Extrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: Genomic Variables Associated With Anatomic Location and Outcome.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to define genomic differences between perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PCA) and distal cholangiocarcinoma (DCA) and identify genomic determinants of survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients with ECA with tissue for targeted next-generation sequencing were analyzed, stratified by anatomic site (PCA/DCA), disease extent, and treatment. Associations between genomic alterations, clinicopathologic features, and outcomes were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards regression to compare survival. RESULTS: In total, 224 patients diagnosed between 2004 and 2022 (n = 127 PCA; n = 97 DCA) met inclusion criteria. The median survival was 29 months (43 after resection and 17 from diagnosis for unresectable disease). Compared with PCA, DCA was enriched in TP53alt (alterations; 69% v 33%; Q < 0.01), epigenetic pathway alterations (45% v 29%; Q = 0.041), and had more total altered pathways (median 3 v 2; Q < 0.01). KRASalt frequency was similar between PCA (36%) and DCA (37%); however, DCA was enriched in KRAS G12D (19% v 9%; P = .002). No other clinicopathologic or genomic variables distinguished subtypes. In resected patients, no genomic alterations were associated with outcome. However, in unresectable patients, CDKN2Aalt (hazard ratio [HR], 2.59 [1.48 to 4.52]) and APCalt (HR, 5.11 [1.96 to 13.3]) were associated with reduced survival. For the entire cohort, irresectability (HR, 3.13 [2.25 to 4.36]), CDKN2Aalt (HR, 1.80 [1.80 to 2.68]), and APCalt (HR, 2.00 [1.04 to 3.87]) were associated with poor survival. CONCLUSION: CDKN2Aalt and APCalt were associated with poor survival in ECA, primarily in advanced disease. As PCA and DCA were genetically similar, coanalysis of PCA and DCA in future genomic studies is reasonable.

Has Management of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma Evolved with the Evidence? Trends and Practice Patterns from the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: Management of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHC) has advanced in recent decades, including randomized trial evidence supporting systemic therapy in the palliative and adjuvant setting. Mounting observational evidence suggests resection of IHC with multifocal disease (IHC-MF) or lymph node metastasis (IHC-LNM) should be limited. It is unknown how real-world practice has evolved in light of research advances. This study characterizes trends in management and outcomes of IHC without distant metastasis. METHODS: We queried the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for patients treated for IHC without distant metastasis (M0) and identified subgroups with lymph node (cN1) or multifocal hepatic involvement (cT2b). Two-sided Cochran-Armitage tests evaluated trends in initial treating modality and perioperative chemotherapy. Logistic regression evaluated associations with choice of initial treating modality. Overall survival (OS) was evaluated by using Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: Between 2004 and 2020, 11,368 patients were treated for IHC without extrahepatic metastasis. Forty-three percent underwent resection. Initial management shifted from resection towards radiation or systemic therapy in IHC-MF and IHC-LNM. Use of perioperative chemotherapy increased from 39% pre-2010 to 70% in 2018-2020 (p < 0.001), most often delivered postoperatively. Across the entire cohort, median OS improved from 16 (95% confidence interval [CI] 15-18) to 27 months (95% CI 26-29). More modest improvements were observed in IHC-MF and IHC-LNM. CONCLUSIONS: Use of perioperative chemotherapy has been widely adopted, predating randomized trial evidence in the adjuvant setting. Initial management of IHC-MF and IHC-LNM has shifted from resection to systemic and/or radiation therapy. While OS has improved overall, outcomes of IHC-MF and IHC-LNM remain poor, warranting further investigation.

