RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN)-derived pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) management is generally extrapolated from pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN)-derived PDAC guidelines. However, these are biologically divergent, and heterogeneity further exists between tubular and colloid subtypes. METHODS: Consecutive upfront surgery patients with PanIN-derived and IPMN-derived PDAC were retrospectively identified from international centers (2000-2019). One-to-one propensity score matching for clinicopathologic factors generated three cohorts: IPMN-derived versus PanIN-derived PDAC, tubular IPMN-derived versus PanIN-derived PDAC, and tubular versus colloid IPMN-derived PDAC. Overall survival (OS) was compared using Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests. Multivariable Cox regression determined corresponding hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: The median OS (mOS) in 2350 PanIN-derived and 700 IPMN-derived PDAC patients was 23.0 and 43.1 months (P < 0.001), respectively. PanIN-derived PDAC had worse T-stage, CA19-9, grade, and nodal status. Tubular subtype had worse T-stage, CA19-9, grade, nodal status, and R1 margins, with a mOS of 33.7 versus 94.1 months (P < 0.001) in colloid. Matched (n = 495), PanIN-derived and IPMN-derived PDAC had mOSs of 30.6 and 42.8 months (P < 0.001), respectively. In matched (n = 341) PanIN-derived and tubular IPMN-derived PDAC, mOS remained poorer (27.7 vs 37.4, P < 0.001). Matched tubular and colloid cancers (n = 112) had similar OS (P = 0.55). On multivariable Cox regression, PanIN-derived PDAC was associated with worse OS than IPMN-derived (HR: 1.66, 95% CI: 1.44-1.90) and tubular IPMN-derived (HR: 1.53, 95% CI: 1.32-1.77) PDAC. Colloid and tubular subtype was not associated with OS (P = 0.16). CONCLUSIONS: PanIN-derived PDAC has worse survival than IPMN-derived PDAC supporting distinct outcomes. Although more indolent, colloid IPMN-derived PDAC has similar survival to tubular after risk adjustment.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Postoperative cholangitis is a common complication after pancreatoduodenectomy that can occur with or without anatomical biliary obstruction. This study aimed to investigate the incidence, diagnosis, treatment, and risk factors of cholangitis after pancreatoduodenectomy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy in 2 Dutch tertiary pancreatic centers (2010-2019). Primary outcome was postoperative cholangitis, defined as systemic inflammation with abnormal liver tests without another focus of infection, at least 1 month after resection. Diagnostic and therapeutic strategies were evaluated. Two types of postoperative cholangitis were distinguished; obstructive cholangitis (benign stenosis of the hepaticojejunostomy) and nonobstructive cholangitis. Potential risk factors were identified using logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Postoperative cholangitis occurred in 93 of 900 patients (10.3%). Median time to first episode of cholangitis was 8 months (interquartile range 4-16) after pancreatoduodenectomy. Multiple episodes of cholangitis occurred in 44 patients (47.3%) and readmission was necessary in 83 patients (89.2%). No cholangitis-related mortality was observed. Obstructive cholangitis was seen in 37 patients (39.8%) and nonobstructive cholangitis in 56 patients (60.2%). Surgery was performed for cholangitis in 7 patients (7.5%) and consisted of revision of the hepaticojejunostomy or elongation of the biliary limb. Postoperative biliary leakage (odds ratio 2.56; 95% confidence interval 1.42-4.62; P = .0018) was independently associated with postoperative cholangitis. CONCLUSION: Postoperative cholangitis unrelated to cancer recurrence was seen in 10% of patients after pancreatoduodenectomy. Nonobstructive cholangitis was more common than obstructive cholangitis. Postoperative biliary leakage was an independent risk factor.
