What is the optimal surgical approach for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic neck? - a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The appropriate surgical approach for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is determined by the tumor's relation to the porto-mesenteric axis. Although the extent and location of lymphadenectomy is dependent on the type of resection, a pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), distal pancreatectomy (DP), or total pancreatectomy (TP) are considered equivalent oncologic operations for pancreatic neck tumors. Therefore, we aimed to assess differences in histopathological and oncological outcomes for surgical approaches in the treatment of pancreatic neck tumors. METHODS: Patients with resected PDAC located in the pancreatic neck were identified from the National Cancer Database (2004-2020). Patients with metastatic disease were excluded. Furthermore, patients with 90-day mortality and R2-resections were excluded from the multivariable Cox-regression analysis. RESULTS: Among 846 patients, 58% underwent PD, 25% DP, and 17% TP with similar R0-resection rates (p = 0.722). Significant differences were observed in nodal positivity (PD:44%, DP:34%, TP:57%, p < 0.001) and mean-number of examined lymph nodes (PD:17.2 ± 10.4, DP:14.7 ± 10.5, TP:21.2 ± 11.0, p < 0.001). Furthermore, inadequate lymphadenectomy (< 12 nodes) was observed in 30%, 44%, and 19% of patients undergoing PD, DP, and TP, respectively (p < 0.001). Multivariable analysis yielded similar overall survival after DP (HR:0.83, 95%CI:0.63-1.11), while TP was associated with worse survival (HR:1.43, 95%CI:1.08-1.89) compared to PD. CONCLUSION: While R0-rates are similar amongst all approaches, DP is associated with inadequate lymphadenectomy which may result in understaging disease. However, this had no negative influence on survival. In the premise that an oncological resection of the pancreatic neck tumor is feasible with a partial pancreatectomy, no benefit is observed by performing a TP.

Assessing quality of hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery: nationwide benchmarking.

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.

Early and Long-Term Morbidity and Mortality Following Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Periampullary Tumors in Elderly Patients.

AIM: The growing elderly population is facing an increasing risk of cancers, consequently raising the pancreatic cancer surgery rate. This study aimed to determine whether advanced age is a risk factor for morbidity and mortality following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for periampullary tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present study included 90 patients who underwent PD for periampullary tumors. Patients were divided into two age-related groups, including those aged 60-74 years (n = 60) (Group 1) and those aged ≥75 years (n = 30) (Group 2). Each patient's characteristics, perioperative features, morbidity, and long-term results were evaluated retrospectively. RESULTS: In both univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses, old age (≥75 years) was not a risk factor for morbidity and hospital mortality. The multivariate analysis demonstrated that male gender (p = 0.008), pancreatic duct diameter (<3 mm) (p < 0.001), and length of hospital stay (p = 0.005) were independent risk factors for pancreatic fistula post-operation and reoperation. Additionally, hospital mortality was significantly associated with reoperation (p = 0.011). The overall median survival was 27 ± 4.1 (18.8-35.1) months. Lymph node positivity (p < 0.001), neural tumor invasion (p = 0.026), and age ≥75 years (p = 0.045) were risk factors affecting the overall survival rate. Moreover, there was no statistically significant difference in terms of PD rates during the Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) period among groups, and PD during this period was not related to the occurrence of pancreatic fistula. CONCLUSION: PD can be performed effectively in selected elderly patients with tolerable morbidity and mortality rates.

Impact of Surgical Margin Status on Survival and Recurrence After Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Distal Cholangiocarcinoma: Is Microscopic Residual Tumor (R1) Associated with Higher Rates of Local Recurrence?