Hepatectomy versus systemic therapy for liver-limited BRAF V600E-mutated colorectal liver metastases: multicentre retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: To date, only two studies have compared the outcomes of patients with liver-limited BRAF V600E-mutated colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) managed with resection versus systemic therapy alone, and these have reported contradictory findings. METHODS: In this observational, international, multicentre study, patients with liver-limited BRAF V600E-mutated CRLMs treated with resection or systemic therapy alone were identified from institutional databases. Patterns of recurrence/progression and overall survival were compared using multivariable analyses of the entire cohort and a propensity score-matched cohort. RESULTS: Of 170 patients included, 119 underwent hepatectomy and 51 received systemic treatment. Surgically treated patients had a more favourable pattern of recurrence with most recurrences limited to a single site, whereas diffuse progression was more common among patients who received systemic treatment (19 versus 44%; P = 0.002). Surgically treated patients had longer median overall survival (35 versus 20 months; P < 0.001). Hepatectomy was independently associated with better OS than systemic treatment alone (HR 0.37, 95% c.i. 0.21 to 0.65). In the propensity score-matched cohort, surgically treated patients had longer median overall survival (28 versus 20 months; P < 0.001); hepatectomy was independently associated with better overall survival (HR 0.47, 0.25 to 0.88). CONCLUSION: BRAF V600E mutation should not be considered a contraindication to surgery for patients with resectable, liver-only CRLMs.

A Novel Approach to Quantify Heterogeneity of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: the Hidden-Genome Classifier.

PURPOSE: Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHC) are heterogeneous tumors. The hidden-genome classifier, a supervised machine learning-based algorithm, was used to quantify tumor heterogeneity and improve classification. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A retrospective review of 1370 patients with IHC, extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (EHC), gallbladder cancer (GBC), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), or biphenotypic tumors was conducted. A hidden-genome model classified 527 IHCs based on genetic similarity to EHC/GBC or HCC. Genetic, histologic, and clinical data were correlated. RESULTS: 410 IHC (78%) had >50% genetic homology with EHC/GBC; 122 (23%) had >90% homology ("biliary-class"), characterized by alterations of KRAS, SMAD4, and CDKN2A loss. 117 IHC (22%) had >50% genetic homology with HCC; 30 (5.7%) had >90% homology ("HCC-class"), characterized by TERT alterations. Patients with biliary- vs. non-biliary-class IHC had median overall survival (OS) of 1 year (95% CI: 0.77, 1.5) vs. 1.8 years (95% CI: 1.6, 2.0) for unresectable disease and 2.4 years (95% CI: 2.1, NR) vs. 5.1 years (95% CI: 4.8, 6.9) for resectable disease. Large-duct-IHC (n=28) was more common in the biliary-class (n=27); HCC-class was comprised mostly of small-duct-IHC (64%, p=0.02). The hidden-genomic classifier predicted OS independent of FGFR2 and IDH1 alterations. By contrast, the histology subtype did not predict OS. CONCLUSIONS: IHC genetics form a spectrum with worse OS for tumors genetically aligned with EHC/GBC. The classifier proved superior to histologic subtypes for predicting OS independent of FGFR2 and IDH1 alterations. These results may explain the differential treatment responses seen in IHC and may direct therapy by help stratifing patients in future clinical trials.

Stage IV Rectal Cancer and Timing of Surgical Approach.

Liver metastases are seen in at least 60% of patients with colorectal cancer at some point during the course of their disease. The management of both primary and liver disease is uniquely challenging in rectal cancer due to competing treatments and complex sequence of treatments depending on the clinical presentation of disease. Recently, several novel concepts are shaping new treatment paradigms, including changes in timing, sequence, and duration of therapies combined with potential deescalation of treatment components. Overall, the treatment of this clinical scenario mandates multidisciplinary evaluation and personalization of care; however, there is still considerable debate regarding the timing of liver metastasectomy in the context of the overall treatment plan. Herein, we will discuss the current literature on management of rectal cancer with synchronous liver metastasis, current treatment approaches with respect to chemotherapy, and role of hepatic artery infusion therapy.

Cross-fellowship Inter-institutional Exchange: Answering the Call for Hepatopancreatobiliary Training Standardization.