RESUMO
Radiation therapy (RT) initiates a local and systemic immune response which can induce antitumor immunity and improve immunotherapy efficacy. Neutrophils are among the first immune cells that infiltrate tumors after RT and are suggested to be essential for the initial antitumor immune response. However, neutrophils in tumors are associated with poor outcomes and RT-induced neutrophil infiltration could also change the composition of the tumor microenvironment (TME) in favor of tumor progression. To improve RT efficacy for patients with cancer it is important to understand the interplay between RT and neutrophils. Here, we review the literature on how RT affects the infiltration and function of neutrophils in the TME of solid tumors, using both patients studies and preclinical murine in vivo models. In general, it was found that neutrophil levels increase and reach maximal levels in the first days after RT and can remain elevated up to 3 weeks. Most studies report an immunosuppressive role of neutrophils in the TME after RT, caused by upregulated expression of neutrophil indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase 1 and arginase 1, as well as neutrophil extracellular trap formation. RT was also associated with increased reactive oxygen species production by neutrophils, which can both improve and inhibit antitumor immunity. In addition, multiple murine models showed improved RT efficacy when depleting neutrophils, suggesting that neutrophils have a protumor phenotype after RT. We conclude that the role of neutrophils should not be overlooked when developing RT strategies and requires further investigation in specific tumor types. In addition, neutrophils can possibly be exploited to enhance RT efficacy by combining RT with neutrophil-targeting therapies.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN)-derived pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is resected at smaller sizes compared to its biologically distinct counterpart, pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN)-derived PDAC. Thus, experts proposed T1 sub-staging for IPMN-derived PDAC. However, this has never been validated. METHODS: Consecutive upfront surgery patients with IPMN-derived PDAC from five international high-volume centers were classified by the proposed T1 sub-staging classification (T1a ≤ 0.5, T1b > 0.5 and ≤1.0, and T1c >1.0 and ≤2.0 cm) using the invasive component size. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests were utilized to compare overall survival (OS). A multivariable Cox-regression was used to determine hazard ratios (HR) with confidence intervals (95%CI). RESULTS: Among 747 patients, 69 (9.2%), 50 (6.7%), 99 (13.0%), and 531 patients (71.1%), comprised the T1a, T1b, T1c, and T2-4 subgroups, respectively. Increasing T-stage was associated with elevated CA19-9, poorer grade, nodal positivity, R1-margin, and tubular subtype. Median OS for T1a, T1b, T1c, and T2-4 were 159.0 (95%CI:126.0-NR), 128.8 (98.3-NR), 77.6 (48.3-108.2), and 31.4 (27.5-37.7) months, respectively (p < .001). OS decreased with increasing T-stage for all pairwise comparisons (all p < .05). After risk-adjustment, age > 65, elevated CA19-9, T1b [HR : 2.55 (1.22-5.32)], T1c [HR : 3.04 (1.60-5.76)], and T2-4 [HR : 3.41 (1.89-6.17)] compared to T1a, nodal positivity, R1-margin, and no adjuvant chemotherapy were associated with worse OS. Disease recurrence was more common in T2-4 tumors (56.4%) compared to T1a (18.2%), T1b (23.9%), and T1c (36.1%, p < .001). CONCLUSION: T1 sub-staging of IPMN-derived PDAC is valid and has significant prognostic value. Advancing T1 sub-stage is associated with worse histopathology, survival, and recurrence. T1 sub-staging is recommended for future guidelines.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy have been confirmed by randomized trials, but current patient selection and outcome of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy in large international cohorts is unknown. This study aimed to compare the use and outcome of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy in North America, the Netherlands, Germany, and Sweden. METHODS: All patients in the 4 Global Audits on Pancreatic Surgery Group (GAPASURG) registries who underwent minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy or open distal pancreatectomy during 2014-2020 were included. RESULTS: Overall, 20,158 distal pancreatectomies were included, of which 7,316 (36%) were minimally invasive distal pancreatectomies. Use of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy varied from 29% to 54% among registries, of which 13% to 35% were performed robotically. Both the use of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy and robotic surgery were the highest in the Netherlands. Patients undergoing minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy tended to have a younger age (Germany and Sweden), female sex (North America, Germany), higher body mass index (North America, the Netherlands, Germany), lower comorbidity classification (North America, Germany, Sweden), lower performance status (Germany), and lower rate of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (all). The minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy group had fewer vascular resections (all) and lower rates of severe complications and mortality (North America, Germany). In the multivariable regression analysis, country was associated with severe complications but not with 30-day mortality. Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy was associated with a lower risk of 30-day mortality compared with open distal pancreatectomy (odds ratio 1.633, 95% CI 1.159-2.300, P = .005). CONCLUSIONS: Considerable disparities were seen in the use of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy among 4 transatlantic registries of pancreatic surgery. Overall, minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy was associated with decreased mortality as compared with open distal pancreatectomy. Differences in patient selection among countries could imply that countries are in different stages of the learning curve.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with brush cytology is an important tool in the diagnosis of hepatobiliary malignancies. However, reported sensitivity of brush cytology is suboptimal and differs markedly per study. The aim of this study is to analyze the optimal technique of endobiliary brushing during ERCP. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis according was performed using Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane library, and reported reported according to the PRISMA guidelines. The intervention reported should involve ERCP, performed by the endoscopist with a comparison of different brushing techniques. The primary outcome was sensitivity for malignancy. Studies published up to December 2022 were included. Percutaneous techniques and cytological or laboratory techniques for processing of material were excluded. Bias was assessed using the Quadas-2 tool. Pooled sensitivity rates and Forest plots were analyzed for the primary outcome. RESULTS: A total of 16 studies were included. Three studies reported on brushing before or after dilation of a biliary stricture. No improvement in sensitivity was found. Five studies reported on alternative brush designs. This did not lead to improved sensitivity. Seven studies reported on the aspiration and analysis of bile fluid, which resulted in a 16% increase in sensitivity (95% CI 4-29%). One study reported an increased in the number of brush passes to the stricture, providing an increase in sensitivity of 20%. Substantial heterogeneity between studies was found, both methodological and statistical. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the number of brush-passes and sending bile fluid for cytology increases the sensitivity of biliary brushings during ERCP. Dilation before brushing or alternative brush designs did not increase sensitivity.