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing macroscopically curative resection for distal cholangiocarcinoma (DCC) have high recurrence rates and poor prognoses. This study aimed to investigate the impact of surgical margin status on survival and recurrence after resection of DCC, specifically focusing on microscopic residual tumor (R1) and its relationship to local recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of patients who had undergone pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for DCC between 2005 and 2021. Surgical margin was classified as R0, R1cis (positive bile duct margin with carcinoma in situ), and R1inv (positive bile duct margin with an invasive subepithelial component and/or positive radial margin). RESULTS: In total, 29 of 133 patients (21.8%) had R1cis and 23 (17.3%) R1inv. The 5-year overall survival (OS) for R0 (55.7%) did not differ significantly from that for R1cis/R1inv (47.4%/33.6%, respectively). The 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) for R0 was significantly longer than that for R1inv (50.1% vs. 17.4%, p = 0.003), whereas RFS did not differ significantly between those with R0 and R1cis. R1cis/R1inv status was not an independent predictor of OS and RFS in multivariate analysis. Cumulative incidence of isolated distant recurrence was significantly higher for R1cis/R1inv than for R0 (p = 0.0343/p = 0.0226, respectively), whereas surgical margin status was not significantly associated with rates of local or local plus distant recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical margin status does not significantly impact OS and RFS in patients undergoing PD for DCC following precise preoperative imaging evaluation. Additionally, R1 status is significantly linked to higher isolated distant recurrence rather than local recurrence, highlighting the importance of multidisciplinary therapy.

Implementation and outcome of minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy in Europe: a registry-based retrospective study - a critical appraisal of the first 3 years of the E-MIPS registry.

BACKGROUND: International multicenter audit-based studies focusing on the outcome of minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) are lacking. The European Registry for Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery (E-MIPS) is the E-AHPBA endorsed registry aimed to monitor and safeguard the introduction of MIPD in Europe. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A planned analysis of outcomes among consecutive patients after MIPD from 45 centers in 14 European countries in the E-MIPS registry (2019-2021). The main outcomes of interest were major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3) and 30-day/in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Overall, 1336 patients after MIPD were included [835 robot-assisted (R-MIPD) and 501 laparoscopic MIPD (L-MIPD)]. Overall, 20 centers performed R-MIPD, 15 centers L-MIPD, and 10 centers both. Between 2019 and 2021, the rate of centers performing L-MIPD decreased from 46.9 to 25%, whereas for R-MIPD this increased from 46.9 to 65.6%. Overall, the rate of major morbidity was 41.2%, 30-day/in-hospital mortality 4.5%, conversion rate 9.7%, postoperative pancreatic fistula grade B/C 22.7%, and postpancreatectomy hemorrhage grade B/C 10.8%. Median length of hospital stay was 12 days (IQR 8-21). A lower rate of major morbidity, postoperative pancreatic fistula grade B/C, postpancreatectomy hemorrhage grade B/C, delayed gastric emptying grade B/C, percutaneous drainage, and readmission was found after L-MIPD. The number of centers meeting the Miami Guidelines volume cut-off of ≥20 MIPDs annually increased from 9 (28.1%) in 2019 to 12 (37.5%) in 2021 ( P =0.424). Rates of conversion (7.4 vs. 14.8% P <0.001) and reoperation (8.9 vs. 15.1% P <0.001) were lower in centers, which fulfilled the Miami volume cut-off. CONCLUSION: During the first 3 years of the pan-European E-MIPS registry, morbidity and mortality rates after MIPD were acceptable. A shift is ongoing from L-MIPD to R-MIPD. Variations in outcomes between the two minimally invasive approaches and the impact of the volume cut-off should be further evaluated over a longer time period.

Prognosticating Outcome in Pancreatic Head Cancer With the use of a Machine Learning Algorithm.

Background: The purpose of this project is to identify prognostic features in resectable pancreatic head adenocarcinoma and use these features to develop a machine learning algorithm that prognosticates survival for patients pursuing pancreaticoduodenectomy. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of 93 patients who underwent a pancreaticoduodenectomy was performed. The patients were analyzed in 2 groups: Group 1 (n = 38) comprised of patients who survived < 2 years, and Group 2 (n = 55) comprised of patients who survived > 2 years. After comparing the two groups, 9 categorical features and 2 continuous features (11 total) were selected to be statistically significant (p < .05) in predicting outcome after surgery. These 11 features were used to train a machine learning algorithm that prognosticates survival. Results: The algorithm obtained 75% accuracy, 41.9% sensitivity, and 97.5% specificity in predicting whether survival is less than 2 years after surgery. Conclusion: A supervised machine learning algorithm that prognosticates survival can be a useful tool to personalize treatment plans for patients with pancreatic cancer.

