Management and outcomes of hemorrhage after distal pancreatectomy: a multicenter study at high volume centers.

BACKGROUND: Data on clinically relevant post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (CR-PPH) are derived from series mostly focused on pancreatoduodenectomy, and data after distal pancreatectomy (DP) are scarce. METHODS: All non-extended DP performed from 2014 to 2018 were included. CR-PPH encompassed grade B and C PPH. Risk factors, management, and outcomes of CR-PPH were evaluated. RESULTS: Overall, 1188 patients were included, of which 561 (47.2 %) were operated on minimally invasively. Spleen-preserving DP was performed in 574 patients (48.4 %). Ninety-day mortality, severe morbidity and CR-POPF rates were 1.1 % (n = 13), 17.4 % (n = 196) and 15.5 % (n = 115), respectively. After a median interval of 8 days (range, 0-37), 65 patients (5.5 %) developed CR-PPH, including 28 grade B and 37 grade C. Reintervention was required in 57 patients (87.7 %). CR-PPH was associated with a significant increase of 90-day mortality, morbidity and hospital stay (p < 0.001). Upon multivariable analysis, prolonged operative time and co-existing POPF were independently associated with CR-PPH (p < 0.005) while a chronic use of antithrombotic agent trended towards an increase of CR-PPH (p = 0.081). As compared to CR-POPF, the failure-to-rescue rate in patients who developed CR-PPH was significantly higher (13.8 % vs. 1.3 %, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: CR-PPH after DP remains rare but significantly associated with an increased risk of 90-day mortality and failure-to-rescue.

Defining Benchmark Outcomes for Distal Pancreatectomy: Results of a French Multicentric Study.

OBJECTIVE: Defining robust and standardized outcome references for distal pancreatectomy (DP) by using Benchmark analysis. BACKGROUND: Outcomes after DP are recorded in medium or small-sized studies without standardized analysis. Therefore, the best results remain uncertain. METHODS: This multicenter study included all patients undergoing DP for resectable benign or malignant tumors in 21 French expert centers in pancreas surgery from 2014 to 2018. A low-risk cohort defined by no significant comorbidities was analyzed to establish 18 outcome benchmarks for DP. These values were tested in high risk, minimally invasive and benign tumor cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 1188 patients were identified and 749 low-risk patients were screened to establish Benchmark cut-offs. Therefore, Benchmark rate for mini-invasive approach was ≥36.8%. Benchmark cut-offs for postoperative mortality, major morbidity grade ≥3a and clinically significant pancreatic fistula rates were 0%, ≤27%, and ≤28%, respectively. The benchmark rate for readmission was ≤16%. For patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma, cut-offs were ≥75%, ≥69.5%, and ≥66% for free resection margins (R0), 1-year disease-free survival and 3-year overall survival, respectively. The rate of mini-invasive approach in high-risk cohort was lower than the Benchmark cut-off (34.1% vs ≥36.8%). All Benchmark cut-offs were respected for benign tumor group. The proportion of benchmark cases was correlated to outcomes of DP. Centers with a majority of low-risk patients had worse results than those operating complex cases. CONCLUSION: This large-scale study is the first benchmark analysis of DP outcomes and provides robust and standardized data. This may allow for comparisons between surgeons, centers, studies, and surgical techniques.

Tumor burden in patients with early and intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing liver resection: a retrospective multicenter study on clinical and oncological outcomes.

