ABSTRACT
European Cancer Organisation Essential Requirements for Quality Cancer Care (ERQCC) are written by experts representing all disciplines involved in cancer care in Europe. They give patients, health professionals, managers and policymakers a guide to essential care throughout the patient journey. Pancreatic cancer is an increasing cause of cancer mortality and has wide variation in treatment and care in Europe. It is a major healthcare burden and has complex diagnosis and treatment challenges. Care must be carried out only in pancreatic cancer units or centres that have a core multidisciplinary team (MDT) and an extended team of health professionals detailed here. Such units are far from universal in European countries. To meet European aspirations for comprehensive cancer control, healthcare organisations must consider the requirements in this paper, paying particular attention to multidisciplinarity and patient-centred pathways from diagnosis, to treatment, to survivorship.
Subject(s)
Pancreatic Neoplasms/therapy , Humans , Medical Oncology/standards , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Quality of Health CareABSTRACT
Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive gastrointestinal malignancy with a poor 5-year survival rate. Accurate staging of PDAC is an important initial step in the development of a stage-specific treatment plan. Different staging systems/consensus statements convened by different societies and academic practices are currently used. The most recent version of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) tumor/node/metastases (TNM) staging system for PDAC has shifted its focus from guiding management to assessing prognosis. In order to preoperatively define the resectability of PDAC and to guide management, additional classification systems have been developed. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines, one of the most commonly used systems, provide recommendations on the management and the determination of resectability for PDAC. The NCCN divides PDAC into three categories of resectability based on tumor-vessel relationship: 'resectable,' 'borderline resectable,' and 'unresectable'. Among these, the borderline disease category is of special interest given its evolution over time and the resulting variations in the definition and the associated recommendations for management between different societies. It is important to be familiar with the evolving criteria, and treatment and follow-up recommendations for PDAC. In this article, the most current AJCC staging (8th edition), NCCN guidelines (version 2.2019-April 9, 2019), and challenges and controversies in borderline resectable PDAC are reviewed.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/diagnostic imaging , Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal/diagnostic imaging , Pancreatic Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Adenocarcinoma/surgery , Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal/pathology , Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal/surgery , Humans , Neoplasm Staging , Pancreatic Neoplasms/pathology , Pancreatic Neoplasms/surgery , Practice Guidelines as Topic , United StatesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of CT in postoperative colorectal anastomotic leakage (AL). METHODS: Two independent blinded radiologists reviewed 153 CTs performed for suspected AL within 60 days after surgery in 131 consecutive patients, with (n = 58) or without (n = 95) retrograde contrast enema (RCE). Results were compared to original interpretations. The reference standard was reoperation or consensus (a radiologist and a surgeon) regarding clinical, laboratory, radiological, and follow-up data after medical treatment. RESULTS: AL was confirmed in 34/131 patients. For the two reviewers and original interpretation, sensitivity of CT was 82 %, 87 %, and 71 %, respectively; specificity was 84 %, 84 %, and 92 %. RCE significantly increased the positive predictive value (from 40 % to 88 %, P = 0.0009; 41 % to 92 %, P = 0.0016; and 40 % to 100 %, P = 0.0006). Contrast extravasation was the most sensitive (reviewers, 83 % and 83 %) and specific (97 % and 97 %) sign and was significantly associated with AL by univariate analysis (P < 0.0001 and P < 0.0001). By multivariate analysis with recursive partitioning, CT with RCE was accurate to confirm or rule out AL with contrast extravasation. CONCLUSIONS: CT with RCE is accurate for diagnosing postoperative colorectal AL. Contrast extravasation is the most reliable sign. RCE should be performed during CT for suspected AL. KEY POINTS: ⢠CT accurately diagnosed clinically suspected colorectal AL and showed good interobserver agreement ⢠Contrast extravasation was the most sensitive and specific CT sign ⢠Retrograde contrast enema during CT improved positive predictive value ⢠Retrograde contrast enema decreased false-negative or indeterminate original CT interpretations.