OBJECTIVE: General surgery trainees interested in performing hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) surgery can choose from multiple fellowship pathways, namely HPB, surgical oncology (SO), and abdominal transplant-HPB (TXP-HPB). Although focused on similar operations, each program offers distinct clinical and technical emphases. DESIGN: An annual inter-institutional exchange between TXP-HPB and SO fellowships, starting in 2014. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: TXP-HPB fellows from Washington University in St. Louis (WUSTL) and SO fellows from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC). RESULTS: About 14 fellows have participated in the exchange so far, 13 of whom responded to our survey. At MSKCC, TXP-HPB fellows performed a median of 24 cases, including 6 major pancreatic resections, 3 major hepatectomies, 4 hepatic artery infusion pump insertions, and 1 major biliary case. At WUSTL, SO fellows performed a median of 16 cases, including 5 liver transplants, 2 major pancreatic resections, 2 major hepatectomies, and 2 major biliary cases. About 92.3% of respondents stated they would repeat the rotation, with SO fellows emphasizing the exposure to vascular anastomoses and transplant-HPB fellows appreciating the oncologic focus. CONCLUSIONS: A monthlong inter-institutional exchange offers a unique opportunity to standardize and improve HPB education.

A critical appraisal of the current landscape of resectable BRAF mutated colorectal liver metastases: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Patients with surgically resectable BRAF-mutated colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) or limited extrahepatic disease constitute a highly selective subgroup among BRAF-mutated patients, characterized by a more indolent disease biology. This is evident in their suitability for surgical resection. However, initial studies from a decade ago presented a discouraging outlook for these patients, citing early, frequent, multifocal recurrences and a very limited median overall survival (OS) of less than two years. Our objective was to provide an updated, comprehensive, and critically assessed review of the current literature on the prognostic impact of BRAF variants in CRLM, as well as to explore optimal treatment strategies for these patients through a systematic search. METHODS: A systematic literature search of the Medline, Scopus, and CENTRAL databases for studies reporting long-term outcomes of patients with a known BRAF status was performed. RESULTS: A total of 386 unique studies were screened during the study selection process. After applying the exclusion criteria, a total of 18 studies published between 2012 and 2023 were deemed eligible for inclusion. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to older studies, more recent studies, with larger sample sizes, have revealed that the rate of extrahepatic recurrence is comparable between BRAF-mutated and wild-type patients. Furthermore, they have reported significantly improved survival outcomes, with OS extending up to 52 months. Notably, patients with non-V600E BRAF mutations may even achieve outcomes comparable to those with wild-type BRAF CRLM. Additionally, a few recent studies have compared surgery and systemic therapies, indicating that surgery is associated with improved survival rates, even for patients with the V600E mutation. This challenges the previous belief that BRAF mutations are absolute contraindications to surgical treatment. Surgical denial for technically resectable patients may now be reserved for specific clinical scenarios, such as the presence of a BRAF V600E mutation and concurrent extrahepatic disease.

Safety of Selective Operative Drainage After Pancreatic Resection: A Retrospective Analysis of 2,607 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether selective omission of operative drains after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) and distal pancreatectomy (DP) is associated with adverse perioperative outcomes. BACKGROUND: The routine use of operative drains after pancreatectomy is widely practiced; however, prospective randomized clinical trials and retrospective analyses have shown mixed results. METHODS: Patients who underwent PD or DP between November 2009 and May 2021 were reviewed and stratified by operative drain placement. Patient demographics, morbidity, the need for additional procedures, and mortality were compared between patients who did or did not develop a clinically relevant post-operative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF). RESULTS: In total, 1,855 PD and 752 DP cases were analyzed. Among PD patients with a CR-POPF (N=259, 14%), 160 (62%) had an operative drain placed, of whom 141 (88%) required at least 1 additional procedure. Within this subgroup, grade ≥ 4 complications (7.5% vs. 11.1%, P=0.37), 90-day mortality (3.8% vs. 6.1%, P=0.54), length of stay (LOS) (median 12 vs. 13 d, P=0.19) and readmission rates (63.1% vs. 54.6%, P=0.19) were similar between drained and non-drained patients. Of note, drained PD patients without a CR-POPF had a longer hospital stay (8 vs. 7 d, respectively, P=0.004) and more thromboembolic events (2.4% vs. 1.1%, respectively, P=0.04) Among DP patients with a CR-POPF (n=129), 44 had an operative drain, with 37 (84%) requiring an additional procedure. Within this subgroup, grade ≥ 4 complications (4.6% vs. 5.9%, P>0.95), 90-day mortality (0%), LOS (median 7 d for both, P=0.88) and readmission rates (72.7% vs. 80%, P=0.38) were similar in drained and non-drained patients. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that selective omission of operative drains does not compromise perioperative outcomes, as initially reported in our prospective randomized trial.