BACKGROUND: According to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system, liver resection (LR) is recommended for early-stage (BCLC-A) hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) but not for intermediate-stage (BCLC-B). This study aimed to assess the outcomes of LR in these patients using a subclassification tumour burden score (TBS). METHODS: All consecutive patients that underwent LR for BCLC-A and BCLC-B HCC between 01/2010 and 12/2020 in 4 tertiary referral centers were included. Clinical outcomes and overall survival (OS) were assessed in relation to TBS and BCLC stages. RESULTS: Among 612 patients included, 562 were classified as BCLC-A and 50 as BCLC-B. The incidence of overall postoperative complications (56.0 vs 41.5%, p = 0.053) and mortality (0 vs 1.6%, p = 1.000) were similar between BCLC-A and BCLC-B patients. OS was significantly higher for BCLC A/low TBS than BCLC B/low TBS (p = 0.009), while patients with medium and high TBS had similar OS, irrespective of BCLC stage (respectively p = 0.103 and p = 0.343). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with medium and high TBS had comparable OS and DFS, irrespective of BCLC A or B stage, and postoperative morbidity was comparable. These results highlight the need for refinement of the BCLC staging system, and LR could be considered for selected intermediate stage (BCLC-B) according to the tumour burden.

International Validation of a Nomogram to Predict Recurrence after Resection of Grade 1 and 2 Nonfunctioning Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Despite the low recurrence rate of resected nonfunctional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NF-pNETs), nearly all patients undergo long-term surveillance. A prediction model for recurrence may help select patients for less intensive surveillance or identify patients for adjuvant therapy. The objective of this study was to assess the external validity of a recently published model predicting recurrence within 5 years after surgery for NF-pNET in an international cohort. This prediction model includes tumor grade, lymph node status and perineural invasion as predictors. METHODS: Retrospectively, data were collected from 7 international referral centers on patients who underwent resection for a grade 1-2 NF-pNET between 1992 and 2018. Model performance was evaluated by calibration statistics, Harrel's C-statistic, and area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic curve for 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS). A sub-analysis was performed in pNETs >2 cm. The model was improved to stratify patients into 3 risk groups (low, medium, high) for recurrence. RESULTS: Overall, 342 patients were included in the validation cohort with a 5-year RFS of 83% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 78-88%). Fifty-eight patients (17%) developed a recurrence. Calibration showed an intercept of 0 and a slope of 0.74. The C-statistic was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.70-0.83), and the AUC for the prediction of 5-year RFS was 0.74. The prediction model had a better performance in tumors >2 cm (C-statistic 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: External validity of this prediction model for recurrence after curative surgery for grade 1-2 NF-pNET showed accurate overall performance using 3 easily accessible parameters. This model is available via www.pancreascalculator.com.

Management and follow-up of gallbladder polyps: updated joint guidelines between the ESGAR, EAES, EFISDS and ESGE.

MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Primary investigation of polypoid lesions of the gallbladder should be with abdominal ultrasound. Routine use of other imaging modalities is not recommended presently, but further research is needed. In centres with appropriate expertise and resources, alternative imaging modalities (such as contrast-enhanced and endoscopic ultrasound) may be useful to aid decision-making in difficult cases. Strong recommendation, low-moderate quality evidence. 2. Cholecystectomy is recommended in patients with polypoid lesions of the gallbladder measuring 10 mm or more, providing the patient is fit for, and accepts, surgery. Multidisciplinary discussion may be employed to assess perceived individual risk of malignancy. Strong recommendation, low-quality evidence. 3. Cholecystectomy is suggested for patients with a polypoid lesion and symptoms potentially attributable to the gallbladder if no alternative cause for the patient's symptoms is demonstrated and the patient is fit for, and accepts, surgery. The patient should be counselled regarding the benefit of cholecystectomy versus the risk of persistent symptoms. Strong recommendation, low-quality evidence. 4. If the patient has a 6-9 mm polypoid lesion of the gallbladder and one or more risk factors for malignancy, cholecystectomy is recommended if the patient is fit for, and accepts, surgery. These risk factors are as follows: age more than 60 years, history of primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), Asian ethnicity, sessile polypoid lesion (including focal gallbladder wall thickening > 4 mm). Strong recommendation, low-moderate quality evidence. 5. If the patient has either no risk factors for malignancy and a gallbladder polypoid lesion of 6-9 mm, or risk factors for malignancy and a gallbladder polypoid lesion 5 mm or less, follow-up ultrasound of the gallbladder is recommended at 6 months, 1 year and 2 years. Follow-up should be discontinued after 2 years in the absence of growth. Moderate strength recommendation, moderate-quality evidence. 6. If the patient has no risk factors for malignancy, and a gallbladder polypoid lesion of 5 mm or less, follow-up is not required. Strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence. 7. If during follow-up the gallbladder polypoid lesion grows to 10 mm, then cholecystectomy is advised. If the polypoid lesion grows by 2 mm or more within the 2-year follow-up period, then the current size of the polypoid lesion should be considered along with patient risk factors. Multidisciplinary discussion may be employed to decide whether continuation of monitoring, or cholecystectomy, is necessary. Moderate strength recommendation, moderate-quality evidence. 8. If during follow-up the gallbladder polypoid lesion disappears, then monitoring can be discontinued. Strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence. SOURCE AND SCOPE: These guidelines are an update of the 2017 recommendations developed between the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR), European Association for Endoscopic Surgery and other Interventional Techniques (EAES), International Society of Digestive Surgery-European Federation (EFISDS) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). A targeted literature search was performed to discover recent evidence concerning the management and follow-up of gallbladder polyps. The changes within these updated guidelines were formulated after consideration of the latest evidence by a group of international experts. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was adopted to define the strength of recommendations and the quality of evidence. KEY POINT: • These recommendations update the 2017 European guidelines regarding the management and follow-up of gallbladder polyps.

