Sociodemographic variation in the utilization of minimally invasive surgical approaches for pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS), when selectively utilized, has been shown to hasten recovery with outcomes comparable to open approaches, but access may not be equitable. This study explored variation in utilization of MIPS for pancreatic cancer. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried to identify patients diagnosed with a primary pancreatic neoplasm from 2010 to 2020. Study participants had diagnoses of clinical or pathologic stage 1-3 disease and received curative-intent surgery. Multivariable analyses assessed the association between surgical approach and patient and disease factors. RESULTS: Inclusion criteria identified 73,137 patients: 51,408 underwent open surgery and 21,729 received MIPS. In our multivariable analysis, Black race was associated with reduced odds of MIPS (AOR 0.88; p = 0.02), while older age (AOR 1.17; p = 0.01), later year of diagnosis (AOR 1.57; p < 0.001), and private insurance coverage (AOR 1.30; p = 0.05) were associated with increased odds. When patients with adenocarcinoma were analyzed in isolation, disparities in MIPS utilization persisted even when controlling for disease stage. CONCLUSION: Sociodemographic factors like age, race, and insurance coverage appear to vary in the utilization of MIPS technologies for the treatment of pancreatic malignancy. Addressing variation with robust mixed methods approaches in the future is proposed to incorporate prospective interventions with highly annotated outcomes for additional study.

Effects of COVID-19 Pandemic on the Treatment of Pancreatic Cancer: A Perspective from Central Europe.

BACKGROUND: This survey aimed to register changes determined by the COVID-19 pandemic on pancreatic surgery in a specific geographic area (Germany, Austria, and Switzerland) to evaluate the impact of the pandemic and obtain interesting cues for the future. METHODS: An online survey was designed using Google Forms focusing on the local impact of the pandemic on pancreatic surgery. The survey was conducted at 2 different time points, during and after the lockdown. RESULTS: Twenty-five respondents (25/56) completed the survey. Many aspects of oncological care have been affected with restrictions and delays: staging, tumor board, treatment selection, postoperative course, adjuvant treatments, outpatient care, and follow-up. Overall, 60% of respondents have prioritized pancreatic cancer patients according to stage, age, and comorbidities, and 40% opted not to operate high-risk patients. However, for 96% of participants, the standards of care were guaranteed. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS: The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic had an important impact on pancreatic cancer surgery in central Europe. Guidelines for prompt interventions and prevention of the spread of viral infections in the surgical environment are needed to avoid a deterioration of care in cancer patients in the event of a second wave or a new pandemic. High-volume centers for pancreatic surgery should be preferred and their activity maintained. Virtual conferences have proven to be efficient during this pandemic and should be implemented in the near future.

National Trends in Readmission and Resource Utilization After Pancreatectomy in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Pancreatectomy is a complex operation that has been associated with excess morbidity and mortality. Although acute index outcomes have been characterized, there are limited data available on nonelective readmission after pancreatic surgery. We sought to identify factors associated with 30-day and 30- to 90-day readmission after pancreatectomy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We utilized the National Readmissions Database between 2010 and 2016 to identify adults who underwent a pancreatectomy. The primary outcomes were 30-day (30DR) and 30- to 90-day (90DR) readmission. Secondary outcomes included nonelective readmission trends, diagnosis, length of stay, charges, and mortality. RESULTS: Of an estimated 130,267 subjects undergoing pancreatectomy, 97% survived index hospitalization. Eighteen percent of patients had nonelective 30DR while 5.6% experienced 90DR. Readmission at the two time points remained stable during the study period. After adjusting for institution, pancreatectomy volume, mortality (2.0% versus 4.9%, P < 0.001), 30DR length of stay (7.3 d versus 7.8 d, P < 0.001), and 90DR rates (6.9% versus 8.1%, P = 0.003) were significantly decreased at high-volume pancreatectomy centers compared to low-volume hospitals. Discharge to a skilled nursing facility (AOR: 1.52) or with home health care (AOR: 1.2) was associated with 30DR (P < 0.001). Patients undergoing total pancreatectomy (AOR: 1.3) or those with a substance use disorder (AOR: 1.4) among others were associated with 90DR (P ≤ 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Readmissions are common and costly after pancreatectomy. Approximately 20% of patients experience readmission within 30 d. 30DR and 90DR rates remained stable during the study. Pancreatectomy at a high-volume center was associated with decreased mortality and 90DR. The present analysis confirms associations between pancreatectomy volume, postsurgical complications, comorbidities, and readmission.

