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.

REDISCOVER International Guidelines on the Perioperative Care of Surgical Patients With Borderline-resectable and Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The REDISCOVER consensus conference aimed at developing and validating guidelines on the perioperative care of patients with borderline-resectable (BR-) and locally advanced (LA) pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). BACKGROUND: Coupled with improvements in chemotherapy and radiation, the contemporary approach to pancreatic surgery supports the resection of BR-PDAC and, to a lesser extent, LA-PDAC. Guidelines outlining the selection and perioperative care for these patients are lacking. METHODS: The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology was used to develop the REDISCOVER guidelines and create recommendations. The Delphi approach was used to reach a consensus (agreement ≥80%) among experts. Recommendations were approved after a debate and vote among international experts in pancreatic surgery and pancreatic cancer management. A Validation Committee used the AGREE II-GRS tool to assess the methodological quality of the guidelines. Moreover, an independent multidisciplinary advisory group revised the statements to ensure adherence to nonsurgical guidelines. RESULTS: Overall, 34 recommendations were created targeting centralization, training, staging, patient selection for surgery, possibility of surgery in uncommon scenarios, timing of surgery, avoidance of vascular reconstruction, details of vascular resection/reconstruction, arterial divestment, frozen section histology of perivascular tissue, extent of lymphadenectomy, anticoagulation prophylaxis, and role of minimally invasive surgery. The level of evidence was however low for 29 of 34 clinical questions. Participants agreed that the most conducive means to promptly advance our understanding in this field is to establish an international registry addressing this patient population ( https://rediscover.unipi.it/ ). CONCLUSIONS: The REDISCOVER guidelines provide clinical recommendations pertaining to pancreatectomy with vascular resection for patients with BR-PDAC and LA-PDAC, and serve as the basis of a new international registry for this patient population.

Nationwide cost-effectiveness and quality of life analysis of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy.

BACKGROUND: This study analyzed the Quality of Life (QoL) and cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic (LDP) versus robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP). METHODS: Consecutive patients submitted to LDP or RDP from 2010 to 2020 in four high-volume Italian centers were included, with a minimum of 12 months of postoperative follow-up were included. QoL was evaluated using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D questionnaires, self-reported by patients. After a propensity score matching, which included BMI, gender, operation time, multiorgan and vascular resections, splenic preservation, and pancreatic stump management, the mean differential cost and Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALY) were calculated and plotted on a cost-utility plane. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 564 patients. Among these, 271 (49%) patients were submitted to LDP, while 293 (51%) patients to RDP. After propensity score matching, the study population was composed of 159 patients in each group, with a median follow-up of 59 months. As regards the QoL analysis, global health and emotional functioning domains showed better results in the RDP group (p = 0.037 and p = 0.026, respectively), whereas the other did not differ. As expected, the median crude costs analysis confirmed that RDP was more expensive than LDP (16,041 Euros vs. 10,335 Euros, p < 0.001). However, the robotic approach had a higher probability of being more cost-effective than the laparoscopic procedure when a willingness to pay more than 5697 Euros/QALY was accepted. CONCLUSION: RDP was associated with better QoL as explored by specific domains. Crude costs were higher for RDP, and the cost-effectiveness threshold was set at 5697 euros/QALY.

Conversion to open surgery in obese patients undergoing minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: results from a multicenter analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is considered a standard approach it still presents a non-negligible rate of conversion to open that is mainly related to some difficulty factors, as obesity. The aim of this study is to analyze the preoperative factors associated with conversion in obese patients with MIDP. METHODS: In this multicenter study, all obese patients who underwent MIDP at 18 international expert centers were included. The preoperative factors associated with conversion to open surgery were analyzed. RESULTS: Out of 436 patients, 91 (20.9%) underwent conversion to open, presenting higher blood loss, longer operative time and similar rate of major complications. Twenty (22%) patients received emergent conversion. At univariate analysis, the type of approach, radiological invasion of adjacent organs, preoperative enlarged lymphnodes and ASA ≥ III were significantly associated with conversion to open. At multivariate analysis, robotic approach showed a significantly lower conversion rate (14.6 % vs 27.3%, OR = 2.380, p = 0.001). ASA ≥ III (OR = 2.391, p = 0.002) and preoperative enlarged lymphnodes (OR = 3.836, p = 0.003) were also independently associated with conversion. CONCLUSION: Conversion rate is significantly lower in patients undergoing robotic approach. Radiological enlarged lymphnodes and ASA ≥ III are also associated with conversion to open. Conversion is associated with poorer perioperative outcomes, especially in case of intraoperative hemorrhage.

Intraperitoneal prophylactic drain after pancreaticoduodenectomy: an Italian survey.