Management strategies of anastomotic ulcer after gastric bypass and risk factors of recurrence.

BACKGROUND: Marginal ulcers (MU) after gastric bypass are a challenging problem. The first-line treatment is a medical therapy with eviction of risk factors but is sometimes insufficient. The management strategies of intractable ulcers are still not clearly defined. The aim of our study was to analyse the risk factors for recurrence, the management strategies used and their efficiencies. METHODS: Based on a retrospective analysis of all MU managed in our tertiary care centre of bariatric surgery during the last 14 years, a descriptive analysis of the cohort, the management strategies and their efficiency were analysed. A logistic regression was done to identify the independent associated risk factors of intractable ulcer. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients matched inclusion criteria: 30 were referred to us (13 Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass-RYGB and 17 One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass-OAGB), 26 were operated on in our institution (24 RYGB and 2 OAGB). 11 patients had a complicated inaugural MU requiring an interventional procedure in emergency: 7 perforations, 4 haemorrhages. The majority of MU were treated medically as a first-line therapy (n = 45; 80.4%). 32 MU recurred: 20 patients required surgery as a 2nd line therapy, 6 were operated on as a 3rd line therapy and 1 had a surgery as a 5th line therapy. The OAGB was the only risk factor of recurrence (p = 0.018). We found that the Surgical management was significantly more frequent for patients with a OAGB (84% versus 35% for RYGB, p = 0.001); the most performed surgical procedure was a conversion of OAGB to RYGB (n = 11, 37.9%). CONCLUSION: Surgery was required for a large number of MU especially in case of recurrence, but recurrence can still occur after the surgery. The OAGB was the only risk factor of recurrence identified and conversion to RYGB seemed to be effective for the healing.

Reappraisal of a 2-Cm Cut-off Size for the Management of Cystic Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: A Multicenter International Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to characterize an international cohort of resected cystic pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (cPanNENs) and identify preoperative predictors of aggressive behavior. BACKGROUND: The characteristics of cPanNENs are unknown and their clinical management remains unclear. An observational strategy for asymptomatic cPanNENs ≤2 cm has been proposed by recent guidelines, but evidence is scarce and limited to single-institutional series. METHODS: Resected cPanNENs (1995-2017) from 16 institutions worldwide were included. Solid lesions (>50% solid component), functional tumors, and MEN-1 patients were excluded. Aggressiveness was defined as lymph node (LN) involvement, G3 grading, distant metastases, and/or recurrence. RESULTS: Overall, 263 resected cPanNENs were included, among which 177 (63.5%) were >2 cm preoperatively. A preoperative diagnosis of cPanNEN was established in 162 cases (61.6%) and was more frequent when patients underwent endoscopic ultrasound [EUS, odds ratio (OR) 2.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.52-4.77] and somatostatin-receptor imaging (OR 3.681, 95% CI 1.809-7.490), and for those managed in specialized institutions (OR 3.12, 95% CI 1.57-6.21). Forty-one cPanNENs (15.6%) were considered aggressive. In the whole cohort, LN involvement on imaging, age >65 years, preoperative size >2 cm, and pancreatic duct dilation were independently associated with aggressive behavior. In asymptomatic patients, older age and a preoperative size >2 cm remained independently associated with aggressiveness. Only 1 of 61 asymptomatic cPanNENs ≤2 cm displayed an aggressive behavior. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic accuracy of cPanNENs is increased by the use of EUS and somatostatin-receptor imaging and is higher in specialized institutions. Preoperative size >2 cm is independently associated with aggressive behavior. Consequently, a watch-and-wait policy for sporadic asymptomatic cPanNENs ≤2 cm seems justified and safe for most patients.