Assuntos
Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica , Humanos , Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica/métodos , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Neoplasias dos Ductos Biliares/patologia , Citodiagnóstico/métodos , Ductos Biliares/diagnóstico por imagem , Ductos Biliares/patologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Clinical auditing is a powerful tool to evaluate and improve healthcare. Deviations from the expected quality of care are identified by benchmarking the results of individual hospitals using national averages. This study aimed to evaluate the use of quality indicators for benchmarking hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) surgery and when outlier hospitals could be identified. METHODS: A population-based study used data from two nationwide Dutch HPB audits (DHBA and DPCA) from 2014 to 2021. Sample size calculations determined the threshold (in percentage points) to identify centres as statistical outliers, based on current volume requirements (annual minimum of 20 resections) on a two-year period (2020-2021), covering mortality rate, failure to rescue (FTR), major morbidity rate and textbook/ideal outcome (TO) for minor liver resection (LR), major LR, pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) and distal pancreatectomy (DP). RESULTS: In total, 10 963 and 7365 patients who underwent liver and pancreatic resection respectively were included. Benchmark and corresponding range of mortality rates were 0.6% (0 -3.2%) and 3.3% (0-16.7%) for minor and major LR, and 2.7% (0-7.0%) and 0.6% (0-4.2%) for PD and DP respectively. FTR rates were 5.4% (0-33.3%), 14.2% (0-100%), 7.5% (1.6%-28.5%) and 3.1% (0-14.9%). For major morbidity rate, corresponding rates were 9.8% (0-20.5%), 28.1% (0-47.1%), 36% (15.8%-58.3%) and 22.3% (5.2%-46.1%). For TO, corresponding rates were 73.6% (61.3%-94.4%), 54.1% (35.3-100), 46.8% (25.3%-59.4%) and 63.3% (30.7%-84.6%). Mortality rate thresholds indicating a significant outlier were 8.6% and 15.4% for minor and major LR and 14.2% and 8.6% for PD and DP. For FTR, these thresholds were 17.9%, 31.6%, 22.9% and 15.0%. For major morbidity rate, these thresholds were 26.1%, 49.7%, 57.9% and 52.9% respectively. For TO, lower thresholds were 52.5%, 32.5%, 25.8% and 41.4% respectively. Higher hospital volumes decrease thresholds to detect outliers. CONCLUSION: Current event rates and minimum volume requirements per hospital are too low to detect any meaningful between hospital differences in mortality rate and FTR. Major morbidity rate and TO are better candidates to use for benchmarking.