The Evolution of Surgical Strategies for Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors (Pan-NENs): Time-trend and Outcome Analysis From 587 Consecutive Resections at a High-volume Institution.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present analysis is 2-fold: first, to define the evolution of time trends on the surgical approach to pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (Pan-NENs); second, to perform a complete analysis of the predictors of oncologic outcome. BACKGROUND: Reflecting their rarity and heterogeneity, Pan-NENs represent a clinical dilemma. In particular, there is a scarcity of data regarding their long-term follow-up after surgical resection. METHODS: From the Institutional Pan-NEN database, 587 resected cases from 1990 to 2015 were extracted. The time span was arbitrarily divided into 3 discrete clusters enabling a balanced comparison between patient groups. Analyses for predictors of recurrence and survival were performed, together with conditional survival analyses. RESULTS: Among the 587 resected Pan-NENs, 75% were nonfunctioning tumors, and 5% were syndrome-associated tumors. The mean age was 54 years (±14 years), and 51% of the patients were female. The median tumor size was 20 mm (range 4 to 140), 62% were G1, 32% were G2, and 4% were G3 tumors. Time trends analysis revealed that the number of resected Pan-NENs constantly increased, while the size (from 25 to 20 mm) and G1 proportion (from 65% to 49%) decreased during the study period. After a mean follow-up of 75 months, recurrence analysis revealed that nonfunctioning tumors, tumor grade, N1 status, and vascular invasion were all independent predictors of recurrence. Regardless of size, G1 nonfunctioning tumors with no nodal involvement and vascular invasion had a negligible risk of recurrence at 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Pan-NENs have been increasingly diagnosed and resected during the last 3 decades, revealing reliable predictors of outcome. Functioning and nodal status, tumor grade, and vascular invasion accurately predict survival and recurrence with resulting implications for patient follow-up.

Opportunity Lost? Diagnostic Laparoscopy in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database.

BACKGROUND: Routine preoperative staging in pancreas cancer is controversial. We sought to evaluate the rates of diagnostic laparoscopy (DLAP) for pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We queried the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program for patients with pancreas cancer (2005-2013) and compared groups who underwent DLAP, exploratory laparotomy (XLAP), pancreas resection (RSXN) or therapeutic bypass (THBP). We compared demographics, comorbidities, postoperative complications, 30-day mortality (Chi-square P < 0.05) and trends over time (R2 0-1). RESULTS: We identified 17,138 patients (RSXN 81.8%, XLAP 16.5%, THBP 8.2%, and DLAP 12.9%), with some having multiple CPT codes. Only 10.3% (n = 1432) of RSXN patients underwent DLAP prior to resection. XLAP occurred in 49.5% of non-RSXN patients, of whom 67.1% had no other operation. The percentage of patients undergoing RSXN increased 20.3% over time (R2 0.81), while DLAP decreased 52.6% (R2 0.92). XLAP patients without other operations decreased from 4.2 to 2.4%, although not linearly (R2 0.31). Only 10.3% of XLAP had a diagnostic laparoscopy as well, leaving nearly 90% of these patients with an exploratory laparotomy without RSXN or THBP. DISCUSSION: Diagnostic laparoscopy for pancreas malignancy is becoming less common but could benefit a subset of patients who undergo open exploration without resection or therapeutic bypass.

Trends in major upper abdominal surgery for cancer in octogenarians: Has there been a change in patient selection?

