Splanchnic vein thrombosis in necrotizing pancreatitis: a post-hoc analysis of a nationwide prospective cohort.

BACKGROUND: Treatment guidelines for splanchnic vein thrombosis in necrotizing pancreatitis are lacking due to insufficient data on the full clinical spectrum. METHODS: We performed a post-hoc analysis of a nationwide prospective necrotizing pancreatitis cohort. Multivariable analyses were used to identify risk factors and compare the clinical course of patients with and without SVT. RESULTS: SVT was detected in 97 of the 432 included patients (22%) (median onset: 4 days). Risk factors were left, central, or subtotal necrosis (OR 28.52; 95% CI 20.11-40.45), right or diffuse necrosis (OR 5.76; 95% CI 3.89-8.51), and younger age (OR 0.94; 95% CI 0.90-0.97). Patients with SVT had higher rates of bleeding (n = 10,11%) and bowel ischemia (n = 4,4%) compared to patients without SVT (n = 14,4% and n = 2,0.6%; OR 3.24; 95% CI 1.27-8.23 and OR 7.29; 95% CI 1.31-40.4, respectively), and were independently associated with ICU admission (adjusted OR 2.53; 95% CI 1.37-4.68). Spontaneous recanalization occurred in 62% of patients (n = 40/71). Radiological and clinical outcomes did not differ between patients treated with and without anticoagulants. DISCUSSION: SVT is a common and early complication of necrotizing pancreatitis, associated with parenchymal necrosis and younger age. SVT is associated with increased complications and a worse clinical course, whereas anticoagulant use does not appear to affect outcomes.

Practice variation in venous resection during pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer: A nationwide cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Practice variation exists in venous resection during pancreatoduodenectomy, but little is known about the potential causes and consequences as large studies are lacking. This study explores the potential causes and consequences of practice variation in venous resection during pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer in the Netherlands. METHODS: This nationwide retrospective cohort study included patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer in 18 centers from 2013 through 2017. RESULTS: Among 1,311 patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy, 351 (27%) had a venous resection, and the overall median annual center volume of venous resection was 4. No association was found between the center volume of pancreatoduodenectomy and the rate of venous resections, nor between patient and tumor characteristics and the rate of venous resections per center. Female sex, lower body mass index, neoadjuvant therapy, venous involvement, and stenosis on imaging were predictive for venous resection. Adjusted for these factors, 3 centers performed significantly more, and 3 centers performed significantly fewer venous resections than expected. In patients with venous resection, significantly less major morbidity (22% vs 38%) and longer overall survival (median 16 vs 12 months) were observed in centers with an above-median annual volume of venous resections (>4). CONCLUSION: Patient and tumor characteristics did not explain significant practice variation between centers in the Netherlands in venous resection during pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer. The clinical outcomes of venous resection might be related to the volume of the procedure.

Prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis after pancreatoduodenectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have reported conflicting results of prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis on infectious complications after pancreatoduodenectomy. This study evaluated the effect of prolonged antibiotics on surgical-site infections (SSIs) after pancreatoduodenectomy. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken of SSIs in patients with perioperative (within 24 h) versus prolonged antibiotic (over 24 h) prophylaxis after pancreatoduodenectomy. SSIs were classified as organ/space infections or superficial SSI within 30 days after surgery. ORs were calculated using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model. RESULTS: Ten studies were included in the qualitative analysis, of which 8 reporting on 1170 patients were included in the quantitative analysis. The duration of prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis varied between 2 and 10 days after surgery. Four studies reporting on 782 patients showed comparable organ/space infection rates in patients receiving perioperative and prolonged antibiotics (OR 1.35, 95 per cent c.i. 0.94 to 1.93). However, among patients with preoperative biliary drainage (5 studies reporting on 577 patients), organ/space infection rates were lower with prolonged compared with perioperative antibiotics (OR 2.09, 1.43 to 3.07). Three studies (633 patients) demonstrated comparable superficial SSI rates between patients receiving perioperative versus prolonged prophylaxis (OR 1.54, 0.97 to 2.44), as well as in patients with preoperative biliary drainage in 4 studies reporting on 431 patients (OR 1.60, 0.89 to 2.88). CONCLUSION: Prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis is associated with fewer organ/space infection in patients who undergo preoperative biliary drainage. However, the optimal duration of antibiotic prophylaxis after pancreatoduodenectomy remains to be determined and warrants confirmation in an RCT.

