002). Weighted median survival difference between adjuvant chemotherapy and surgery alone in node-positive patients was 11.6 months (95% CI 3.83-19.38, p = 0.003) favouring chemotherapy. Adjuvant chemotherapy had no impact on OS in node-negative patients (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.20-1.43, p = 0.209). High heterogeneity (I2 > 75%) was observed in pooled estimates of hazard ratios. Improved OS following adjuvant chemotherapy was reported for patients with stage III/IV disease, tumour size > 2 cm, node-positive status, grade 3 tumour differentiation, positive margin status, tubular carcinoma subtype, and presence of perineural or lymphovascular invasion. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with improved OS in node-positive IIPMNs. However, the findings were limited by marked heterogeneity. Future large multicentre prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings and explore additional predictors of improved OS to guide patient selection for adjuvant chemotherapy.

Analgesia in the Initial Management of Acute Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: The optimal analgesic strategy for patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: The present systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy of different analgesic modalities trialled in AP. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, SCOPUS and Web of Science conducted up until June 2021, identified all randomised control trials (RCTs) comparing analgesic modalities in AP. A pooled analysis was undertaken of the improvement in pain scores as reported on visual analogue scale (VAS) on day 0, day 1 and day 2. RESULTS: Twelve RCTs were identified including 542 patients. Seven trial drugs were compared: opiates, non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs), metamizole, local anaesthetic, epidural, paracetamol, and placebo. Across all modalities, the pooled VAS scores showed global improvement from baseline to day 2. Epidural analgesia appears to provide the greatest improvement in VAS within the first 24 h but is equivalent to opiates by 48 h. Within 24 h, NSAIDs offered similar pain-relief to opiates, while placebo also showed equivalence to other modalities but then plateaued. Local anaesthetics demonstrated least overall efficacy. VAS scores for opiate and non-opiate analgesics were comparable at baseline and day 1. The identified RCTs demonstrated significant statistical and methodological heterogeneity in pain-relief reporting. CONCLUSIONS: There is remarkable paucity of level 1 evidence to guide pain management in AP with small datasets per study. Epidural administration appears effective within the first 24 h of AP although infrequently used and featured in only a single RCT. NSAIDs are an effective opiate sparing alternative during the first 24 h.

A fast-track surgery programme leads to timelier treatment and higher resection rates in pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to perform a propensity-matched comparison of patients with pancreatic cancer undergoing surgery, with and without biliary stenting and an intention to treat analysis of long-term survival between the two groups. METHODS: This was an observational study of a cohort of consecutive patients presenting with obstructive jaundice and undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic and periampullary malignancies between November 2015 and May 2019. RESULTS: In this study of 216 consecutive operable patients, 70 followed the fast-track pathway and 146 had pre-operative biliary drainage. All 70 patients in the FT group and 122 out of 146 in the PBD group proceeded to surgery (100% and 83.6% respectively, p = 0.001). Interval time from diagnostic CT scan to surgery and from MDT decision to treat to surgery was shorter in the FT group, (median 8 vs 43 days p < 0.001 and 3 vs 36 days p < 0.001 respectively) as was the overall time from diagnostic CT to adjuvant treatment (88 vs 121 days p < 0.001). Postoperative outcomes including complications, readmission and mortality rates were comparable in the two groups. There was no difference in survival. CONCLUSION: For a person with pancreatic cancer who is proceeding to surgery, the best approach is to avoid pre-operative biliary drainage.

