Benefits and barriers to accreditation of HPB center and fellowship programs in Europe: a strength-weakness-opportunity-and-threats (SWOT) analysis by an E-AHPBA-ESSO-UEMS ad hoc working committee.

BACKGROUND: Training in HPB surgery lacks uniformity across regions covered by the E-AHPBA. Accreditation has been in place for centers and fellowship programs, but with low uptake. The decision whether to continue, change or cease such accreditation is being discussed. Thus, a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis was conducted. METHODS: A mixed-methods, cross-sectional study among stakeholders in E-AHPBA, ESSO and UEMS under the E-AHPBA executive council was founded, ensuring representation by gender and geographic distribution. RESULTS: Responses were collected from across E-AHPBA regions, with response from 15 of 24 subchapters. The most frequent and recurring themes are presented in a SWOT matrix which allows for paired evaluations of factors deemed to be helpful (Strengths and Opportunities), those that are harmful (Weaknesses and Threats). CONCLUSION: This study identified both helpful and harmful effects to an accreditation process of HPB centers or HPB fellowship training across the E-AHPBA membership region. Formal accreditation of centers is not within the scope, nor jurisdiction nor financial capacity for E-AHPBA in the current situation. A strong interest in formal HPB training should be capitalized into E-AHPBA strategic planning towards a structured accreditation system for HPB fellowship programs or HPB training tracks.

Thirty-day prevalence and clinical impact of fluid collections at the resection margin after distal pancreatectomy: Follow-up of a multicentric randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative fluid collections at the resection margin of the pancreatic stump are frequent after distal pancreatectomy, yet their clinical impact is unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the 30-day prevalence of postoperative fluid collections after distal pancreatectomy and the factors associated with a clinically relevant condition. METHODS: Patients enrolled in a randomized controlled trial of parenchymal transection with either reinforced, triple-row staple, or ultrasonic dissector underwent routine magnetic resonance 30 days postoperatively. Postoperative fluid collection was defined as a cyst-like lesion of at least 1 cm at the pancreatic resection margin. Postoperative fluid collections requiring any therapy were defined as clinically relevant. RESULTS: A total of 133 patients were analyzed; 69 were in the triple-row staple transection arm, and 64 were in the ultrasonic dissector transection arm. The overall 30-day prevalence of postoperative fluid collections was 68% (n = 90), without any significant difference between the two trial arms. Postoperative serum hyperamylasemia was more frequent in patients with postoperative fluid collections than those without (31% vs 7%, P = .001). Among the postoperative fluid collection population, an early postoperative pancreatic fistula (odds ratio 14.9, P = .002), post pancreatectomy acute pancreatitis (odds ratio 12.7, P = .036), and postoperative fluid collection size larger than 50 mm (odds ratio 6.6, P = .046) were independently associated with a clinically relevant postoperative fluid collection. CONCLUSION: Postoperative fluid collections at the resection margin are common after distal pancreatectomy and can be predicted by early assessment of postoperative serum hyperamylasemia. A preceding pancreatectomy acute pancreatitis and/or postoperative pancreatic fistula and large collections (>50 mm) were associated with a clinically relevant postoperative fluid collection, representing targets for closer follow-up or earlier therapeutic interventions.

Toward a new paradigm of care: a surgical leaders' Delphi consensus on the organizational factors of the new pancreas units (E-AHPBA PUECOF study).

Pancreas units represent new organizational models of care that are now at the center of the European debate. The PUECOF study, endorsed by the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (E-AHPBA), aims to reach an expert consensus by enquiring surgical leaders about the Pancreas Units' most relevant organizational factors, with 30 surgical leaders from 14 countries participating in the Delphi survey. Results underline that surgeons believe in the need to organize multidisciplinary meetings, nurture team leadership, and create metrics. Clinical professionals and patients are considered the most relevant stakeholders, while the debate is open when considering different subjects like industry leaders and patient associations. Non-technical skills such as ethics, teamwork, professionalism, and leadership are highly considered, with mentoring, clinical cases, and training as the most appreciated facilitating factors. Surgeons show trust in functional leaders, key performance indicators, and the facilitating role played by nurse navigators and case managers. Pancreas units have a high potential to improve patients' outcomes. While the pancreas unit model of care will not change the technical content of pancreatic surgery, it may bring surgeons several benefits, including more cases, professional development, easier coordination, less stress, and opportunities to create fruitful connections with research institutions and industry leaders.