Almost 40 in 100 patients develop an infection after pancreatic surgery. This study collected research that studied the effect of prolonged antibiotics after pancreatic surgery on the number of infections after surgery. Research articles were selected if patients who received antibiotics only during surgery were compared with those who had prolonged antibiotics after surgery. Prolonged antibiotics means antibiotics for longer than 24 h after surgery. Comparing patients who had antibiotics during surgery and those who received prolonged antibiotics after surgery, this study focused on the number of abdominal infections and wound infections. Ten studies were selected, and these studies included 1170 patients in total. The duration of prolonged antibiotics ranged from 2 to 5 days after pancreatic surgery. Four studies (with 782 patients) showed comparable abdominal infections in patients who had antibiotics only during surgery and those who had prolonged antibiotics after surgery (OR 1.35, 95 per cent c.i. 0.94 to 1.93). However, for patients with a stent in the bile duct (5 studies on 577 patients), fewer abdominal infections were seen in patients who had prolonged antibiotics after surgery compared with patients who received antibiotics only during surgery (OR 2.09, 1.43 to 3.07). Three studies (633 patients) showed the same rate of wound infections in patients who had antibiotics only during surgery compared with those who received prolonged antibiotics after operation (OR 1.54, 0.97 to 2.44). The number of wound infections was also the same in patients with a stent in the bile duct (OR 1.60, 0.89 to 2.88). Prolonged antibiotics after pancreatic surgery seem to lower abdominal infections in patients who have a stent placed in the bile duct. However, the best duration of antibiotics is unclear; a decent study is needed.

Prolonged antibiotics after pancreatoduodenectomy reduce abdominal infections in patients with positive bile cultures: a dual-center cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal infections account for substantial morbidity after pancreatoduodenectomy. Contaminated bile is the presumed main risk factor, and prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis might prevent these complications. This study compared organ/space infection (OSIs) rates in patients receiving perioperative versus prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis after pancreatoduodenectomy. METHODS: Patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy in two Dutch centers between 2016 and 2019 were included. Perioperative prophylaxis was compared prolonged prophylaxis (cefuroxime and metronidazole for five days). The primary outcome was an isolated OSI: an abdominal infection without concurrent anastomotic leakage. Odds ratios (OR) were adjusted for surgical approach and pancreatic duct diameter. RESULTS: OSIs occurred in 137 out of 362 patients (37.8%): 93 patients with perioperative and 44 patients with prolonged prophylaxis (42.5% versus 30.8%, P = 0.025). Isolated OSIs occurred in 38 patients (10.5%): 28 patients with perioperative and 10 patients with prolonged prophylaxis (12.8% versus 7.0%, P = 0.079). Bile cultures were obtained in 198 patients (54.7%). Patients with positive bile cultures showed higher isolated OSI rates with perioperative compared to prolonged prophylaxis (18.2% versus 6.6%, OR 5.7, 95% CI: 1.3-23.9). CONCLUSION: Prolonged antibiotics after pancreatoduodenectomy are associated with fewer isolated OSIs in patients with contaminated bile and warrant confirmation in a randomised controlled trial (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT0578431).

Therapeutic anticoagulation for splanchnic vein thrombosis in acute pancreatitis: A national survey and case-vignette study.

BACKGROUND: Splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) is a major complication of moderate and severe acute pancreatitis. There is no consensus on whether therapeutic anticoagulation should be started in patients with acute pancreatitis and SVT. AIM: To gain insight into current opinions and clinical decision making of pancreatologists regarding SVT in acute pancreatitis. METHODS: A total of 139 pancreatologists of the Dutch Pancreatitis Study Group and Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group were approached to complete an online survey and case vignette survey. The threshold to assume group agreement was set at 75%. RESULTS: The response rate was 67% (n = 93). Seventy-one pancreatologists (77%) regularly prescribed therapeutic anticoagulation in case of SVT, and 12 pancreatologists (13%) for narrowing of splanchnic vein lumen. The most common reason to treat SVT was to avoid complications (87%). Acute thrombosis was the most important factor to prescribe therapeutic anticoagulation (90%). Portal vein thrombosis was chosen as the most preferred location to initiate therapeutic anticoagulation (76%) and splenic vein thrombosis as the least preferred location (86%). The preferred initial agent was low molecular weight heparin (LMWH; 87%). In the case vignettes, therapeutic anticoagulation was prescribed for acute portal vein thrombosis, with or without suspected infected necrosis (82% and 90%), and thrombus progression (88%). Agreement was lacking regarding the selection and duration of long-term anticoagulation, the indication for thrombophilia testing and upper endoscopy, and about whether risk of bleeding is a major barrier for therapeutic anticoagulation. CONCLUSION: In this national survey, the pancreatologists seemed to agree on the use of therapeutic anticoagulation, using LMWH in the acute phase, for acute portal thrombosis and in the case of thrombus progression, irrespective of the presence of infected necrosis.