Management and Prognosis of Localized Duodenal Neuroendocrine Neoplasms.

INTRODUCTION: The characteristics, prognostic factors, and management of duodenal neuroendocrine neoplasms (dNEN) are ill-defined, given their rarity. Whether nonsurgical management might be appropriate for patients with nonmetastatic dNEN and a good prognosis, as is the case for pancreatic NEN (pNEN), is unknown. We aimed to describe the management and prognosis of nonmetastatic dNEN patients. METHODS: All consecutive patients with nonmetastatic dNEN managed between 1981 and 2018 in 2 expert centers were included. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and factors associated with recurrence were estimated. RESULTS: A total of 145 patients with dNEN were included. Twenty-eight patients with sporadic, nonfunctioning, small (median 7 mm) dNEN underwent endoscopic resection, with a 5-year RFS rate of 89.4%. Local recurrence occurred in 2 patients, who underwent surgery with no new events. The 5-year RFS rate was 87.9% in patients who underwent surgery. Upon univariate analysis, age, size, Ki67 index, and lymph node involvement (LN+) were significantly associated with worse RFS for all dNEN treated (endoscopy/surgery); multivariate analysis found that age, size, and LN+ were associated with worse RFS. CONCLUSION: Selected nonmetastatic dNEN had a favorable outcome, and a less invasive therapeutic strategy appeared more suitable than oncological surgery.

Prognostic value of positive histological margins in patients with pancreatic head ductal adenocarcinoma and lymph node involvement: an international multicentric study.

BACKGROUND: Resection margin status and lymph node (LN) involvement are known prognostic factors for patients who undergo pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This study aimed to compare overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) by resection margin status in patients with PDAC and LN involvement. METHODS: A retrospective international multicentric study was performed including four Western centers. Multivariable Cox analysis was performed to identify prognostic factors of OS and DFS. Median OS and DFS were calculated using Kaplan-Meier curves and compared using log-rank tests. RESULTS: A cohort of 814 PDAC patients with pancreatoduodenectomy were analyzed. A total of 651 patients had LN involvement (80%). On multivariable analysis R1 resection was not an independent factor of worse OS and DFS in patients with LN involvement (HR 1.1, p = 0.565; HR 1.2, p = 0.174). Only tumor size, grade, and adjuvant chemotherapy were associated with OS and DFS. Median OS and DFS were similar between patients with R0 and R1 resections (23 vs. 20 months, p = 0.196; 15 vs. 14 months, p = 0.080). CONCLUSION: Resection status was not identified as predictor of OS or DFS in PDAC patients with LN involvement. Extensive surgery to achieve R0 resection in such patients might not influence the disease course.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Pancreatoduodenectomy: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Recommendations 2019.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways are now implemented worldwide with strong evidence that adhesion to such protocol reduces medical complications, costs and hospital stay. This concept has been applied for pancreatic surgery since the first published guidelines in 2012. This study presents the updated ERAS recommendations for pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) based on the best available evidence and on expert consensus. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in three databases (Embase, Medline Ovid and Cochrane Library Wiley) for the 27 developed ERAS items. Quality of randomized trials was assessed using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement checklist. The level of evidence for each item was determined using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation system. The Delphi method was used to validate the final recommendations. RESULTS: A total of 314 articles were included in the systematic review. Consensus among experts was reached after three rounds. A well-implemented ERAS protocol with good compliance is associated with a reduction in medical complications and length of hospital stay. The highest level of evidence was available for five items: avoiding hypothermia, use of wound catheters as an alternative to epidural analgesia, antimicrobial and thromboprophylaxis protocols and preoperative nutritional interventions for patients with severe weight loss (> 15%). CONCLUSIONS: The current updated ERAS recommendations for PD are based on the best available evidence and processed by the Delphi method. Prospective studies of high quality are encouraged to confirm the benefit of current updated recommendations.