Outcome of patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma and previous biliary instrumentation: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: To assess the outcome of previously untreated patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma who present to a cancer referral center with or without pre-existing trans-papillary biliary drainage. METHODS: Consecutive patients with a diagnosis of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma presenting between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2017, were identified from a prospective surgical database and by a query of the institutional database. Of 237 patients identified, 106 met inclusion criteria and were reviewed. Clinical information was obtained from the Electronic Medical Record and imaging studies were reviewed in the Picture Archiving and Communication System. RESULTS: 73 of 106 patients (69%) presenting with a new diagnosis of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma underwent trans-papillary biliary drainage (65 endoscopic and 8 percutaneous) prior to presentation at our institution. 8 of the 73 patients with trans-papillary biliary drainage (11%) presented with and 5 developed cholangitis; all 13 (18%) required subsequent intervention; none of the patients without trans-papillary biliary drainage presented with or required drainage for cholangitis (p = 0.008). Requiring drainage for cholangitis was more likely to delay treatment (p = 0.012) and portended a poorer median overall survival (13.6 months, 95%CI [4.08, not reached)] vs. 20.6 months, 95%CI [18.34, 37.51] p = 0.043). CONCLUSION: Trans-papillary biliary drainage for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma carries a risk of cholangitis and should be avoided when possible. Clinical and imaging findings of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma should prompt evaluation at a cancer referral center before any intervention. This would mitigate development of cholangitis necessitating additional drainage procedures, delaying treatment and potentially compromising survival.

Hemorrhage Sites and Mitigation Strategies After Pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Importance: Postpancreatectomy hemorrhage is an uncommon but highly morbid complication of pancreaticoduodenectomy. Clinical evidence often draws suspicion to the gastroduodenal artery stump, even without a clear source. Objective: To determine the frequency of gastroduodenal artery bleeding compared to other sites and the results of mitigation strategies. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study involved a retrospective analysis of data for consecutive patients who had pancreaticoduodenectomy from 2011 to 2021 at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK) and Thomas Jefferson University Hospital (TJUH). Exposures: Demographic, perioperative, and disease-related variables. Main Outcomes and Measures: The incidence, location, treatment, and outcomes of primary (initial) and secondary (recurrent) hemorrhage requiring invasive intervention were analyzed. Imaging studies were re-reviewed by interventional radiologists to confirm sites. Results: Inclusion criteria were met by 3040 patients (n = 1761 MSK, n = 1279 TJUH). Patients from both institutions were similar in age (median [IQR] age at MSK, 67 [59-74] years, and at TJUH, 68 [60-75] years) and sex (at MSK, 814 female [46.5%] and 947 male [53.8%], and at TJUH, 623 [48.7%] and 623 male [51.3%]). Primary hemorrhage occurred in 90 patients (3.0%), of which the gastroduodenal artery was the source in 15 (16.7%), unidentified sites in 24 (26.7%), and non-gastroduodenal artery sites in 51 (56.7%). Secondary hemorrhage occurred in 23 patients; in 4 (17.4%), the gastroduodenal artery was the source. Of all hemorrhage events (n = 117), the gastroduodenal artery was the source in 19 (16.2%, 0.63% incidence in all pancreaticoduodenectomies). Gastroduodenal artery hemorrhage was more often associated with soft gland texture (14 [93.3%] vs 41 [62.1%]; P = .02) and later presentation (median [IQR], 21 [15-26] vs 10 days [5-18]; P = .002). Twenty-three patients underwent empirical gastroduodenal artery embolization or stent placement, 7 (30.4%) of whom subsequently experienced secondary hemorrhage. Twenty percent of all gastroduodenal artery embolizations/stents (8/40 patients), including 13% (3/13 patients) of empirical treatments, were associated with significant morbidity (7 hepatic infarction, 4 biliary stricture), with a 90-day mortality rate of 38.5% (n = 5) for patients with these complications vs 7.8% without (n = 6; P = .008). Ninety-day mortality was 12.2% (n = 11) for patients with hemorrhage (3 patients [20%] with primary gastroduodenal vs 8 [10.7%] for all others; P = .38) compared with 2% (n = 59) for patients without hemorrhage. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, postpancreatectomy hemorrhage was uncommon and the spectrum was broad, with the gastroduodenal artery responsible for a minority of bleeding events. Empirical gastroduodenal artery embolization/stent without obvious sequelae of recent hemorrhage was associated with significant morbidity and rebleeding and should not be routine practice. Successful treatment of postpancreatectomy hemorrhage requires careful assessment of all potential sources, even after gastroduodenal artery mitigation.