Intraoperative Ultrasound During Surgical Exploration in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer and Vascular Involvement (ULTRAPANC): A Prospective Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Determining the resectability of pancreatic cancer with vascular involvement on preoperative computed tomography imaging remains challenging, especially following preoperative chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy. Intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) may provide real-time additional information, but prospective multicenter series confirming its value are lacking. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective multicenter study included patients undergoing surgical exploration for pancreatic cancer with vascular involvement. All patients underwent IOUS at the start of explorative laparotomy. Primary outcomes were resectability status as defined by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the extent of vascular involvement. RESULTS: Overall, 85 patients were included, of whom 74 (87%) were post preoperative chemotherapy, and mostly following FOLFIRINOX regimen (n = 57; 76%). On the basis of preoperative imaging, 34 (40%) patients were staged as resectable (RPC), 32 (38%) borderline resectable (BRPC), and 19 (22%) locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). IOUS changed the resectability status in 32/85 (38%) patients (p < 0.001), including 8/19 (42%) patients with LAPC who were downstaged (4 to BRPC, 4 to RPC), and 22/32 (69%) patients with BRPC who were downstaged to RPC. Among patients with presumed superior mesenteric artery (SMA) involvement, 20/28 (71%) had no SMA involvement on IOUS. In 15 of these 20 patients a pancreatic resection was performed, all with R0 SMA margin. CONCLUSION: IOUS during surgical exploration for pancreatic cancer and vascular involvement downstaged the resectability status in over one-third of patients, which could facilitate progress during surgical exploration. This finding should be confirmed by larger studies, including detailed pathology assessment. Trial Registration www.trialregister.nl (NL7621).

International assessment and validation of the prognostic role of lymph node ratio in patients with resected pancreatic head ductal adenocarcinoma.

Background: Lymph node ratio (LNR; positive/harvested lymph nodes) was identified as overall survival predictor in several cancers, including pancreatic adenocarcinoma. It remains unclear if LNR is predictive of overall survival in pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients staged pN2. This study assessed the prognostic overall survival role of LNR in pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients in relation with lymph node involvement. Methods: A retrospective international study in six different centers (Europe and United States) was performed. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy from 2000 to 2017 were included. Patients with neoadjuvant treatment, metastases, R2 resections, or missing data regarding nodal status were excluded. Survival curves were calculated using Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank test. Multivariable Cox regressions were performed to find independent overall survival predictors adjusted for potential confounders. Results: A total of 1,327 patients were included. Lymph node involvement (pN+) was found in 1,026 patients (77%), 561 pN1 (55%) and 465 pN2 (45%). Median LNR in pN+ patients was 0.214 [interquartile range (IQR): 0.105-0.364]. On multivariable analysis, LNR was the strongest overall survival predictor in the entire cohort [hazard ratio (HR) =5.5; 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.1-9.9; P<0.001] and pN+ patients (HR =3.8; 95% CI: 2.2-6.6; P<0.001). Median overall survival was better in patients with LNR <0.225 compared to patients with LNR ≥0.225 in the entire cohort and pN+ patients. Similar results were found in pN2 patients (worse overall survival when LNR ≥0.225). Conclusions: LNR appeared as an important prognostic factor in patients undergoing surgery for pancreatic adenocarcinoma and permitted to stratify overall survival in pN2 patients. LNR should be routinely used in complement to tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stage to better predict patient prognosis.