Assuntos
Benchmarking , Indicadores de Qualidade em Assistência à Saúde , Humanos , Países Baixos/epidemiologia , Pancreatectomia/normas , Pancreatectomia/mortalidade , Masculino , Pancreaticoduodenectomia/normas , Pancreaticoduodenectomia/mortalidade , Hepatectomia/mortalidade , Hepatectomia/normas , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Mortalidade HospitalarRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between perineural invasion (PNI) and overall survival (OS) in a nationwide cohort of patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), stratified for margin negative (R0) or positive (R1) resection and absence or presence of lymph node metastasis (pN0 or pN1-N2, respectively). BACKGROUND: Patients with R0 and pN0 resected PDAC have a relatively favorable prognosis. As PNI is associated with worse OS, this might be a useful factor to provide further prognostic information for patients counselling. METHODS: A nationwide observational cohort study was performed including all patients who underwent PDAC resection in the Netherlands (2014-2019) with complete information on relevant pathological features (PNI, R status, and N status). OS was assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves, and Cox-proportional hazard analyses were performed to calculate hazard ratio's (HR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: In total, 1630 patients were included with a median follow-up of 43 (interquartile range 33-58) months. PNI was independently associated with worse OS in both R0 patients (HR 1.49 [95%CI 1.18-1.88]; P<0.001) and R1 patients (HR 1.39 [95% CI 1.06-1.83]; P=0.02), as well as in pN0 patients (HR 1.75 [95%CI 1.27-2.41]; P<0.001) and pN1-N2 patients (HR 1.35 [95% CI 1.10-1.67]; P<0.01). In 315 patients with R0N0, multivariable analysis showed that PNI was the strongest predictor of OS (HR 2.24 [95% CI 1.52-3.30]; P<0.001). CONCLUSION: PNI is strongly associated with worse survival in patients with resected PDAC, in particular in patients with relatively favorable pathological features. These findings may aid patient stratification and counselling and help guide treatment strategies.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The use of robot-assisted and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy is increasing, yet large adjusted analyses that can be generalized internationally are lacking. This study aimed to compare outcomes after robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy in a pan-European cohort. METHODS: An international multicenter retrospective study including patients after robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy from 50 centers in 12 European countries (2009-2020). Propensity score matching was performed in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo ≥III). RESULTS: Among 2,082 patients undergoing minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy, 1,006 underwent robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and 1,076 laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy. After matching 812 versus 812 patients, the rates of major morbidity (31.9% vs 29.6%; P = .347) and 30-day/in-hospital mortality (4.3% vs 4.6%; P = .904) did not differ significantly between robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy, respectively. Robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with a lower conversion rate (6.7% vs 18.0%; P < .001) and higher lymph node retrieval (16 vs 14; P = .003). Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with shorter operation time (446 minutes versus 400 minutes; P < .001), and lower rates of postoperative pancreatic fistula grade B/C (19.0% vs 11.7%; P < .001), delayed gastric emptying grade B/C (21.4% vs 7.4%; P < .001), and a higher R0-resection rate (73.2% vs 84.4%; P < .001). CONCLUSION: This European multicenter study found no differences in overall major morbidity and 30-day/in-hospital mortality after robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy compared with laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy. Further, laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with a lower rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula, delayed gastric emptying, wound infection, shorter length of stay, and a higher R0 resection rate than robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy. In contrast, robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with a lower conversion rate and a higher number of retrieved lymph nodes as compared with laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy.
Assuntos
Laparoscopia , Pancreaticoduodenectomia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias , Pontuação de Propensão , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos , Humanos , Pancreaticoduodenectomia/métodos , Pancreaticoduodenectomia/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Feminino , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos/efeitos adversos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos/métodos , Laparoscopia/métodos , Laparoscopia/efeitos adversos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Europa (Continente)/epidemiologia , Idoso , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirurgia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/mortalidade , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To establish minimal and optimal lymphadenectomy thresholds for intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN)-derived pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and evaluate their prognostic value. BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend a minimum of 12-15 lymph nodes (LNs) in PDAC. This is largely based on pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN)-derived PDAC, a biologically distinct entity from IPMN-derived PDAC. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective study including consecutive patients undergoing upfront surgery for IPMN-derived PDAC was conducted. The minimum cut-off for lymphadenectomy was defined as the maximum number of LNs where a significant node positivity difference was observed. Maximally selected log-rank statistic was used to derive the optimal lymphadenectomy cut-off (maximize survival). Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests were used to analyze overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Multivariable Cox-regression was used to determine hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). RESULTS: In 341 patients with resected IPMN-derived PDAC, the minimum number of LNs needed to ensure accurate nodal staging was 10 (P=0.040), whereas ≥20 LNs was the optimal number associated with improved OS (80.3 vs. 37.2 mo, P<0.001). Optimal lymphadenectomy was associated with improved OS [HR:0.57 (95%CI 0.39-0.83)] and RFS [HR:0.70 (95%CI 0.51-0.97)] on multivariable Cox-regression. On sub-analysis the optimal lymphadenectomy cut-offs for pancreatoduodenectomy, distal pancreatectomy, and total pancreatectomy were 20 (P<0.001), 23 (P=0.160), and 25 (P=0.008). CONCLUSION: In IPMN-derived PDAC, lymphadenectomy with at least 10 lymph nodes mitigates under-staging, and at least 20 lymph nodes is associated with the improved survival. Specifically, for pancreatoduodenectomy and total pancreatectomy, 20 and 25 lymph nodes were the optimal cut-offs.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate short- and long-term outcomes following pancreatectomy in patients with LAPC compared to (B)RPC patients. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Selected patients diagnosed with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) are increasingly undergoing resection following induction chemotherapy. To evaluate the benefit of this treatment approach, it is helpful to compare outcomes in resected patients with primary LAPC to outcomes in resected patients with primary (borderline) resectable pancreatic cancer ((B)RPC). METHODS: Two prospectively maintained nationwide databases were used for this study. Patients with (B)RPC undergoing upfront tumor resection and patients with resected LAPC after induction therapy were included. Outcomes were postoperative pancreas-specific complications, 90-day mortality, pathological outcomes, disease-free interval (DFI), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Overall, 879 patients were included; 103 with LAPC (12%) and 776 with (B)RPC (88%). LAPC patients had a lower WHO performance score and CACI. Postoperative pancreas-specific complications were comparable between groups, except delayed gastric emptying grade C, which occurred more often in LAPC patients (9% vs. 3%, P=0.03). Ninety-day mortality was comparable. About half of the patients in both groups (54% in LAPC vs. 48% in (B)RPC), P=0.21) had a radical resection (R0). DFI was 13 months in both groups (P=0.12) and OS from date of diagnosis was 24 months in LAPC patients and 19 months in (B)RPC patients (P=0.34). CONCLUSIONS: In our nationwide prospective databases, pancreas-specific complications, mortality and survival in patients with LAPC following pancreatectomy are comparable with those undergoing resection for (B)RPC. These outcomes suggest that postoperative morbidity and mortality after tumor resection in carefully selected patients with LAPC are acceptable.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Postoperative pancreatic fistula remains the leading cause of significant morbidity after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy has been described to reduce the risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula, but randomized trials on neoadjuvant treatment in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma focus increasingly on preoperative chemotherapy rather than preoperative chemoradiotherapy. This study aimed to investigate the impact of preoperative chemotherapy and preoperative chemoradiotherapy on postoperative pancreatic fistula and other pancreatic-specific surgery related complications on a nationwide level. METHODS: All patients after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were included in the mandatory nationwide prospective Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (2014-2020). Baseline and treatment characteristics were compared between immediate surgery, preoperative chemotherapy, and preoperative chemoradiotherapy. The relationship between preoperative chemotherapy, chemoradiotherapy, and clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery grade B/C) was investigated using multivariable logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Overall, 2,019 patients after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were included, of whom 1,678 underwent immediate surgery (83.1%), 192 (9.5%) received preoperative chemotherapy, and 149 (7.4%) received preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Postoperative pancreatic fistula occurred in 8.3% of patients after immediate surgery, 4.2% after preoperative chemotherapy, and 2.0% after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (P = .004). In multivariable analysis, the use of preoperative chemoradiotherapy was associated with reduced risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula (odds ratio, 0.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.03-0.69; P = .033) compared with immediate surgery, whereas preoperative chemotherapy was not (odds ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-1.25; P = .199). Intraoperatively hard, or fibrotic pancreatic texture was most frequently observed after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (53% immediate surgery, 62% preoperative chemotherapy, 77% preoperative chemoradiotherapy, P < .001). CONCLUSION: This nationwide analysis demonstrated that in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, only preoperative chemoradiotherapy, but not preoperative chemotherapy, was associated with a reduced risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula.
Assuntos
Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático , Fístula Pancreática , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Pancreaticoduodenectomia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias , Humanos , Pancreaticoduodenectomia/efeitos adversos , Fístula Pancreática/prevenção & controle , Fístula Pancreática/etiologia , Fístula Pancreática/epidemiologia , Feminino , Masculino , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/terapia , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/cirurgia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/terapia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirurgia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controle , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Países Baixos/epidemiologia , Terapia Neoadjuvante/métodos , Terapia Neoadjuvante/efeitos adversos , Quimiorradioterapia/efeitos adversos , Quimiorradioterapia/métodos , Estudos Prospectivos , Cuidados Pré-Operatórios/métodosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Prophylactic passive abdominal drainage is standard practice after distal pancreatectomy. This approach aims to mitigate the consequences of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) but its added value, especially in patients at low risk of POPF, is currently being debated. We aimed to assess the non-inferiority of a no-drain policy in patients after distal pancreatectomy. METHODS: In this international, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older undergoing open or minimally invasive elective distal pancreatectomy for all indications in 12 centres in the Netherlands and Italy. We excluded patients with an American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) physical status of 4-5 or WHO performance status of 3-4, added by amendment following the death of a patient with ASA 4 due to a pre-existing cardiac condition. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) intraoperatively by permuted blocks (size four to eight) to either no drain or prophylactic passive drain placement, stratified by annual centre volume (<40 or ≥40 distal pancreatectomies) and low risk or high risk of grade B or C POPF. High-risk was defined as a pancreatic duct of more than 3 mm in diameter, a pancreatic thickness at the neck of more than 19 mm, or both, based on the Distal Pancreatectomy Fistula Risk Score. Other patients were considered low-risk. The primary outcome was the rate of major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo score ≥III), and the most relevant secondary outcome was grade B or C POPF, grading per the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery. Outcomes were assessed up to 90 days postoperatively and analysed in the intention-to-treat population and per-protocol population, which only included patients who received the allocated treatment. A prespecified non-inferiority margin of 8% was compared with the upper limit of the two-sided 95% CI (Wald) of unadjusted risk difference to assess non-inferiority. This trial is closed and registered in the Netherlands Trial Registry, NL9116. FINDINGS: Between Oct 3, 2020, and April 28, 2023, 376 patients were screened for eligibility and 282 patients were randomly assigned to the no-drain group (n=138; 75 [54%] women and 63 [46%] men) or the drain group (n=144; 73 [51%] women and 71 [49%] men). Seven patients in the no-drain group received a drain intraoperatively; consequently, the per-protocol population included 131 patients in the no-drain group and 144 patients in the drain group. The rate of major morbidity was non-inferior in the no-drain group compared with the drain group in the intention-to-treat analysis (21 [15%] vs 29 [20%]; risk difference -4·9 percentage points [95% CI -13·8 to 4·0]; pnon-inferiority=0·0022) and the per-protocol analysis (21 [16%] vs 29 [20%]; risk difference -4·1 percentage points [-13·2 to 5·0]; pnon-inferiority=0·0045). Grade B or C POPF was observed in 16 (12%) patients in the no-drain group and in 39 (27%) patients in the drain group (risk difference -15·5 percentage points [95% CI -24·5 to -6·5]; pnon-inferiority<0·0001) in the intention-to-treat analysis. Three patients in the no-drain group died within 90 days; the cause of death in two was not considered related to the trial. The third death was a patient with an ASA score of 4 who died after sepsis and a watershed cerebral infarction at second admission, leading to multiple organ failure. No patients in the drain group died within 90 days. INTERPRETATION: A no-drain policy is safe in terms of major morbidity and reduced the detection of grade B or C POPF, and should be the new standard approach in eligible patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy. FUNDING: Ethicon UK (Johnson & Johnson Medical, Edinburgh, UK).
Assuntos
Drenagem , Pancreatectomia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Abdome , Drenagem/efeitos adversos , Pancreatectomia/efeitos adversos , Pancreatectomia/métodos , Fístula Pancreática/epidemiologia , Fístula Pancreática/etiologia , Fístula Pancreática/prevenção & controle , Fatores de Risco , AdultoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Non-invasive evaluation of phosphomonoesters (PMEs) and phosphodiesters (PDEs) by 31-phosphorus MR spectroscopy (31 P MRS) may have potential for early therapy (non-)response assessment in cancer. However, 31 P MRS has not yet been applied to investigate the human pancreas in vivo. PURPOSE: To assess the technical feasibility and repeatability of 31 P MR spectroscopic imaging (MRSI) of the pancreas, compare 31 P metabolite levels between pancreas and liver, and determine the feasibility of 31 P MRSI in pancreatic cancer. STUDY TYPE: Prospective cohort study. POPULATION: 10 healthy subjects (age 34 ± 12 years, four females) and one patient (73-year-old female) with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 7-T, 31 P FID-MRSI, 1 H gradient-echo MRI. ASSESSMENT: 31 P FID-MRSI of the abdomen (including the pancreas and liver) was performed with a nominal voxel size of 20 mm (isotropic). For repeatability measurements, healthy subjects were scanned twice on the same day. The patient was only scanned once. Test-retest 31 P MRSI data of pancreas and liver voxels (segmented on 1 H MRI) of healthy subjects were quantified by fitting in the time domain and signal amplitudes were normalized to γ-adenosine triphosphate. In addition, the PME/PDE ratio was calculated. Metabolite levels were averaged over all voxels within the pancreas, right liver lobe and left liver lobe, respectively. STATISTICAL TESTS: Repeatability of test-retest data from healthy pancreas was assessed by paired t-tests, Bland-Altman analyses, and calculation of the intrasubject coefficients of variation (CoVs). Significant differences between healthy pancreas and right and left liver lobes were assessed with a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for repeated measures. A P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The intrasubject CoVs for PME, PDE, and PME/PDE in healthy pancreas were below 20%. Furthermore, PME and PME/PDE were significantly higher in pancreas compared to liver. In the patient with pancreatic cancer, qualitatively, elevated relative PME signals were observed in comparison with healthy pancreas. DATA CONCLUSION: In vivo 31 P MRSI of the human healthy pancreas and in pancreatic cancer may be feasible at 7 T. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.