Hepatic arterial infusion pump chemotherapy combined with systemic chemotherapy for borderline resectable and unresectable colorectal liver metastases: phase II feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Hepatic arterial infusion pump chemotherapy combined with systemic chemotherapy (HAIP-SYS) for liver-only colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) has shown promising results but has not been adopted worldwide. This study evaluated the feasibility of HAIP-SYS in the Netherlands. METHODS: This was a single-arm phase II study of patients with CRLMs who received HAIP-SYS consisting of floxuridine with concomitant systemic FOLFOX or FOLFIRI. Main inclusion and exclusion criteria were borderline resectable or unresectable liver-only metastases, suitable arterial anatomy and no previous local treatment. Patients underwent laparotomy for pump implantation and primary tumour resection if in situ. Primary end point was feasibility, defined as ≥70% of patients completing two cycles of HAIP-SYS. Sample size calculations led to 31 patients. Secondary outcomes included safety and tumour response. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients with median 13 CRLMs (i.q.r. 6-23) were included. Twenty-eight patients (90%) received two HAIP-SYS cycles. Three patients did not get two cycles due to extrahepatic disease at pump placement, definitive pathology of a recto-sigmoidal squamous cell carcinoma, and progressive disease. Five patients experienced grade 3 surgical or pump device-related complications (16%) and 11 patients experienced grade ≥3 chemotherapy toxicity (38%). At first radiological evaluation, disease control rate was 83% (24/29 patients) and hepatic disease control rate 93% (27/29 patients). At 6 months, 19 patients (66%) had experienced grade ≥3 chemotherapy toxicity and the disease control rate was 79%. CONCLUSION: HAIP-SYS for borderline resectable and unresectable CRLMs was feasible and safe in the Netherlands. This has led to a successive multicentre phase III randomized trial investigating oncological benefit (EUDRA-CT 2023-506194-35-00). Current trial registration number: clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04552093).

Comparison study of intraoperative surface acquisition methods on registration accuracy for soft-tissue surgical navigation.

Purpose: To study the difference between rigid registration and nonrigid registration using two forms of digitization (contact and noncontact) in human in vivo liver surgery. Approach: A Conoprobe device attachment and sterilization process was developed to enable prospective noncontact intraoperative acquisition of organ surface data in the operating room (OR). The noncontact Conoprobe digitization method was compared against stylus-based acquisition in the context of image-to-physical registration for image-guided surgical navigation. Data from n=10 patients undergoing liver resection were analyzed under an Institutional Review Board-approved study at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Organ surface coverage of each surface acquisition method was compared. Registration accuracies resulting from the acquisition techniques were compared for (1) rigid registration method (RRM), (2) model-based nonrigid registration method (NRM) using surface data only, and (3) NRM with one subsurface feature (vena cava) from tracked intraoperative ultrasound (NRM-VC). Novel vessel centerline and tumor targets were segmented and compared to their registered preoperative counterparts for accuracy validation. Results: Surface data coverage collected by stylus and Conoprobe were 24.6%±6.4% and 19.6%±5.0%, respectively. The average difference between stylus data and Conoprobe data using NRM was -1.05 mm and using NRM-VC was -1.42 mm, indicating the registrations to Conoprobe data performed worse than to stylus data with both NRM approaches. However, using the stylus and Conoprobe acquisition methods led to significant improvement of NRM-VC over RRM by average differences of 4.48 and 3.66 mm, respectively. Conclusion: The first use of a sterile-field amenable Conoprobe surface acquisition strategy in the OR is reported for open liver surgery. Under clinical conditions, the nonrigid registration significantly outperformed standard-of-care rigid registration, and acquisition by contact-based stylus and noncontact-based Conoprobe produced similar registration results. The accuracy benefits of noncontact surface acquisition with a Conoprobe are likely obscured by inferior data coverage and intrinsic noise within acquisition systems.