External validation of three lymph node ratio-based nomograms predicting survival using an international cohort of patients with resected pancreatic head ductal adenocarcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Lymph node ratio (LNR) is an important prognostic factor of survival in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This study aimed to validate three LNR-based nomograms using an international cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive PDAC patients who underwent upfront pancreatoduodenectomy from six centers (Europe/USA) were collected (2000-2017). Patients with metastases, R2 resection, missing LNR data, and who died within 90 postoperative days were excluded. The updated Amsterdam nomogram, the nomogram by Pu et al., and the nomogram by Li et al. were selected. For the validation, calibration, discrimination capacity, and clinical utility were assessed. RESULTS: After exclusion of 176 patients, 1'113 patients were included. Median overall survival (OS) of the cohort was 23 months (95% CI: 21-25). For the three nomograms, Kaplan-Meier curves showed significant OS diminution with increasing scores (p < 0.01). All nomograms showed good calibration (non-significant Hosmer-Lemeshow tests). For the Amsterdam nomogram, area under the ROC curve (AUROC) for 3-year OS was 0.64 and 0.67 for 5-year OS. Sensitivity and specificity for 3-year OS prediction were 65% and 59%. Regarding the nomogram by Pu et al., AUROC for 3- and 5-year OS were 0.66 and 0.70. Sensitivity and specificity for 3-year OS prediction were 68% and 53%. For the Li nomogram, AUROC for 3- and 5-year OS were 0.67 and 0.71, while sensitivity and specificity for 3-year OS prediction were 63% and 60%. CONCLUSION: The three nomograms were validated using an international cohort. Those nomograms can be used in clinical practice to evaluate survival after pancreatoduodenectomy for PDAC.

Visceral adipose tissue is a better predictor than BMI in the alternative Fistula Risk Score in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy.

BACKGROUND: Muscle attenuation (MA) and visceral adipose tissue (VAT) have not yet been included in the currently used alternative Fistula Risk Score (a-FRS). The aim of this study was to examine the added value of these parameters as predictors of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) in the a-FRS after pancreatoduodenectomy compared to Body Mass Index (BMI). METHODS: A single center retrospective cohort study was performed in patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy between 2009 and 2018. The a-FRS model was reproduced, MA and VAT were both combined and separately added to the model instead of BMI using logistic regression analysis. Model discrimination was assessed by ROC-curves. RESULTS: In total, 329 patients were included of which 55 (16.7%) developed CR-POPF. The a-FRS model showed an AUC of 0.74 (95%CI: 0.68-0.80). In this model, BMI was not significantly associated with CR-POPF (p = 0.16). The MA + VAT model showed an AUC of 0.81 (95%CI: 0.75-0.86). VAT was significantly associated with CR-POPF (per cm2, OR: 1.01; 95%CI: 1.00-1.01; p < 0.001). The AUC of the MA + VAT model differed significantly from the AUC of the a-FRS model (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Visceral adipose tissue is of added value in the a-FRS compared to BMI in predicting CR-POPF in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy.

High Systemic Immune Inflammation Index Is Associated With Low Skeletal Muscle Quantity in Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

Background and Aims: Failing immune surveillance in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is related to poor prognosis. PDAC is also characterized by its substantial alterations to patients' body composition. Therefore, we investigated associations between the host systemic immune inflammation response and body composition in patients with resected PDAC. Methods: Patients who underwent a pancreatectomy for PDAC between 2004 and 2016 in two tertiary referral centers were included. Skeletal muscle mass quantity and muscle attenuation, as well as subcutaneous and visceral adipose tissue at the time of diagnosis, were determined by CT imaging measured transversely at the third lumbar vertebra level. Baseline clinicopathological characteristics, laboratory values including the systemic immune inflammation index (SIII), postoperative, and survival outcomes were collected. Results: A total of 415 patients were included, and low skeletal muscle mass quantity was found in 273 (65.7%) patients. Of the body composition indices, only low skeletal muscle mass quantity was independently associated with a high (≥900) SIII (OR 7.37, 95% CI 2.31-23.5, p=0.001). The SIII was independently associated with disease-free survival (HR 1.86, 95% CI 1.12-3.04), and cancer-specific survival (HR 2.21, 95% CI 1.33-3.67). None of the body composition indices were associated with survival outcomes. Conclusion: This study showed a strong association between preoperative low skeletal muscle mass quantity and elevated host systemic immune inflammation in patients with resected PDAC. Understanding how systemic inflammation may contribute to changes in body composition or whether reversing these changes may affect the host systemic immune inflammation response could expose new therapeutic possibilities for improving patients' survival outcomes.