Short-term outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy in octogenarians: multicentre case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is frequently the surgical treatment indicated for a number of pathologies. Elderly patients may be denied surgery because of concerns over poor perioperative outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate postoperative clinical outcomes and provide evidence on current UK practice in the elderly population after PD. METHODS: This was a multicentre retrospective case-control study of octogenarians undergoing PD between January 2008 and December 2017, matched with younger controls from seven specialist centres in the UK. The primary endpoint was 90-day mortality. Secondary endpoints were index admission mortality, postoperative complications, and 30-day readmission rates. RESULTS: In total, 235 octogenarians (median age 81 (range 80-90) years) and 235 controls (age 67 (31-79) years) were included in the study. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (median 0 (range 0-3) versus 0 (0-2); P = 0.010) and Charlson Co-morbidity Index score (7 (6-11) versus 5 (2-9); P = 0.001) were higher for octogenarians than controls. Postoperative complication and 30-day readmission rates were comparable. The 90-day mortality rate was higher among octogenarians (9 versus 3 per cent; P = 0.030). Index admission mortality rates were comparable (4 versus 2 per cent; P = 0.160), indicating that the difference in mortality was related to deaths after hospital discharge. Despite the higher 90-day mortality rate in the octogenarian population, multivariable Cox regression analysis did not identify age as an independent predictor of postoperative mortality. CONCLUSION: Despite careful patient selection and comparable index admission mortality, 90-day and, particularly, out-of-hospital mortality rates were higher in octogenarians.

Venous wedge and segment resection during pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer: impact on short- and long-term outcomes in a nationwide cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Venous resection of the superior mesenteric or portal vein is increasingly performed in pancreatic cancer surgery, whereas results of studies on short- and long-term outcomes are contradictory. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the type of venous resection in pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer on postoperative morbidity and overall survival. METHODS: This nationwide retrospective cohort study included all patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer in 18 centres (2013-2017). RESULTS: A total of 1311 patients were included, of whom 17 per cent underwent wedge resection and 10 per cent segmental resection. Patients with segmental resection had higher rates of major morbidity (39 versus 20 versus 23 per cent, respectively; P < 0.001) and portal or superior mesenteric vein thrombosis (18 versus 5 versus 1 per cent, respectively; P < 0.001) and worse overall survival (median 12 versus 16 versus 20 months, respectively; P < 0.001), compared to patients with wedge resection and those without venous resection. Multivariable analysis showed patients with segmental resection, but not those who had wedge resection, had higher rates of major morbidity (odds ratio = 1.93, 95 per cent c.i. 1.20 to 3.11) and worse overall survival (hazard ratio = 1.40, 95 per cent c.i. 1.10 to 1.78), compared to patients without venous resection. Among patients who received neoadjuvant therapy, there was no difference in overall survival among patients with segmental and wedge resection and those without venous resection (median 32 versus 25 versus 33 months, respectively; P = 0.470), although there was a difference in major morbidity rates (52 versus 19 versus 21 per cent, respectively; P = 0.012). CONCLUSION: In pancreatic surgery, the short- and long-term outcomes are worse in patients with venous segmental resection, compared to patients with wedge resection and those without venous resection.

Upfront Surgery and Surgery Following Neoadjuvant Treatment of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Comparative Analysis of Short-term Postoperative Outcomes.

BACKGROUND/AIM: In cases where neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) is administered, research on short-term postoperative outcomes appears to be insufficient. We compared short-term outcomes of upfront surgery (UpS) cases and NAT cases for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 1,228 cases that had elective pancreatectomy at Samsung Medical Center from 2010 to 2020. All cases were classified into resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC) and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) according to NCCN guidelines 2017. In each group, factors were compared between the UpS and NAT groups. RESULTS: Rate of vascular resection was higher in the NAT group in RPC, compared to that in the NAT group in LAPC. Short-term postoperative outcomes had no significant differences between the UpS and NAT groups in both RPC and LAPC. CONCLUSION: In the NAT group, there were no significant differences from UpS in terms of short-term postoperative outcomes. Conversion surgery following NAT is a favorable strategy.