Preoperative CT and survival data for patients undergoing resection of colorectal liver metastases.

The liver is a common site for the development of metastases in colorectal cancer. Treatment selection for patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) is difficult; although hepatic resection will cure a minority of CRLM patients, recurrence is common. Reliable preoperative prediction of recurrence could therefore be a valuable tool for physicians in selecting the best candidates for hepatic resection in the treatment of CRLM. It has been hypothesized that evidence for recurrence could be found via quantitative image analysis on preoperative CT imaging of the future liver remnant before resection. To investigate this hypothesis, we have collected preoperative hepatic CT scans, clinicopathologic data, and recurrence/survival data, from a large, single-institution series of patients (n = 197) who underwent hepatic resection of CRLM. For each patient, we also created segmentations of the liver, vessels, tumors, and future liver remnant. The largest of its kind, this dataset is a resource that may aid in the development of quantitative imaging biomarkers and machine learning models for the prediction of post-resection hepatic recurrence of CRLM.

Concordance in Oncogenic Alterations Between the Primary Tumor and Advanced Disease: Insights Into the Heterogeneity of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICCA) is characterized by significant phenotypic and clinical heterogeneities and poor response to systemic therapy, potentially related to underlying heterogeneity in oncogenic alterations. We aimed to characterize the genomic heterogeneity between primary tumors and advanced disease in patients with ICCA. METHODS: Biopsy-proven CCA specimens (primary tumor and paired advanced disease [metastatic disease, progressive disease on systemic therapy, or postoperative recurrence]) from two institutions were subjected to targeted next-generation sequencing. Overall concordance (oncogenic driver mutations, copy number alterations, and fusion events) and mutational concordance (only oncogenic mutations) were compared across paired samples. A subgroup analysis was performed on the basis of exposure to systemic therapy. Patients with extrahepatic CCA (ECCA) were included as a comparison group. RESULTS: Sample pairs from 65 patients with ICCA (n = 54) and ECCA (n = 11) were analyzed. The median time between sample collection was 19.6 months (range, 2.7-122.9). For the entire cohort, the overall oncogenic concordance was 49% and the mutational concordance was 62% between primary and advanced disease samples. Subgroup analyses of ICCA and ECCA revealed overall/mutational concordance rates of 47%/58% and 60%/84%, respectively. Oncogenic concordance was similarly low for pairs exposed to systemic therapy between sample collections (n = 50, 53% overall, 68% mutational). In patients treated with targeted therapy for IDH1/2 alterations (n = 6) or FGFR2 fusions (n = 3), there was 100% concordance between the primary and advanced disease specimens. In two patients, FGFR2 (n = 1) and IDH1 (n = 1) alterations were detected de novo in the advanced disease specimens. CONCLUSION: The results reflect a high degree of heterogeneity in ICCA and argue for reassessment of the dominant driver mutations with change in disease status.

Randomized Prospective Trial of Epidural Analgesia after Open Hepatectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) improves postoperative pain during ambulation following elective open hepatectomy. BACKGROUND: Strategies to alleviate postoperative pain are a critical element of recovery after surgery. However, the optimal postoperative pain management strategy following open hepatectomy remains unclear. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, nonblinded, randomized comparison of PCEA (intervention) versus intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV PCA; control) for postoperative pain following elective open hepatectomy. The primary end point was pain during ambulation on postoperative day (POD) 2. The study was powered to detect a clinically significant 2-point difference on the pain numeric rating scale (NRS). Secondary end points included pain at rest, morbidity, time to return of bowel function, and length of stay. RESULTS: From 2015 to 2020, 231 patients were randomized (116 patients in the PCEA arm and 115 in the IV PCA arm). The incidence of epidural failure was 3% (n=4/116), with no epidural-related complications. Patients in the PCEA arm had a <2-point difference in NRS pain scores during ambulation on POD 2 vs. IV PCA (median 4.0 vs. 5.0, P <0.001). There was no difference in overall complications between the PCEA and IV PCA arms (33% vs. 40%, P =0.276). Secondary outcomes, including pain scores at rest, were similar between the study arms. CONCLUSIONS: PCEA was safe following open hepatectomy and was associated with a small difference in pain with activity on POD 2 that did not reach our pre-specified definition of clinical significance.