BACKGROUND: Although there is a general perception that, as the older population grows in number, more are undergoing surgery, there are few data on trends in major resections for cancer and short-term outcomes in this group. METHODS: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was (NIS) used to estimate the national trends of major upper abdominal resections (esophagus, stomach, liver, pancreas) for cancer in octogenarians (aged ≥80 years) from 2001 to 2011. Resection rates performed per year were incidence-adjusted within this age group for each cancer type as determined by the NIS database. Joinpoint regression was used to calculate average annual percentage changes (AAPC) when evaluating trends over time. RESULTS: During the study period, octogenarians underwent an estimated 30,356 upper abdominal organ resections for cancer in the United States, representing 3.8% of all cancer admissions among octogenarians. Resection rates in octogenarians increased significantly over time (AAPC, 2.54; P < .001) secondary to increasing trends in pancreatic (AAPC, 11.52; P < .001) and hepatic (AAPC, 6.67; P < .001) resections. Elixhauser comorbidity index scores increased from a mean of 3.61 to 4.20 (AAPC, 1.31; P < .001), whereas inpatient mortality during this time decreased from 13.6% to 8.2% (AAPC, 5.58; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Overall rates of major upper abdominal cancer resections in octogenarians are increasing over time, driven by increases in liver and pancreatic resections. These increases were observed despite a less favorable patient morbidity profile over time. These patterns may suggest shifting selection criteria for octogenarians undergoing major abdominal surgery over time in the context of diminishing postoperative mortality. Cancer 2018;124:125-35. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Worldwide survey on opinions and use of minimally invasive pancreatic resection.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of minimally invasive pancreatic resection (MIPR) into surgical practice has been slow. The worldwide utilization of MIPR and attitude towards future perspectives of MIPR remains unknown. METHODS: An anonymous survey on MIPR was sent to the members of six international associations of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary (HPB) surgery. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 435 surgeons from 50 countries, with each surgeon performing a median of 22 (IQR 12-40) pancreatic resections annually. Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) was performed by 345 (79%) surgeons and minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) by 124 (29%). The median total personal experience was 20 (IQR 10-50) MIDPs and 12 (IQR 4-40) MIPDs. Current superiority for MIDP was claimed by 304 (70%) and for MIPD by 44 (10%) surgeons. The most frequently mentioned reason for not performing MIDP (54/90 (60%)) and MIPD (193/311 (62%)) was lack of specific training. Most surgeons (394/435 (90%)) would consider participating in an international registry on MIPR. DISCUSSION: This worldwide survey showed that most participating HPB surgeons value MIPR as a useful development, especially for MIDP, but the role and implementation of MIPD requires further assessment. Most HPB surgeons would welcome specific training in MIPR and the establishment of an international registry.

Diagnosis and treatment in chronic pancreatitis: an international survey and case vignette study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to evaluate the current opinion and clinical decision-making process of international pancreatologists, and to systematically identify key study questions regarding the diagnosis and treatment of chronic pancreatitis (CP) for future research. METHODS: An online survey, including questions regarding the diagnosis and treatment of CP and several controversial clinical case vignettes, was send by e-mail to members of various international pancreatic associations: IHPBA, APA, EPC, ESGE and DPSG. RESULTS: A total of 288 pancreatologists, 56% surgeons and 44% gastroenterologists, from at least 47 countries, participated in the survey. About half (48%) of the specialists used a classification tool for the diagnosis of CP, including the Mayo Clinic (28%), Mannheim (25%), or Büchler (25%) tools. Overall, CT was the preferred imaging modality for evaluation of an enlarged pancreatic head (59%), pseudocyst (55%), calcifications (75%), and peripancreatic fat infiltration (68%). MRI was preferred for assessment of main pancreatic duct (MPD) abnormalities (60%). Total pancreatectomy with auto-islet transplantation was the preferred treatment in patients with parenchymal calcifications without MPD abnormalities and in patients with refractory pain despite maximal medical, endoscopic, and surgical treatment. In patients with an enlarged pancreatic head, 58% preferred initial surgery (PPPD) versus 42% initial endoscopy. In patients with a dilated MPD and intraductal stones 56% preferred initial endoscopic ± ESWL treatment and 29% preferred initial surgical treatment. CONCLUSION: Worldwide, clinical decision-making in CP is largely based on local expertise, beliefs and disbeliefs. Further development of evidence-based guidelines based on well designed (randomized) studies is strongly encouraged.