RESUMO
Occult metastases are detected in 10-15% of patients during exploratory laparotomy for pancreatic cancer. This study developed and externally validated a model to predict occult metastases in patients with potentially resectable pancreatic cancer. Model development was performed within the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit, including all patients operated for pancreatic cancer (January 2013-December 2017). Multivariable logistic regression analysis based on the Akaike Information Criteria was performed with intraoperative pathologically proven metastases as the outcome. The model was externally validated with a cohort from the University Hospital of Verona (January 2013-December 2017). For model development, 2262 patients were included of whom 235 (10%) had occult metastases, located in the liver (n = 143, 61%), peritoneum (n = 73, 31%), or both (n = 19, 8%). The model included age (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.00-1.03), BMI (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.93-0.99), preoperative nutritional support (OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.01-2.74), tumor diameter (OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.04-2.45), tumor composition (solid vs. cystic) (OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.20-4.35), and indeterminate lesions on preoperative imaging (OR 4.01, 95% CI 2.16-7.43). External validation showed poor discrimination with a C-statistic of 0.56. Although some predictor variables were significantly associated with occult metastases, the model performed insufficiently at external validation.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Cytologic and histopathologic diagnosis of non-ductal pancreatic neoplasms can be challenging in daily clinical practice, whereas it is crucial for therapy and prognosis. The cancer methylome is successfully used as a diagnostic tool in other cancer entities. Here, we investigate if methylation profiling can improve the diagnostic work-up of pancreatic neoplasms. METHODS: DNA methylation data were obtained for 301 primary tumors spanning 6 primary pancreatic neoplasms and 20 normal pancreas controls. Neural Network, Random Forest, and extreme gradient boosting machine learning models were trained to distinguish between tumor types. Methylation data of 29 nonpancreatic neoplasms (n = 3708) were used to develop an algorithm capable of detecting neoplasms of non-pancreatic origin. RESULTS: After benchmarking 3 state-of-the-art machine learning models, the random forest model emerged as the best classifier with 96.9% accuracy. All classifications received a probability score reflecting the confidence of the prediction. Increasing the score threshold improved the random forest classifier performance up to 100% with 87% of samples with scores surpassing the cutoff. Using a logistic regression model, detection of nonpancreatic neoplasms achieved an area under the curve of >0.99. Analysis of biopsy specimens showed concordant classification with their paired resection sample. CONCLUSIONS: Pancreatic neoplasms can be classified with high accuracy based on DNA methylation signatures. Additionally, non-pancreatic neoplasms are identified with near perfect precision. In summary, methylation profiling can serve as a valuable adjunct in the diagnosis of pancreatic neoplasms with minimal risk for misdiagnosis, even in the pre-operative setting.
Assuntos
Metilação de DNA , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Humanos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/genética , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/classificação , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patologia , Masculino , Feminino , Idoso , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Novel definitions suggest that resectability status for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) should be assessed beyond anatomical criteria, considering both biological and conditional factors. This has, however, yet to be validated on a nationwide scale. This study evaluated the prognostic value of biological and conditional factors for staging of patients with resectable PDAC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A nationwide observational cohort study was performed, including all consecutive patients who underwent upfront resection of National Comprehensive Cancer Network resectable PDAC in the Netherlands (2014-2019) with complete information on preoperative carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status. PDAC was considered biologically unfavorable (RB+) if CA19-9 ≥ 500 U/mL and favorable (RB-) otherwise. ECOG ≥ 2 was considered conditionally unfavorable (RC+) and favorable otherwise (RC-). Overall survival (OS) was assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox-proportional hazard analysis, presented as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Overall, 688 patients were analyzed with a median overall survival (OS) of 20 months (95% CI 19-23). OS was 14 months (95% CI 10 months-median not reached) in 20 RB+C+ patients (3%; HR 1.61, 95% CI 0.86-2.70), 13 months (95% CI 11-15) in 156 RB+C- patients (23%; HR 1.86, 95% CI 1.50-2.31), and 21 months (95% CI 12-41) in 47 RB-C+ patients (7%; HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.80-1.62) compared with 24 months (95% CI 22-27) in 465 patients with RB-C- PDAC (68%; reference). CONCLUSIONS: Survival after upfront resection of anatomically resectable PDAC is worse in patients with CA19-9 ≥ 500 U/mL, while performance status had no impact. This supports consideration of CA19-9 in preoperative staging of resectable PDAC.