Impact of Enhanced Recovery Program after Surgery in Patients Undergoing Pancreatectomy on Postoperative Outcomes: A Controlled before and after Study.

BACKGROUND: Implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program after pancreatic surgery was associated with decreased length of stay (LOS). However, there were only retrospective uncontrolled before-after study, and care protocols were heterogeneous. We aimed to evaluate the impact of ERAS program on postoperative outcomes after pancreatectomy through a prospective controlled study. METHODS: A before/after study with a contemporary control group was undertaken in patients undergoing pancreatectomy. We compared 2 groups: the intervention hospital that implemented ERAS program and the control hospital that performed traditional care; and 2 periods: the preimplementation and the post-implementation period. A difference-in-differences approach was used to evaluate whether implementation of ERAS program was associated with improved LOS and postoperative morbidity. RESULTS: About 97 and 75 patients were included in intervention and control hospital. In multivariate analysis, implementation of ERAS was associated with a significantly shorten LOS (hazard ratio 1.61; 95% CI 1.07-2.44) and higher compliance rate (OR 1.34; 95% CI 1.18-1.53). Difference-in-differences analysis revealed that LOS, morbidity, and readmission did not differ after ERAS implementation. CONCLUSION: Implementation of ERAS program was safe and effective after pancreatectomy with high compliance rate. LOS was significantly reduced without compromising morbidity.

Benchmarks in Pancreatic Surgery: A Novel Tool for Unbiased Outcome Comparisons.

OBJECTIVE: To use the concept of benchmarking to establish robust and standardized outcome references after pancreatico-duodenectomy (PD). BACKGROUND: Best achievable results after PD are unknown. Consequently, outcome comparisons among different cohorts, centers or with novel surgical techniques remain speculative. METHODS: This multicenter study analyzes consecutive patients (2012-2015) undergoing PD in 23 international expert centers in pancreas surgery. Outcomes in patients without significant comorbidities and major vascular resection (benchmark cases) were analyzed to establish 20 outcome benchmarks for PD. These benchmarks were tested in a cohort with a poorer preoperative physical status (ASA class ≥3) and a cohort treated by minimally invasive approaches. RESULTS: Two thousand three hundred seventy-five (38%) low-risk cases out of a total of 6186 PDs were analyzed, disclosing low in-hospital mortality (≤1.6%) but high morbidity, with a 73% benchmark morbidity rate cumulated within 6 months following surgery. Benchmark cutoffs for pancreatic fistulas (B-C), severe complications (≥ grade 3), and failure-to-rescue rate were 19%, 30%, and 9%, respectively. The ASA ≥3 cohort showed comparable morbidity but a higher in hospital-mortality (3% vs 1.6%) and failure-to-rescue rate (16% vs 9%) than the benchmarks. The proportion of benchmark cases performed varied greatly across centers and continents for both open (9%-93%) and minimally invasive (11%-62%) PD. Centers operating mostly on complex PD cases disclosed better results than those with a majority of low-risk cases. CONCLUSION: The proposed outcome benchmarks for PD, established in a large-scale international patient cohort and tested in 2 different cohorts, may allow for meaningful comparisons between different patient cohorts, centers, countries, and surgical techniques.

The Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI®) is a Novel Cost Assessment Tool for Surgical Procedures.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify a readily available, reproducible, and internationally applicable cost assessment tool for surgical procedures. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Strong economic pressure exists worldwide to slow down the rising of health care costs. Postoperative morbidity significantly impacts on cost in surgical patients. The comprehensive complication index (CCI), reflecting overall postoperative morbidity, may therefore serve as a new marker for cost. METHODS: Postoperative complications and total costs from a single tertiary center were prospectively collected (2014 to 2016) up to 3 months after surgery for a variety of abdominal procedures (n = 1388). CCI was used to quantify overall postoperative morbidity. Pearson correlation coefficient (rpears) was calculated for cost and CCI. For cost prediction, a linear regression model based on CCI, age, and type of surgery was developed and validated in an international cohort of patients. RESULTS: We found a high correlation between CCI and overall cost (rpears = 0.75) with the strongest correlation for more complex procedures. The prediction model performed very well (R = 0.82); each 10-point increase in CCI corresponded to a 14% increase to the baseline cost. Additional 12% of baseline cost must be added for patients older than 50 years, or 24% for those over 70 years. The validation cohorts showed a good match of predicted and observed cost. CONCLUSION: Overall postoperative morbidity correlates highly with cost. The CCI together with the type of surgery and patient age is a novel and reliable predictor of expenses in surgical patients. This finding may enable objective cost comparisons among centers, procedures, or over time obviating the need to look at complex country-specific cost calculations (www.assessurgery.com).

Fukuoka-Negative Branch-Duct IPMNs: When to Worry? A Study from the French Surgical Association (AFC).

BACKGROUND: This study analyzed the pathologic findings for patients with Fukuoka-negative branch-duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (BD-IPMN) who theoretically were eligible for surveillance care with follow-up assessment, but instead underwent resection. METHODS: From January 2005 to December 2012, 820 patients underwent evaluation for IPMN. At initial staging, 319 patients had BD-IPMN, and 89 of these patients presented with Fukuoka-negative criteria. These 89 patients were included in this study. RESULTS: Of the 89 patients, 55 (62%) underwent pancreatectomy. After pathologic examination, the ultimate diagnosis was MT-IPMN for 20 (36%) of these patients (the MT group) and BD-IPMN for 35 (64%) of these patients (the BD group). The remaining 34 patients (38%) underwent enucleation. The patients in the MT group were more likely to be male (P = 0.01) and to have a higher rate of recent (< 1 year) diabetes mellitus diagnosis (P = 0.007) than the patients in the BD group. In the multivariate analysis, diabetes mellitus was independently associated with involvement of the main pancreatic duct (P = 0.05). Malignancy was diagnosed for 14 (16%) of the 89 patients. The rate of invasive IPMN was higher in the MT group than in the BD group (20% vs. 0%, P = 0.02). The 5-year overall survival rate was 100% for the BD group and 84% for the MT group (P = 0.02). For the male patients with diabetes mellitus, the rate of malignancy rose to 67%. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with a diagnosis of Fukuoka-negative BD-IPMN, resection should be considered primarily for male patients with a recent diabetes mellitus diagnosis.

Outcomes After Distal Pancreatectomy with Celiac Axis Resection for Pancreatic Cancer: A Pan-European Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Western multicenter studies on distal pancreatectomy with celiac axis resection (DP-CAR), also known as the Appleby procedure, for locally advanced pancreatic cancer are lacking. We aimed to study overall survival, morbidity, mortality and the impact of preoperative hepatic artery embolization (PHAE). METHODS: Retrospective cohort study within the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary-Association, on DP-CAR between 1-1-2000 and 6-1-2016. Primary endpoint was overall survival. Secondary endpoints were radicality (R0-resection), 90-day mortality, major morbidity, and pancreatic fistulae (grade B/C). RESULTS: We included 68 patients from 20 hospitals in 12 countries. Postoperatively, 53% of patients had R0-resection, 25% major morbidity, 21% an ISGPS grade B/C pancreatic fistula, and 16% mortality. In total, 82% received (neo-)adjuvant chemotherapy and median overall survival in 62 patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients was 18 months (CI 10-37). We observed no impact of PHAE on ischemic complications. CONCLUSIONS: DP-CAR combined with chemotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer is associated with acceptable overall survival. The 90-day mortality is too high and should be reduced. Future studies should investigate to what extent increasing surgical volume or better patient selection can improve outcomes.