Geographic disparities in surgical treatment recommendation patterns and survival for pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have described pessimistic attitudes of physicians toward recommending surgery for early-stage pancreatic adenocarcinoma. However, the impact of geographic region on recommendation patterns of surgical treatment for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer is unknown. METHODS: The SEER registry was used to identify patients with early-stage pancreatic adenocarcinoma (AJCC I-II) [2004-2013]. The exposure of interest was geographic region of diagnosis: Midwest, West, Southeast or Northeast. The endpoints of interest were recommendation of no surgery, and overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 24,408 patients were identified [Midwest - 10.6%, West - 50.1%, Southeast - 21.7% and Northeast - 17.6%]. Overall, 38% of patients had a recommendation of no surgery by their provider. On univariate analysis, the likelihood of having a recommendation of no surgery was lowest in the NE [OR: Northeast (0.8), West (1.6), Southeast (1.3), and Midwest (Ref); p < 0.05 for all]. This association persisted following risk adjustment. Geographic region was an independent predictor of mortality, irrespective of resection status. CONCLUSION: Significant disparities in surgical treatment recommendation patterns and survival for early-stage pancreatic cancer exist based on geographic location. Improved adherence to guideline-driven treatment recommendations, standardization of care processes, and regionalization may help stem the existing variability in care and outcomes.

Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Resection: Is It Really the Future?

The introduction and widespread application of minimally invasive surgery has been one of the most important innovations that radically changed the practice of surgery during the last few decades. The application to pancreatic surgery of minimally invasive approach has only recently emerged: both laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) and laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) can be competently performed. LDP and LPD are advocated to improved perioperative outcomes, including decreased blood loss, shorter length of stay, reduced postoperative pain and expedited time to functional recovery. However, the indication to minimally invasive approach for pancreatic surgery is often benign or low-grade malignant pathologies. In this review, we summarize the current data on minimally invasive pancreatic surgery, focusing on indication, perioperative and oncological outcomes.

Pan-European survey on the implementation of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery with emphasis on cancer.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive (MI) pancreatic surgery appears to be gaining popularity, but its implementation throughout Europe and the opinions regarding its use in pancreatic cancer patients are unknown. METHODS: A 30-question survey was sent between June and December 2014 to pancreatic surgeons of the European Pancreatic Club, European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association and 5 European national pancreatic societies. Incomplete responses were excluded. RESULTS: In total, 237 pancreatic surgeons responded. After excluding 34 incomplete responses, 203 responses from 27 European countries were included. 164 (81%) surgeons were employed at a university hospital, 184 (91%) performed advanced MI surgery and 148 (73%) performed MI distal pancreatectomy. MI pancreatoduodenectomy was performed by 42 (21%) surgeons, whereas 9 (4.4%) surgeons had performed more than 10 procedures. Robot-assisted MI pancreatic surgery was performed by 28 (14%) surgeons. 63 (31%) surgeons expected MI distal pancreatectomy for cancer to be inferior to open distal pancreatectomy concerning oncological outcomes. 151 (74%) surgeons expected to benefit from training in MI distal pancreatectomy and 149 (73%) were willing to participate in a randomized trial on this topic. CONCLUSIONS: MI distal pancreatectomy is a common procedure, although its use for cancer is still disputed. MI pancreatoduodenectomy is still an uncommon procedure. Specific training and a randomized trial regarding MI pancreatic cancer surgery are welcomed.

Diagnostic strategy and timing of intervention in infected necrotizing pancreatitis: an international expert survey and case vignette study.