The impact of venous resection in pancreatoduodectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Vein resection pancreatoduodenectomy (VRPD) may be performed in selected pancreatic cancer patients. However, the main risks and benefits related to VRPD remain controversial. OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to evaluate the risks and survival benefits that the VRPD may add when compared with standard pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing VRPD and PD were performed. RESULTS: VRPD was associated with a higher risk for postoperative mortality (risk difference: -0.01; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.02 to -0.00) and complications (risk difference: -0.05; 95% CI -0.09 to -0.01) than PD. The length of hospital stay was not different between the groups (mean difference [MD]: -0.65; 95% CI -2.11 to 0.81). In the VRPD, the operating time was 69 minutes higher on average (MD: -69.09; 95% CI -88.4 to -49.78), with a higher blood loss rate (MD: -314.04; 95% CI -423.86 to -195.22). In the overall survival evaluation, the hazard ratio for mortality during follow-up on the group of VRPD was higher compared to the PD group (hazard ratio: 1.13; 95% CI 1.03-1.23). CONCLUSION: VRPD is associated with a higher risk of short-term complications and mortality and a lower probability of survival than PD. Knowing the risks and potential benefits of surgery can help clinicians to properly manage pancreatic cancer patients with venous invasion. The decision for surgery with major venous resection should be shared with the patients after they are informed of the risks and prognosis.

Postoperative Outcomes of Tangential versus Segmental Resection and End-to-end Reconstruction of the Superior Mesenterico-Portal Vein During Pancreatoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Single-Center Experience.

BACKGROUND/AIM: The impact of venous resections and reconstruction techniques on morbidity after surgery for pancreatic cancer (PDAC) remains controversial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 143 patients receiving pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) for PDAC between 2013 and 2018 were identified from a prospective database. Morbidity and mortality after PD with tangential resection versus end-to-end reconstruction were assessed. RESULTS: Fifty-two of 143 (36.4%) patients underwent PD with portal venous resection (PVR), which was associated with longer operation times [398 (standard error (SE) 12.01) vs. 306 (SE 13.09) min, p<0.001]. PVR was associated with longer intensive-care-unit stay (6.3 vs. 3.8 days, p=0.054); morbidity (Clavien-Dindo classification (CDC) grade IIIa-V 45.8% vs. 35.8%, p=0.279) and 30-day mortality (4.1% vs. 4.2%, p>0.99) were not different. Tangential venous resection was associated with similar CDC grade IIIa-IV (42.9% vs. 50.0%, p=0.781) and 30-day mortality rates (3.5% vs. 4.1%, p=0.538) as segmental resection and end-to-end venous reconstruction. CONCLUSION: Both tangential and segmental PVR appear feasible and can be safely performed to achieve negative resection margins.

Complications After Pancreaticoduodenectomy.

The most common complications after a pancreaticoduodenectomy are delayed gastric emptying, pancreatic fistulae, hemorrhage, chyle leaks, endocrine and exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, and surgical site infections. Understanding the potential complications and recognizing them are imperative to taking great care of these complex patients. Taking care of these patients postoperatively requires a team approach including experienced nursing staff combined with robust gastroenterology and interventional radiology.

Failure to Rescue After Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Transatlantic Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This analysis aimed to compare failure to rescue (FTR) after pancreatoduodenectomy across the Atlantic. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: FTR, or mortality after development of a major complication, is a quality metric originally created to compare hospital results. FTR has been studied in North American and Northern European patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). However, a direct comparison of FTR after PD between North America and Northern Europe has not been performed. METHODS: Patients who underwent PD in North America, the Netherlands, Sweden and Germany (GAPASURG dataset) were identified from their respective registries (2014-17). Patients who developed a major complication defined as Clavien-Dindo ≥3 or developed a grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) were included. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative variables were compared between patients with and without FTR. Variables significant on univariable analysis were entered into a logistic regression for FTR. RESULTS: Major complications occurred in 6188 of 22,983 patients (26.9%) after PD, and 504 (8.1%) patients had FTR. North American and Northern European patients with complications differed, and rates of FTR were lower in North America (5.4% vs 12%, P < 0.001). Fourteen factors from univariable analysis contributing to differences in patients who developed FTR were included in a logistic regression. On multivariable analysis, factors independently associated with FTR were age, American Society of Anesthesiology ≥3, Northern Europe, POPF, organ failure, life-threatening complication, nonradiologic intervention, and reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Older patients with severe systemic diseases are more difficult to rescue. Failure to rescue is more common in Northern Europe than North America. In stable patients, management of complications by interventional radiology is preferred over reoperation.