Correction to: Outcomes After Distal Pancreatectomy with Celiac Axis Resection for Pancreatic Cancer: A Pan-European Retrospective Cohort Study.

In the original article, the institutional author the E-AHPBA DP-CAR study group was misspelled. It is correct as reflected here. The original article has also been corrected.

Impact of laparoscopy in patients aged over 70 years requiring distal pancreatectomy: a French multicentric comparative study.

BACKGROUND: Few data are available concerning short-term results of minimally invasive surgery in patients > 70 years old requiring distal pancreatectomy. The aim of this study was to compare short-term results after laparoscopic (LDP) versus open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) in this subgroup of patients. METHODS: All patients > 70 years who underwent distal pancreatectomy in 3 expert centers between 1995 and 2017 were included and data were retrospectively analyzed. Demographic, intraoperative data and postoperative outcomes in LDP and ODP groups were compared. RESULTS: A distal pancreatectomy was performed in 109 elderly patients; LDP group included 53 patients while ODP group included 56. There were 55 (50.5%) males and 54 (49.5%) women with a median age of 75 years (range 70-87). Fifty (45.9%) patients were 70-74, 40 (36.7%) patients were 75-79, and 19 (17.4%) patients were over 80 years. Nine (8.2%) patients required conversion to open surgery. The median operative time was not different between LDP and ODP (204 vs. 220 min, p = 0.62). The intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower in the LDP group (238 ± 312 vs. 425 ± 582 ml, p = 0.009) with no difference regarding the intraoperative transfusion rate. 90-day mortality (0 vs. 5%, p = 0.42), overall complication (45.4 vs. 51.8%, p = 0.53), major complication (18.2 vs. 12.5%, p = 0.43), grade B/C pancreatic fistula (6.8 vs. 7.1%, p = 0.71), were comparable in the 2 groups. Only postoperative confusion rate was significantly lower in the LDP group (4.5 vs. 25%, p = 0.01). Median length of stay was significantly lower in the LDP group (14 ± 10 vs. 16 ± 11 days, p = 0.04). R0 resection was performed in 94% of LDP patients and 89% in ODP patients without significant difference (p = 0.73). CONCLUSIONS: The laparoscopic approach seems to reduce blood loss, postoperative confusion, and length of stay in elderly patients requiring distal pancreatectomy.

Management and follow-up of gallbladder polyps : Joint guidelines between the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR), European Association for Endoscopic Surgery and other Interventional Techniques (EAES), International Society of Digestive Surgery - European Federation (EFISDS) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE).

OBJECTIVES: The management of incidentally detected gallbladder polyps on radiological examinations is contentious. The incidental radiological finding of a gallbladder polyp can therefore be problematic for the radiologist and the clinician who referred the patient for the radiological examination. To address this a joint guideline was created by the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR), European Association for Endoscopic Surgery and other Interventional Techniques (EAES), International Society of Digestive Surgery - European Federation (EFISDS) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). METHODS: A targeted literature search was performed and consensus guidelines were created using a series of Delphi questionnaires and a seven-point Likert scale. RESULTS: A total of three Delphi rounds were performed. Consensus regarding which patients should have cholecystectomy, which patients should have ultrasound follow-up and the nature and duration of that follow-up was established. The full recommendations as well as a summary algorithm are provided. CONCLUSIONS: These expert consensus recommendations can be used as guidance when a gallbladder polyp is encountered in clinical practice. KEY POINTS: • Management of gallbladder polyps is contentious • Cholecystectomy is recommended for gallbladder polyps >10 mm • Management of polyps <10 mm depends on patient and polyp characteristics • Further research is required to determine optimal management of gallbladder polyps.