Intraperitoneal prophylactic drain (IPD) use in pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is still controversial. A survey was designed to investigate surgeons' use of IPD in PD patients through 23 questions and one clinical vignette. For the clinical scenario, respondents were asked to report their regret of omission and commission regarding the use of IPD elicited on a scale between 0 (no regret) and 100 (maximum regret). The threshold model and a multilevel mixed regression were applied. One hundred three (97.2%) respondents confirmed using at least two IPDs. The median regret due to the omission of IPD was 84 (67-100, IQR). The median regret due to the commission of IPD was 10 (3.5-20, IQR). The CR-POPF probability threshold at which drainage omission was the less regrettable choice was 3% (1-50, IQR). The threshold was lower for those surgeons who performed minimally invasive PD (P = 0.048), adopted late removal (P = 0.002), perceived FRS able to predict the risk (P = 0.006), and IPD able to avoid relaparotomy P = 0.036). Drain management policies after PD remain heterogeneous among surgeons. The regret model suggested that IPD omission could be performed in low-risk patients.

Thirty-day prevalence and clinical impact of fluid collections at the resection margin after distal pancreatectomy: Follow-up of a multicentric randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative fluid collections at the resection margin of the pancreatic stump are frequent after distal pancreatectomy, yet their clinical impact is unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the 30-day prevalence of postoperative fluid collections after distal pancreatectomy and the factors associated with a clinically relevant condition. METHODS: Patients enrolled in a randomized controlled trial of parenchymal transection with either reinforced, triple-row staple, or ultrasonic dissector underwent routine magnetic resonance 30 days postoperatively. Postoperative fluid collection was defined as a cyst-like lesion of at least 1 cm at the pancreatic resection margin. Postoperative fluid collections requiring any therapy were defined as clinically relevant. RESULTS: A total of 133 patients were analyzed; 69 were in the triple-row staple transection arm, and 64 were in the ultrasonic dissector transection arm. The overall 30-day prevalence of postoperative fluid collections was 68% (n = 90), without any significant difference between the two trial arms. Postoperative serum hyperamylasemia was more frequent in patients with postoperative fluid collections than those without (31% vs 7%, P = .001). Among the postoperative fluid collection population, an early postoperative pancreatic fistula (odds ratio 14.9, P = .002), post pancreatectomy acute pancreatitis (odds ratio 12.7, P = .036), and postoperative fluid collection size larger than 50 mm (odds ratio 6.6, P = .046) were independently associated with a clinically relevant postoperative fluid collection. CONCLUSION: Postoperative fluid collections at the resection margin are common after distal pancreatectomy and can be predicted by early assessment of postoperative serum hyperamylasemia. A preceding pancreatectomy acute pancreatitis and/or postoperative pancreatic fistula and large collections (>50 mm) were associated with a clinically relevant postoperative fluid collection, representing targets for closer follow-up or earlier therapeutic interventions.

Toward a new paradigm of care: a surgical leaders' Delphi consensus on the organizational factors of the new pancreas units (E-AHPBA PUECOF study).

Pancreas units represent new organizational models of care that are now at the center of the European debate. The PUECOF study, endorsed by the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (E-AHPBA), aims to reach an expert consensus by enquiring surgical leaders about the Pancreas Units' most relevant organizational factors, with 30 surgical leaders from 14 countries participating in the Delphi survey. Results underline that surgeons believe in the need to organize multidisciplinary meetings, nurture team leadership, and create metrics. Clinical professionals and patients are considered the most relevant stakeholders, while the debate is open when considering different subjects like industry leaders and patient associations. Non-technical skills such as ethics, teamwork, professionalism, and leadership are highly considered, with mentoring, clinical cases, and training as the most appreciated facilitating factors. Surgeons show trust in functional leaders, key performance indicators, and the facilitating role played by nurse navigators and case managers. Pancreas units have a high potential to improve patients' outcomes. While the pancreas unit model of care will not change the technical content of pancreatic surgery, it may bring surgeons several benefits, including more cases, professional development, easier coordination, less stress, and opportunities to create fruitful connections with research institutions and industry leaders.

Epidemiology of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms: a review and protocol presentation for bridging tumor registry data with the Italian association for neuroendocrine tumors (Itanet) national database.

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are rare tumors with diverse clinical behaviors. Large databases like the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program and national NEN registries have provided significant epidemiological knowledge, but they have limitations given the recent advancements in NEN diagnostics and treatments. For instance, newer imaging techniques and therapies have revolutionized NEN management, rendering older data less representative. Additionally, crucial parameters, like the Ki67 index, are missing from many databases. Acknowledging these gaps, the Italian Association for Neuroendocrine Tumors (Itanet) initiated a national multicenter prospective database in 2019, aiming to gather data on newly-diagnosed gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine (GEP) NENs. This observational study, coordinated by Itanet, includes patients from 37 Italian centers. The database, which is rigorously maintained and updated, focuses on diverse parameters including age, diagnostic techniques, tumor stage, treatments, and survival metrics. As of October 2023, data from 1,600 patients have been recorded, with an anticipation of reaching 3600 by the end of 2025. This study aims at understanding the epidemiology, clinical attributes, and treatment strategies for GEP-NENs in Italy, and to introduce the Itanet database project. Once comprehensive follow-up data will be acquired, the goal will be to discern predictors of treatment outcomes and disease prognosis. The Itanet database will offer an unparalleled, updated perspective on GEP-NENs, addressing the limitations of older databases and aiding in optimizing patient care. STUDY REGISTRATION: This protocol was registered in clinicaltriasl.gov (NCT04282083).