Early Diagnosis of Pancreatic Cancer: Clinical Premonitions, Timely Precursor Detection and Increased Curative-Intent Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The overall poor prognosis in pancreatic cancer is related to late clinical detection. Early diagnosis remains a considerable challenge in pancreatic cancer. Unfortunately, the onset of clinical symptoms in patients usually indicate advanced disease or presence of metastasis. ANALYSIS AND RESULTS: Currently, there are no designated diagnostic or screening tests for pancreatic cancer in clinical use. Thus, identifying risk groups, preclinical risk factors or surveillance strategies to facilitate early detection is a target for ongoing research. Hereditary genetic syndromes are a obvious, but small group at risk, and warrants close surveillance as suggested by society guidelines. Screening for pancreatic cancer in asymptomatic individuals is currently associated with the risk of false positive tests and, thus, risk of harms that outweigh benefits. The promise of cancer biomarkers and use of 'omics' technology (genomic, transcriptomics, metabolomics etc.) has yet to see a clinical breakthrough. Several proposed biomarker studies for early cancer detection lack external validation or, when externally validated, have shown considerably lower accuracy than in the original data. Biopsies or tissues are often taken at the time of diagnosis in research studies, hence invalidating the value of a time-dependent lag of the biomarker to detect a pre-clinical, asymptomatic yet operable cancer. New technologies will be essential for early diagnosis, with emerging data from image-based radiomics approaches, artificial intelligence and machine learning suggesting avenues for improved detection. CONCLUSIONS: Early detection may come from analytics of various body fluids (eg 'liquid biopsies' from blood or urine). In this review we present some the technological platforms that are explored for their ability to detect pancreatic cancer, some of which may eventually change the prospects and outcomes of patients with pancreatic cancer.

Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a multicenter propensity score-matched study.

BACKGROUND: The role of laparoscopy in the treatment of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) remains unclear. This multicenter study examined the outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection for ICC. METHODS: Patients with ICC who had undergone laparoscopic or open liver resection between 2012 and 2019 at four European expert centers were included in the study. Laparoscopic and open approaches were compared in terms of surgical and oncological outcomes. Propensity score matching was used for minimizing treatment selection bias and adjusting for confounders (age, ASA grade, tumor size, location, number of tumors and underlying liver disease). RESULTS: Of 136 patients, 50 (36.7%) underwent laparoscopic resection, whereas 86 (63.3%) had open surgery. Median tumor size was larger (73.6 vs 55.1 mm, p = 0.01) and the incidence of bi-lobar tumors was higher (36.6 vs 6%, p < 0.01) in patients undergoing open surgery. After propensity score matching baseline characteristics were comparable although open surgery was associated with a larger fraction of major liver resections (74 vs 38%, p < 0.01), lymphadenectomy (60 vs 20%, p < 0.01) and longer operative time (294 vs 209 min, p < 0.01). Tumor characteristics were similar. Laparoscopic resection resulted in less complications (30 vs 52%, p = 0.025), fewer reoperations (4 vs 16%, p = 0.046) and shorter hospital stay (5 vs 8 days, p < 0.01). No differences were found in terms of recurrence, recurrence-free and overall survival. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic resection seems to be associated with improved short-term and with similar long-term outcomes compared with open surgery in patients with ICC. However, possible selection criteria for laparoscopic surgery are yet to be defined.

Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma - Novel Benchmark Values for Surgical and Oncological Outcomes From 24 Expert Centers.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to define robust benchmark values for the surgical treatment of perihilar cholangiocarcinomas (PHC) to enable unbiased comparisons. BACKGROUND: Despite ongoing efforts, postoperative mortality and morbidity remains high after complex liver surgery for PHC. Benchmark data of best achievable results in surgical PHC treatment are however still lacking. METHODS: This study analyzed consecutive patients undergoing major liver surgery for PHC in 24 high-volume centers in 3 continents over the recent 5-year period (2014-2018) with a minimum follow-up of 1 year in each patient. Benchmark patients were those operated at high-volume centers (≥50 cases during the study period) without the need for vascular reconstruction due to tumor invasion, or the presence of significant co-morbidities such as severe obesity (body mass index ≥35), diabetes, or cardiovascular diseases. Benchmark cutoff values were derived from the 75th or 25th percentile of the median values of all benchmark centers. RESULTS: Seven hundred eight (39%) of a total of 1829 consecutive patients qualified as benchmark cases. Benchmark cut-offs included: R0 resection ≥57%, postoperative liver failure (International Study Group of Liver Surgery): ≤35%; in-hospital and 3-month mortality rates ≤8% and ≤13%, respectively; 3-month grade 3 complications and the CCI: ≤70% and ≤30.5, respectively; bile leak-rate: ≤47% and 5-year overall survival of ≥39.7%. Centers operating mostly on complex cases disclosed better outcome including lower post-operative liver failure rates (4% vs 13%; P = 0.002). Centers from Asia disclosed better outcomes. CONCLUSION: Surgery for PHC remains associated with high morbidity and mortality with now the availability of benchmark values covering 21 outcome parameters, which may serve as key references for comparison in any future analyses of individuals, group of patients or centers.

A man in his thirties with right ventricular heart failure, jaundice and abdominal pain. / En mann i 30-årene med høyresidig hjertesvikt, ikterus og magesmerter.

BACKGROUND: The combination of jaundice and acute abdominal pain is a common clinical problem associated with a broad array of aetiologies. CASE PRESENTATION: A 36-year-old male with Down's syndrome and Eisenmenger's syndrome presented with abdominal pain, jaundice and acute liver failure. Initial transabdominal ultrasound and subsequent magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) revealed gallbladder stones, but no common bile duct stones. During the course of the patient's hospital admission, his liver chemistries were consistently elevated. Thus, endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) with sphincterotomy was performed, despite the anaesthesiological risk associated with his chronic heart failure. However, the ERC and sphincterotomy did not relieve the patient's symptoms and had no apparent effect on his abnormal liver chemistries. By the end of his hospital stay, the patient recovered spontaneously and was discharged with no final conclusion having been reached. An unexpected turn of events led us to conclude upon a diagnosis a few weeks later. INTERPRETATION: This case illustrates the challenges of a multidisciplinary approach in a complex patient, and an overlooked detail that became a lesson to learn from.