The impact of obesity and severe obesity on postoperative outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy.

BACKGROUND: The impact of obesity on postoperative outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy remains insufficiently studied. METHODS: All pancreatoduodenectomy patients were abstracted from the 2014 to 2018 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data sets and were stratified into the following 3 body mass index categories: non-obese (body mass index 18.5-29.9), class 1/2 obesity (body mass index 30-39.9), and class 3 severe obesity (body mass index ≥ 40). Analyses tested associations between patient factors and four 30-day postoperative outcomes: mortality, composite morbidity, delayed gastric emptying, and postoperative pancreatic fistula. Multivariable logistic regression models tested independent associations between patient factors and these 4 outcome measures. RESULTS: A total of 16,823 patients were included in the study: 12,234 (72.7%) non-obese, 4,030 (24%) obese, and 559 (3.3%) with severe obesity. Bivariable analyses demonstrated significant associations between obesity, severe obesity, and greater proportions of numerous preoperative comorbidities as well as a greater likelihood of postoperative complications, including postoperative pancreatic fistula, delayed gastric emptying, composite morbidity, and mortality (all P ≤ .001). After adjusting for significant covariates, obesity was independently associated with postoperative pancreatic fistula (odds ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval: 1.33-1.67, P < .001), delayed gastric emptying (odds ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval: 1.05-1.28, P = .004), composite morbidity (odds ratio 1.28, 95% confidence interval: 1.18-1.38, P < .001), and mortality (odds ratio 1.79, 95% confidence interval: 1.36-2.36, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Obesity and severe obesity are significantly associated with worse short-term outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy. Preoperative considerations, such as weight management strategies during individualized treatment planning, could improve outcomes in this population.

INR and not bilirubin levels predict postoperative morbidity in patients with malignant obstructive jaundice.

BACKGROUND: There are no established predictors for deciding between upfront surgery and PBD in pancreatic head malignancy. Once PBD is present, the ideal drainage-time remains elusive. The aim was, to identify predictors in jaundiced patients and ideal PBD-duration. METHODS: Analysis of 304 patients with pancreatic head malignancy (56% with PBD, n = 170) undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy was performed. Postoperative morbidity and survival were analyzed. RESULTS: Postoperative complications increased after PBD (98.2% vs. 88.8%; p < 0.001). Patients with PBD received more postoperative antibiotics (42.4% vs. 21.6%; p < 0.001) and wound infections were increased (21.4% vs. 9.4%; p = 0.006). INR predicted postoperative morbidity (p = 0.026), whereas serum-bilirubin (p = 0.708), leucocytes (p = 0.158) and MELD-score (p = 0.444) had no impact. Complications were not different between long (>4 weeks) and short (<4 weeks) PBD-duration (p = 0.608). No life-threatening complications (CDIV + V) occurred after long drainage (0.0% vs. 8.9%; p = 0.028) and long-term survival was not compromised. CONCLUSIONS: INR is a suitable predictor for postoperative outcome, while serum-bilirubin levels had no predictive value. The INR can help deciding between PBD and upfront surgery. If PBD is inevitable, drainage duration of >4 weeks reduced major complications. CATEGORY: Clinical study.