Unnecessary preoperative biliary drainage: impact on perioperative outcomes of resectable periampullary tumors.

OBJECTIVE: Routine preoperative endoscopic biliary drainage (PEBD) is not recommended for malignant periampullary tumors (MPT) with uncomplicated obstructive cholestasis, yet many patients still receive routine PEBD. Herein were assessed perioperative outcomes of routine PEBD in resectable MPT with uncomplicated biliary obstruction. METHODS: From 2008 to 2014, we identified three groups among patients undergoing surgery for resectable MPT: "unnecessary-PEBD" (despite recommendations), "necessary-PEBD" (following recommendations), and "upfront-surgery groups." The first two groups were compared on referral patterns, drainage procedure, and post-PEBD complications; "Unnecessary-PEBD" and "upfront-surgery" groups were compared on perioperative outcomes. RESULTS: A total 140 patients underwent surgery for resectable MPT; 38 had cholestasis with clear PEBD indication ("necessary-PEBD"). A further 66 presented uncomplicated obstructive cholestasis with total bilirubin < 300 µmol/l, of whom 26 had unnecessary PEBD and 40 underwent upfront surgery. In total, 40.1% of PEBD were unnecessary and 64.1% were performed before surgical consultation. Time-to-surgery was significantly increased in the "unnecessary-PEBD" group by a mean ± SD 35.3 ± 5.5 days as compared to "upfront-surgery" group (95%CI [24.4-46.2]; p < 0.001). The "unnecessary-PEBD" group had a post-PEBD complication rate of 34.6%, and 7.7% were unresectable due to severe fibrosis following PEBD-induced acute pancreatitis. Perioperative severe complication rate was higher in the "unnecessary-PEBD" (73.1%) than in the "upfront-surgery" group (37.5%, p = 0.005), as was Clavien-Dindo grade > II post-operative complication rate (65.4 and 37.5%; p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Routine preoperative biliary drainage is associated with an increased morbidity and persists despite recommendations against its systematic use. Early multidisciplinary team discussions with pancreatic surgeons should be implemented with an aim to reduce unnecessary stenting and improve patient outcomes.

Early Enteral Versus Total Parenteral Nutrition in Patients Undergoing Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Randomized Multicenter Controlled Trial (Nutri-DPC).

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare nasojejunal early enteral nutrition (NJEEN) with total parenteral nutrition (TPN), after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), in terms of postoperative complications. BACKGROUND: Current nutritional guidelines recommend the use of enteral over parenteral nutrition in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery. However, the NJEEN remains controversial in patients undergoing PD. METHODS: Multicenter, randomized, controlled trial was conducted between 2011 and 2014. Nine centers in France analyzed 204 patients undergoing PD to NJEEN (n = 103) or TPN (n = 101). Primary outcome was the rate of postoperative complications according to Clavien-Dindo classification. Successful NJEEN was defined as insertion of a nasojejunal feeding tube, delivering at least 50% of nutritional needs on PoD 5, and no TPN for more than consecutive 48 hours. RESULTS: Postoperative complications occurred in 77.5% [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 68.1-85.1] patients in the NJEEN group versus 64.4% (95% CI 54.2-73.6) in TPN group (P = 0.040). NJEEN was associated with higher frequency of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) (48.1% vs 27.7%, P = 0.012) and higher severity (grade B/C 29.4% vs 13.9%; P = 0.007). There was no significant difference in the incidence of post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage, delayed gastric emptying, infectious complications, the grade of postoperative complications, and the length of postoperative stay. A successful NJEEN was achieved in 63% patients. In TPN group, average energy intake was significantly higher (P < 0.001) and patients had an earlier recovery of oral feeding (P = 0.0009). CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing PD, NJEEN was associated with an increased overall postoperative complications rate. The frequency and the severity of POPF were also significantly increased after NJEEN. In terms of safety and feasibility, NJEEN should not be recommended.