External validation of postoperative pancreatic fistula prediction scores in pancreatoduodenectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Multiple risk scores claim to predict the probability of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreatoduodenectomy. It is unclear which scores have undergone external validation and are the most accurate. The aim of this study was to identify risk scores for POPF, and assess the clinical validity of these scores. METHODS: Areas under receiving operator characteristic curve (AUROCs) were extracted from studies that performed external validation of POPF risk scores. These were pooled for each risk score, using intercept-only random-effects meta-regression models. RESULTS: Systematic review identified 34 risk scores, of which six had been subjected to external validation, and so included in the meta-analysis, (Tokyo (N=2 validation studies), Birmingham (N=5), FRS (N=19), a-FRS (N=12), m-FRS (N=3) and ua-FRS (N=3) scores). Overall predictive accuracies were similar for all six scores, with pooled AUROCs of 0.61, 0.70, 0.71, 0.70, 0.70 and 0.72, respectively. Considerably heterogeneity was observed, with I2 statistics ranging from 52.1-88.6%. CONCLUSION: Most risk scores lack external validation; where this was performed, risk scores were found to have limited predictive accuracy. . Consensus is needed for which score to use in clinical practice. Due to the limited predictive accuracy, future studies to derive a more accurate risk score are warranted.

SARS-CoV-2 infection in acute pancreatitis increases disease severity and 30-day mortality: COVID PAN collaborative study.

OBJECTIVE: There is emerging evidence that the pancreas may be a target organ of SARS-CoV-2 infection. This aim of this study was to investigate the outcome of patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) and coexistent SARS-CoV-2 infection. DESIGN: A prospective international multicentre cohort study including consecutive patients admitted with AP during the current pandemic was undertaken. Primary outcome measure was severity of AP. Secondary outcome measures were aetiology of AP, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, length of hospital stay, local complications, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), persistent organ failure and 30-day mortality. Multilevel logistic regression was used to compare the two groups. RESULTS: 1777 patients with AP were included during the study period from 1 March to 23 July 2020. 149 patients (8.3%) had concomitant SARS-CoV-2 infection. Overall, SARS-CoV-2-positive patients were older male patients and more likely to develop severe AP and ARDS (p<0.001). Unadjusted analysis showed that SARS-CoV-2-positive patients with AP were more likely to require ICU admission (OR 5.21, p<0.001), local complications (OR 2.91, p<0.001), persistent organ failure (OR 7.32, p<0.001), prolonged hospital stay (OR 1.89, p<0.001) and a higher 30-day mortality (OR 6.56, p<0.001). Adjusted analysis showed length of stay (OR 1.32, p<0.001), persistent organ failure (OR 2.77, p<0.003) and 30-day mortality (OR 2.41, p<0.04) were significantly higher in SARS-CoV-2 co-infection. CONCLUSION: Patients with AP and coexistent SARS-CoV-2 infection are at increased risk of severe AP, worse clinical outcomes, prolonged length of hospital stay and high 30-day mortality.

Reporting of longitudinal pancreatojejunostomy with partial pancreatic head resection (the Frey procedure) for chronic pancreatitis: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Longitudinal pancreatojejunostomy with partial pancreatic head resection (the Frey procedure) is accepted for surgical treatment of painful chronic pancreatitis. However, conduct and reporting are not standardized and thus, making comparisons difficult. This study assesses the reporting standards of this procedure. DATA SOURCES: A systematic literature review was performed between January 1987 and January 2020. The keyword and Medical Subject Heading "chronic pancreatitis" was used together with the individual operation term "Frey pancreatojejunostomy". Reports were included if they provided original information on conduct and outcome. Thirty-three papers providing information on 1205 patients constituted the study population. Risk of bias in included reports was assessed. RESULTS: Etiology of chronic pancreatitis (alcohol) was reported in 26 of 28 (93%) studies, duration of symptoms prior to surgery in 19 (58%) studies and pre-operative opiate use in 12 (36%) studies. In terms of morphology, pancreatic duct diameter was reported in 17 (52%) studies and diameter of the pancreatic head in 13 (39%) studies. In terms of technique, three (9%) studies reported weight of excised parenchyma. There were 9 (0.7%) procedure-related deaths. Post-operative follow-up ranged from 6 to 82.5 months. No studies reported post-operative portal hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial heterogeneity between studies in reporting of clinical baseline, morphology of the diseased pancreas, operative detail and outcome after longitudinal pancreatojejunostomy with partial pancreatic head resection. This critically compromises the comparison between centers and between surgeons. Structured reporting is necessary for clinicians to assess choice of procedure and for patients to make informed choices when seeking treatment for painful chronic pancreatitis.