Laparoscopic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic or periampullary tumours: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The benefit and safety of laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) for the treatment of pancreatic or periampullary tumours remain controversial. Studies have shown that the learning curve plays an important role in LPD, yet there are no randomised studies on LPD after the surgeons have surmounted the learning curve. The aim of this trial was to compare the outcomes of open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) with those of LPD, when performed by experienced surgeons. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial done in 14 Chinese medical centres, we recruited patients aged 18-75 years with a benign, premalignant, or malignant indication for pancreatoduodenectomy. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo either LPD or OPD. Randomisation was centralised via a computer-generated system that used a block size of four. The patients and surgeons were unmasked to study group, whereas the data collectors, outcome assessors, and data analysts were masked. LPD and OPD were performed by experienced surgeons who had already done at least 104 LPD operations. The primary outcome was the postoperative length of stay. The criteria for discharge were based on functional recovery, and analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat basis (ie, including patients who had a pancreatoduodenectomy regardless of whether the operation was the one they were assigned to). This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT03138213. FINDINGS: Between May 18, 2018, and Dec 19, 2019, we assessed 762 patients for eligibility, of whom 656 were randomly assigned to either the LPD group (n=328) or the OPD group (n=328). 31 patients in each group were excluded and 80 patients crossed over (33 from LPD to OPD, 47 from OPD to LPD). In the modified intention-to-treat analysis (297 patients in the LPD group and 297 patients in the OPD group), the postoperative length of stay was significantly shorter for patients in the LPD group than for patients in the OPD group (median 15·0 days [95% CI 14·0-16·0] vs 16·0 days [15·0-17·0]; p=0·02). 90-day mortality was similar in both groups (five [2%] of 297 patients in the LPD group vs six [2%] of 297 in the OPD group, risk ratio [RR] 0·83 [95% CI 0·26-2·70]; p=0·76). The incidence rate of serious postoperative morbidities (Clavien-Dindo grade of at least 3) was not significantly different in the two groups (85 [29%] of 297 patients in the LPD group vs 69 [23%] of 297 patients in OPD group, RR 1·23 [95% CI 0·94-1·62]; p=0·13). The comprehensive complication index score was not significantly different between the two groups (median score 8·7 [IQR 0·0-26·2] vs 0·0 [0·0-20·9]; p=0·06). INTERPRETATION: In highly experienced hands, LPD is a safe and feasible procedure. It was associated with a shorter length of stay and similar short-term morbidity and mortality rates to OPD. Nonetheless, the clinical benefit of LPD compared with OPD was marginal despite extensive procedural expertise. Future research should focus on identifying the populations that will benefit from LPD. FUNDING: National Natural Science Foundation of China and Tongji Hospital, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, China.

Prognostic impact of conservative surgery for pancreatic IPMNs.

BACKGROUND: The extent of pancreatic resection for intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) remains an unresolved issue. The study aims at analyzing the prognostic impact of conservative surgery (CS) i.e. of pancreatoduodenectomy or distal pancreatectomy, versus total pancreatectomy (TP), for pancreatic IPMNs. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed and compared data of patients who had undergone pancreatic resection for IPMNs at our center between November 2007 and April 2019. Patients were divided into two main groups based on the extent of surgery: TP-group and CS-group. Subsequently, the perioperative and the long-term outcomes were compared. Moreover, a sub-group analysis of patients with IPMN alone and patients with malignant IPMN, based on preoperative indications to surgery and post-operative histopathological findings, was also performed. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients were included in the TP-group and 73 in the CS-group. In 50 (39.7%) cases the frozen section changed the pre-operative surgical planning, with an extension of the pancreatic resection, in 43 (34.1%) cases up to a total pancreatectomy. Twenty-six patients (20.6%) with low-grade dysplasia at the frozen section underwent CS, while twenty (15.8%) underwent TP. Comparing these two sub-groups no differences were found in surgical IPMN recurrence, nor progression. The rate of overall postoperative complications was 56.6% in the TP-group and 57.5% in the CS-group (p = 0.940). Fifteen patients (20.5%) developed diabetes in the CS-group. None of the patients treated with CS developed a surgical IPMN recurrence or progression during the follow-up period. Comparing OS and DFS of the two groups, we did not find any statistically significant difference (p = 0.619 and 0.315). CONCLUSION: A timely CS can be considered an appropriate and valid strategy in the surgical treatment of the majority of pancreatic IPMNs, as it can avoid the serious long-term metabolic consequences of TP in patients with a long-life expectancy. On the contrary, TP remains mandatory in case of PDAC or high-risk features involving the entire gland.

Does minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy increase the chance of a textbook oncologic outcome?