BACKGROUND: The optimal diagnostic strategy and timing of intervention in infected necrotizing pancreatitis is subject to debate. We performed a survey on these topics amongst a group of international expert pancreatologists. METHODS: An online survey including case vignettes was sent to 118 international pancreatologists. We evaluated the use and timing of fine needle aspiration (FNA), antibiotics, catheter drainage and (minimally invasive) necrosectomy. RESULTS: The response rate was 74% (N = 87). None of the respondents use FNA routinely, 85% selectively and 15% never. Most respondents (87%) use a step-up approach in patients with infected necrosis. Walled-off necrosis (WON) is considered a prerequisite for endoscopic drainage and percutaneous drainage by 66% and 12%, respectively. After diagnosing infected necrosis, 55% routinely postpone invasive interventions, whereas 45% proceed immediately to intervention. Lack of consensus about timing of intervention was apparent on day 14 with proven infected necrosis (58% intervention vs. 42% non-invasive) as well as on day 20 with only clinically suspected infected necrosis (59% intervention vs. 41% non-invasive). DISCUSSION: The step-up approach is the preferred treatment strategy in infected necrotizing pancreatitis amongst expert pancreatologists. There is no uniformity regarding the use of FNA and timing of intervention in the first 2-3 weeks of infected necrotizing pancreatitis.

National trends in resection of cystic lesions of the pancreas.

BACKGROUND: Management of cystic lesions of the pancreas (CLP) is controversial. In this study, we sought to evaluate national changes in the resection of CLP over time, to better understand the impact of evolving guidelines on CLP management. METHODS: We used Medicare data to examine CLP resection among patients undergoing pancreatic resection between 2001 and 2012. Patients with a diagnosis of CLP were identified and compared to patients with non-CLP indications. We then examined changes over time in patient and hospital characteristics and outcomes among patients with a CLP diagnosis. RESULTS: We identified 56,419 Medicare patients undergoing pancreatic resection, of which 2129 had a CLP diagnosis. The annual number of CLP resections, and proportion of all resections performed for CLP increased significantly during the period, from 2.1% (65/3072) resections in 2001, to 4.5% (286/6348) in 2012 (p < 0.001). The proportion of CLP resections with a malignant diagnosis did not change (15.5% in 2001-2003 vs. 13.1% in 2010-2012, p = 0.4). Overall rates of 30-day mortality decreased significantly during the period (9.6% in 2001-2003 vs. 5.5% in 2010-2012, p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: CLP resections were performed with increasing frequency in Medicare patients between 2001 and 2012, but this did not correspond to increased diagnosis of malignancy. Additional research is needed to understand the influence of recent guidelines on management of CLP.

Changing indications for a total pancreatectomy: perspectives over a quarter of a century.

INTRODUCTION: The indications for a total pancreatectomy (TP), its peri-operative management, provision of pancreatic surgical services and medical treatment of the inherent exo- and endocrine deficient states have all changed considerably over recent decades. The effects of these upon the incidence, indications for and outcomes of TP are unclear. Patients undergoing TP at a single institution over a quarter of a century were reviewed to try to address these issues. METHODS: Data on patients who underwent elective (el-) and emergency TP (em-TP) between 1987 and 2013 were reviewed. Patient demographics, indications, intra-operative details, peri-operative management and long-term outcomes were analysed. Absolute numbers of TP were reported relative to partial pancreatectomy rates. RESULTS: In total, 136 patients underwent TP [98 (72.1%) el-TP; 38 (27.9%) em-TP]. There was a significant change in indication for el-TP with it increasingly performed for (an intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) and renal cell metastases whereas there was a decrease in the number of el-TP performed for chronic pancreatitis (P = 0.025). The relative rates of el-TP, however, did not change significantly across the study period (P = 0.225). The median length of stay after el-TP decreased from 19 days pre-1997 to 12 days post-1997 (P = 0.009). The relative use of em-TP declined by 0.28 percentage points per year [P = 0.018; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.04-0.41]. CONCLUSIONS: The indications for el-TP have changed; it is being performed more frequently although the proportion relative to other pancreatic resections has not changed. A decrease in the rate of em-TP is likely to reflect improved peri-operative management of a pancreatic fistula and its complications after a pancreaticoduodenectomy.

[Novelties in surgery in 2013?]. / Quoi de neuf en chirurgie?