Risk Factors for Progression in Patients Undergoing Surveillance for Pancreatic Cysts.

OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors associated with the progression of pancreatic cysts in patients undergoing surveillance. BACKGROUND: Previous studies of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) rely on surgical series to determine malignancy risk and have inconsistently identified characteristics associated with IPMN progression. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 2197 patients presenting with imaging concerning for IPMN from 2010 to 2019 at a single institution. Cyst progression was defined as resection or pancreatic cancer development. RESULTS: The median follow-up time was 84 months from the presentation. The median age was 66 years, and 62% were female. Ten percent had a first-degree relative with pancreatic cancer, and 3.2% had a germline mutation or genetic syndrome associated with an increased risk of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Cumulative incidence of progression was 17.8% and 20.0% at 12 and 60 months postpresentation, respectively. Surgical pathology for 417 resected cases showed noninvasive IPMN in 39% of cases and PDAC with or without associated IPMN in 20%. Only 18 patients developed PDAC after 6 months of surveillance (0.8%). On multivariable analysis, symptomatic disease [hazard ratio (HR)=1.58; 95% CI: 1.25-2.01], current smoker status (HR=1.58; 95% CI: 1.16-2.15), cyst size (HR=1.26; 95% CI: 1.20-1.33), main duct dilation (HR=3.17; 95% CI: 2.44-4.11), and solid components (HR=1.89; 95% CI: 1.34-2.66) were associated with progression. CONCLUSIONS: Worrisome features on imaging at presentation, current smoker status, and symptomatic presentation are associated with IPMN progression. Most patients progressed within the first year of presentation to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC). Further investigation is necessary to develop personalized cyst surveillance strategies.

Early-Onset Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: Clinical Presentation, Pathology Features, and Oncological Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Early-Onset (EO) pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (PanNET) is a rare disease, but whether it is clinically different from late-onset (LO) PanNET is unknown. Our study aimed to evaluate clinical differences and disease outcomes between EO-PanNET and LO-PanNET and to compare sporadic EO-PanNET with those with a hereditary syndrome. METHODS: Patients with localized PanNET who underwent pancreatectomy at Memorial Sloan Kettering between 2000 and 2017 were identified. Those with metastatic disease and poorly differentiated tumors were excluded. EO-PanNET was defined as <50 and LO-PanNET >50 years of age at the time of diagnosis. Family history and clinical and pathology characteristics were recorded. RESULTS: Overall 383 patients were included, 107 (27.9%) with EO-PanNET. Compared with LO-PanNET, EO-PanNET were more likely to have a hereditary syndrome (2.2% vs. 16%, P <0.001) but had similar pathology features such as tumor grade ( P =0.6), size (2.2 Vs. 2.3 cm, P =0.5) and stageof disease ( P =0.8). Among patients with EO-PanNET, those with hereditary syndrome had more frequently a multifocal disease (65% vs. 3.3%, P <0.001). With a median follow-up of 70 months (range 0-238), the 5-year cumulative incidence of recurrence after curative surgery was 19% (95% CI 12%-28%) and 17% (95% CI 13%-23%), in EO-PanNET and LO-PanNET ( P =0.3). Five-year disease-specific survival was 99% (95% CI 98%-100%) with no difference with respect to PanNET onset time ( P =0.26). CONCLUSIONS: In this surgical cohort, we found that EO-PanNET is associated with hereditary syndromes but has pathologic characteristics and oncological outcomes similar to LO-PanNET. These findings suggest that patients with EO-PanNET can be managed similarly to those with LO-PanNET.