BACKGROUND: Textbook oncologic outcome has been described in an effort to improve upon traditional outcomes defining care after pancreaticoduodenectomy for adenocarcinoma. We sought to examine whether minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy increased the likelihood of an optimal textbook oncologic outcome. METHODS: Patients undergoing open pancreaticoduodenectomy or minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy between 2010 and 2015 were identified in the National Cancer Database. Textbook oncologic outcome was defined as R0 resection with American Joint Committee on Cancer compliant lymphadenectomy, no prolonged duration of stay, no 30-day readmission/mortality, and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy. Propensity score matching was employed to evaluate adjusted rates of textbook oncologic outcome, in addition to overall survival. RESULTS: Among 12,854 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy, 48.3% were female, and the median patient age was 66 years; 87.5% underwent open pancreaticoduodenectomy, and 12.5% underwent whether minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy. After propensity score matching, there were no noted differences in the likelihood of R0 resection, adequate lymphadenectomy, nonprolonged duration of stay, no readmission, no 30-day mortality, adjuvant chemotherapy, or textbook oncologic outcome among open pancreaticoduodenectomy versus minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (P > .05). Textbook oncologic outcome was associated with an improved median overall survival (negative textbook oncologic outcome: 21.3 months vs positive textbook oncologic outcome: 27.6 months, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Although textbook oncologic outcome was associated with a survival advantage, it was only achieved in 1 in 4 patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy for adenocarcinoma. Achievement of textbook oncologic outcome was equivalent among patients who underwent minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy compared with open pancreaticoduodenectomy after propensity score matching.

Circulating Cell-Free DNA in Pancreatic Head Adenocarcinoma Undergoing Pancreaticoduodenectomy.

OBJECTIVE: Circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) analysis is recently reported as a promising prognostic biomarker in various types of cancer. This study aimed to evaluate the role of cfDNA in pancreatic head adenocarcinoma. METHODS: Data for pancreatic head adenocarcinoma undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy were studied for cfDNA. Prognostic factors were determined, and their correlation with cfDNA level was evaluated. RESULTS: The median of cfDNA for 97 cases was 7724 copies/mL, with a mean of 10,467, and ranging from 1856 to 44,203. Cell-free DNA was significantly higher in positive lymph node involvement and advanced stage III. Poor prognostic factors included high cfDNA level (>7724 copies/mL), abnormal carbohydrate antigen 19-9, abnormal carcinoembryonic antigen, and advanced stage. The 1- and 5-year survivals for those with high cfDNA were poorer, 70.2% and 21.2%, respectively, as compared with 93.4% and 23.7% for those with low cfDNA level. Only cfDNA level and stage were independent prognostic factors after multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The level of cfDNA was correlated with tumor burden. Therefore, it could be an emerging survival predictor for resectable pancreatic head adenocarcinoma, and its detection might be a promising liquid biopsy to monitor both tumor progression and treatment response.

Management of postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy: Analysis of 600 cases of pancreatoduodenectomy patients over a 10-year period at a single institution.

BACKGROUND: Although postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a common and critical complication of pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), effective strategies to prevent POPF have not yet been completely developed. Because appropriate management of POPF is important to reduce the mortality rate after PD, in this study we aimed to evaluate our approach for the management of POPF after PD, including the postoperative course. METHODS: This retrospective study included 605 consecutive patients who underwent PD at our hospital between 2010 and 2020. All patients who developed POPF were first managed conservatively, with drainage tubes placed during surgery retained to manage POPF. In cases wherein conservative treatment was unsuccessful, open drainage, followed by continuous negative pressure and continuous irrigation, was used. For open drainage, the surgical wound was opened bluntly (approximate length, 5 cm) under local anesthesia, and the fluid was directly and completely drained. RESULTS: The prevalence of POPF of grades B and C was 15.4% (n = 93) and 0.33% (n = 2), respectively. Of these patients, 1 required reoperation, 43 recovered with conservative management only, 47 required open drainage, and 4 required image-guided percutaneous drainage. Postoperative hemorrhage with a pseudoaneurysm was identified in 3 (0.66%) patients. The postoperative in-hospital mortality rate was low (n = 1, 0.16%). The rate of successful POPF management was 98.9%. CONCLUSION: Based on our high success rate in POPF management, we consider open drainage to be a safe primary management method for POPF.