Assuntos
Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Pancreatectomia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Humanos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirurgia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patologia , Feminino , Masculino , Idoso , Taxa de Sobrevida , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/cirurgia , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/patologia , Seguimentos , Prognóstico , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Países Baixos/epidemiologia , Antígeno CA-19-9/sangue , Biomarcadores TumoraisRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Although robotic pancreatoduodenectomy has shown promising outcomes in experienced high-volume centres, it is unclear whether implementation on a nationwide scale is safe and beneficial. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of the early experience with robotic pancreatoduodenectomy versus open pancreatoduodenectomy in the Netherlands. METHODS: This was a nationwide retrospective cohort study of all consecutive patients who underwent robotic pancreatoduodenectomy or open pancreatoduodenectomy who were registered in the mandatory Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (18 centres, 2014-2021), starting from the first robotic pancreatoduodenectomy procedure per centre. The main endpoints were major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade greater than or equal to III) and in-hospital/30-day mortality. Propensity-score matching (1 : 1) was used to minimize selection bias. RESULTS: Overall, 701 patients who underwent robotic pancreatoduodenectomy and 4447 patients who underwent open pancreatoduodenectomy were included. Among the eight centres that performed robotic pancreatoduodenectomy, the median robotic pancreatoduodenectomy experience was 86 (range 48-149), with a 7.3% conversion rate. After matching (698 robotic pancreatoduodenectomy patients versus 698 open pancreatoduodenectomy control patients), no significant differences were found in major complications (40.3% versus 36.2% respectively; P = 0.186), in-hospital/30-day mortality (4.0% versus 3.1% respectively; P = 0.326), and postoperative pancreatic fistula grade B/C (24.9% versus 23.5% respectively; P = 0.578). Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with a longer operating time (359 min versus 301 min; P < 0.001), less intraoperative blood loss (200â ml versus 500â ml; P < 0.001), fewer wound infections (7.4% versus 12.2%; P = 0.008), and a shorter hospital stay (11 days versus 12 days; P < 0.001). Centres performing greater than or equal to 20 robotic pancreatoduodenectomies annually had a lower mortality rate (2.9% versus 7.3%; P = 0.009) and a lower conversion rate (6.3% versus 11.2%; P = 0.032). CONCLUSION: This study indicates that robotic pancreatoduodenectomy was safely implemented nationwide, without significant differences in major morbidity and mortality compared with matched open pancreatoduodenectomy patients. Randomized trials should be carried out to verify these findings and confirm the observed benefits of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy versus open pancreatoduodenectomy.
Assuntos
Pancreaticoduodenectomia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos , Humanos , Pancreaticoduodenectomia/efeitos adversos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos/efeitos adversos , Pâncreas , Perda Sanguínea Cirúrgica , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologiaRESUMO
Importance: Implementation of new cancer treatment strategies as recommended by evidence-based guidelines is often slow and suboptimal. Objective: To improve the implementation of guideline-based best practices in the Netherlands in pancreatic cancer care and assess the impact on survival. Design, setting, and participants: This multicenter, stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial compared enhanced implementation of best practices with usual care in consecutive patients with all stages of pancreatic cancer. It took place from May 22, 2018 through July 9, 2020. Data were analyzed from April 1, 2022, through February 1, 2023. It included all patients in the Netherlands with pathologically or clinically diagnosed pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. This study reports 1-year follow-up (or shorter in case of deceased patients). Intervention: The 5 best practices included optimal use of perioperative chemotherapy, palliative chemotherapy, pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT), referral to a dietician, and use of metal stents in patients with biliary obstruction. A 6-week implementation period was completed, in a randomized order, in all 17 Dutch networks for pancreatic cancer care. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was 1-year survival. Secondary outcomes included adherence to best practices and quality of life (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC] global health score). Results: Overall, 5887 patients with pancreatic cancer (median age, 72.0 [IQR, 64.0-79.0] years; 50% female) were enrolled, 2641 before and 2939 after implementation of best practices (307 during wash-in period). One-year survival was 24% vs 23% (hazard ratio, 0.98, 95% CI, 0.88-1.08). There was no difference in the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (11% vs 11%), adjuvant chemotherapy (48% vs 51%), and referral to a dietician (59% vs 63%), while the use of palliative chemotherapy (24% vs 30%; odds ratio [OR], 1.38; 95% CI, 1.10-1.74), PERT (34% vs 45%; OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.28-2.11), and metal biliary stents increased (74% vs 83%; OR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.13-2.80). The EORTC global health score did not improve (area under the curve, 43.9 vs 42.8; median difference, -1.09, 95% CI, -3.05 to 0.94). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, implementation of 5 best practices in pancreatic cancer care did not improve 1-year survival and quality of life. The finding that most patients received no tumor-directed treatment paired with the poor survival highlights the need for more personalized treatment options. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03513705.