Multidisciplinary management of colorectal liver metastases allows an increase of about 20% in the resection rate of liver metastases. It includes chemotherapy, interventional radiology and surgery. In 2013, the preliminary results of the in-situ split of the liver associated with portal vein ligation (ALLPS) are promising with unprecedented mean hypertrophy up to 70% at day 9. However, the related morbidity of this procedure is about 40% and hence should be performed in the setting of study protocol only. For pancreatic cancer, the future belongs to the use of adjuvant and neo adjuvant therapies in order to increase the resection rate. Laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery is still in evolution with significant benefits in the reduction of cost, hospital stay, and postoperative morbidity. Finally, enhanced recovery pathways (ERAS) have been validated for colorectal surgery and are currently assessed in other fields of surgery like HPB and upper GI surgery.

Is Illinois heeding the call to regionalize pancreatic surgery?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Recommendations to refer pancreatic procedures to high-volume centers have been in place for a decade. We sought to determine whether regionalization of pancreatic procedures to high-volume centers is occurring in Illinois. METHODS: We compared pancreatic procedures performed in Illinois hospitals from 2000 to 2004 [time period (TP) 1] versus 2005-2009 (TP2) for changes in inpatient mortality and hospital volume. Hospitals were categorized into low- (LVH), intermediate- (IVH), or high-volume (HVH). RESULTS: From TP1 to TP2, there was a 23% increase in absolute case volume (2,232-2,737), despite fewer hospitals performing pancreatic procedures (114-95). In hospital mortality decreased (5.5-3.3%, P < 0.01) and was lowest at HVHs. LVHs and IVHs were associated with a 4.7 and 3.0 higher odds of mortality, respectively (both P < 0.001). Overall, HVHs performed 659 (+73%) more procedures, whereas cumulative procedure volume dropped by 154 cases at LVHs (+1%) and IVHs (-18%). CONCLUSIONS: We observed limited evidence of regionalization of pancreatic procedures in Illinois. The increase in HVH case volume cannot be solely attributed to regionalization, given the corresponding modest decrease seen at non-HVHs. There is opportunity for Illinois hospitals to implement strategies such as selective referral to improve mortality after pancreatic resection.

Time trends in the treatment and prognosis of resectable pancreatic cancer in a large tertiary referral centre.

OBJECTIVES: Mortality in pancreatic cancer has remained unchanged over the last 20-30 years. The aim of the present study was to analyse survival trends in a selected population of patients submitted to resection for pancreatic cancer at a single institution. METHODS: Included were 544 patients who underwent pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer between 1990 and 2009. Patients were categorized into two subgroups according to the decade in which resection was performed (1990-1999 and 2000-2009). Predictors of survival were analysed using univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: Totals of 114 (21%) and 430 (79%) resections were carried out during the periods 1990-1999 and 2000-2009, respectively (P < 0.0001). Hospital length of stay (16 days versus 10 days; P < 0.001) and postoperative mortality (3% versus 1%; P = 0.160) decreased over time. Median disease-specific survival significantly increased from 16 months in the first period to 29 months in the second period (P < 0.001). Following multivariate analysis, poorly differentiated tumour [hazard ratio (HR) 3.1, P < 0.001], lymph node metastases (HR = 1.9, P < 0.001), macroscopically positive margin (R2) resection (HR = 3.2, P < 0.0001), no adjuvant therapy (HR = 1.6, P < 0.001) and resection performed in the period 1990-1999 (HR = 2.18, P < 0.001) were significant independent predictors of a poor outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Longterm survival after surgery for pancreatic cancer significantly improved over the period under study. Better patient selection and the routine use of adjuvant therapy may account for this improvement.

Innovation in the Surgical Management of Pancreatic Cystic Neoplasms: Same Operations, Narrower Indications, and an Individualized Approach to Decision-Making.

Historically, the management of pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCN) has been operative. Early intervention for premalignant lesions, including intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN) and mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCN), offers an opportunity to prevent pancreatic cancer-with potential decrement to patients' short-term and long-term health. The operations performed have remained fundamentally the same, with most patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy or distal pancreatectomy using oncologic principles. The role of parenchymal-sparing resection and total pancreatectomy remains controversial. We review innovations in the surgical management of PCN, focusing on the evolution of evidence-based guidelines, short-term and long-term outcomes, and individualized risk-benefit assessment.