Systemic chemotherapy with or without cetuximab in patients with resectable colorectal liver metastasis (New EPOC): long-term results of a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The interim analysis of the multicentre New EPOC trial in patients with resectable colorectal liver metastasis showed a significant reduction in progression-free survival in patients allocated to cetuximab plus chemotherapy compared with those given chemotherapy alone. The focus of the present analysis was to assess the effect on overall survival. METHODS: New EPOC was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with KRAS wild-type (codons 12, 13, and 61) resectable or suboptimally resectable colorectal liver metastases and a WHO performance status of 0-2 were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive chemotherapy with or without cetuximab before and after liver resection. Randomisation was done centrally with minimisation factors of surgical centre, poor prognosis cancer, and previous adjuvant treatment with oxaliplatin. Chemotherapy consisted of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 administered intravenously over 2 h, l-folinic acid (175 mg flat dose administered intravenously over 2 h) or d,l-folinic acid (350 mg flat dose administered intravenously over 2 h), and fluorouracil bolus 400 mg/m2 administered intravenously over 5 min, followed by a 46 h infusion of fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 repeated every 2 weeks (regimen one), or oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 administered intravenously over 2 h and oral capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-14 repeated every 3 weeks (regimen two). Patients who had received adjuvant oxaliplatin could receive irinotecan 180 mg/m2 intravenously over 30 min with fluorouracil instead of oxaliplatin (regimen three). Cetuximab was given intravenously, 500 mg/m2 every 2 weeks with regimen one and three or a loading dose of 400 mg/m2 followed by a weekly infusion of 250 mg/m2 with regimen two. The primary endpoint of progression-free survival was published previously. Secondary endpoints were overall survival, preoperative response, pathological resection status, and safety. Trial recruitment was halted prematurely on the advice of the Trial Steering Committee on Nov 1, 2012. All analyses (except safety) were done on the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses included all randomly assigned patients. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number 22944367. FINDINGS: Between Feb 26, 2007, and Oct 12, 2012, 257 eligible patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy with cetuximab (n=129) or without cetuximab (n=128). This analysis was carried out 5 years after the last patient was recruited, as defined in the protocol, at a median follow-up of 66·7 months (IQR 58·0-77·5). Median progression-free survival was 22·2 months (95% CI 18·3-26·8) in the chemotherapy alone group and 15·5 months (13·8-19·0) in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·17, 95% CI 0·87-1·56; p=0·304). Median overall survival was 81·0 months (59·6 to not reached) in the chemotherapy alone group and 55·4 months (43·5-71·5) in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group (HR 1·45, 1·02-2·05; p=0·036). There was no significant difference in the secondary outcomes of preoperative response or pathological resection status between groups. Five deaths might have been treatment-related (one in the chemotherapy alone group and four in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events reported were: neutrophil count decreased (26 [19%] of 134 in the chemotherapy alone group vs 21 [15%] of 137 in the chemotherapy plus cetuximab group), diarrhoea (13 [10%] vs 14 [10%]), skin rash (one [1%] vs 22 [16%]), thromboembolic events (ten [7%] vs 11 [8%]), lethargy (ten [7%] vs nine [7%]), oral mucositis (three [2%] vs 14 [10%]), vomiting (seven [5%] vs seven [5%]), peripheral neuropathy (eight [6%] vs five [4%]), and pain (six [4%] vs six [4%]). INTERPRETATION: Although the addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy improves the overall survival in some studies in patients with advanced, inoperable metastatic disease, its use in the perioperative setting in patients with operable disease confers a significant disadvantage in terms of overall survival. Cetuximab should not be used in this setting. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.