Therapeutic anticoagulation for splanchnic vein thrombosis in acute pancreatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The optimal management of patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) and splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) remains unknown. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to see if therapeutic anticoagulation (AC) improves outcomes in patients with AP and SVT. METHODS: A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Main outcomes were recanalization, recurrent venous thromboembolism, development of varices, collaterals or cavernoma, haemorrhage and mortality. Meta-analysis were performed with the Mantel-Haenszel random effect models. RESULTS: Seven retrospective cohort studies (3495 patients) were included. SVT occurred in 233 (7%) patients and involved most frequently the splenic vein (44%). Therapeutic AC was administered to 109 (47%) patients, most frequently to those with triple vessel thrombosis (72%) and least to those with isolated splenic vein (22%) or superior mesenteric vein thrombosis (0%). Most studies administered (low molecular weight) heparin followed by warfarin (duration ranged between 1.5 and 12 months). This meta-analysis showed an absolute risk difference of 9% (95% confidence interval [CI] = -11-28%) for recanalization, -3% (95% CI = -19-12%) for the development of varices, collaterals or cavernoma, 3% (95% CI = -6-12%) for haemorrhage and 2% (95% CI = -8-12%) for mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the currently available data, it remains unclear if therapeutic anticoagulation provides benefit to acute pancreatitis patients with splanchnic vein thrombosis. These results are based on low quality data underlining the need for further higher quality studies.

Pain management, fluid therapy and thromboprophylaxis after pancreatoduodenectomy: a worldwide survey among surgeons.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this survey was to assess practices regarding pain management, fluid therapy and thromboprophylaxis in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy on a global basis. METHODS: This survey study among surgeons from eight (inter)national scientific societies was performed according to the CHERRIES guideline. RESULTS: Overall, 236 surgeons completed the survey. ERAS protocols are used by 61% of surgeons and respectively 82%, 93%, 57% believed there is a relationship between pain management, fluid therapy, and thromboprophylaxis and clinical outcomes. Epidural analgesia (50%) was most popular followed by intravenous morphine (24%). A restrictive fluid therapy was used by 58% of surgeons. Chemical thromboprophylaxis was used by 88% of surgeons. Variations were observed between continents, most interesting being the choice for analgesic technique (transversus abdominis plane block was popular in North America), restrictive fluid therapy (little use in Asia and Oceania) and duration of chemical thromboprophylaxis (large variation). CONCLUSION: The results of this international survey showed that only 61% of surgeons practice ERAS protocols. Although the majority of surgeons presume a relationship between pain management, fluid therapy and thromboprophylaxis and clinical outcomes, variations in practices were observed. Additional studies are needed to further optimize, standardize and implement ERAS protocols after pancreatic surgery.

External Validity of the Multicenter Randomized PREOPANC Trial on Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Pancreatic Cancer: Outcome of Eligible but Nonrandomized Patients.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the accrual proportion and patients' reasons for not participating in the PREOPANC trial on neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus immediate surgery in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, and to compare these patients' outcomes with those of patients who had been randomized in the trial. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The external validity of multicenter randomized trials in cancer treatment has been criticized for suboptimal non-representative inclusion. In trials, it is unclear how outcomes compare between randomized and nonrandomized patients. METHODS: At 8 of 16 participant centers, this multicenter observational study identified validation patients, who had been eligible but not randomized during recruitment for the PREOPANC trial. We assessed the accrual proportion, investigated their most common reasons for not participating in the trial, and compared resection rates, radical (R0) resection rates, and overall survival between the validation patients and PREOPANC patients, who had been randomized in the trial to immediate surgery. RESULTS: In total, 455 patients had been eligible during the recruitment period, 151 of whom (33%) had been randomized. Fifty-five percent of the 304 validation patients had refused to participate. Median overall survival in the validation group was 15.2 months, against 15.5 months in the PREOPANC group (P = 1.00). The respective resection rates (76% vs 73%) and R0 resection rates (51% vs 46%) did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: The PREOPANC trial included a reasonable percentage of 33% of eligible patients. In terms of the outcomes survival, resection rate, and R0 resection rate, this appeared to be a representative group.

An Immunohistochemical Evaluation of Tumor-Associated Glycans and Mucins as Targets for Molecular Imaging of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

Targeted molecular imaging may overcome current challenges in the preoperative and intraoperative delineation of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Tumor-associated glycans Lea/c/x, sdi-Lea, sLea, sLex, sTn as well as mucin-1 (MUC1) and mucin-5AC (MU5AC) have gained significant interest as targets for PDAC imaging. To evaluate their PDAC molecular imaging potential, biomarker expression was determined using immunohistochemistry on PDAC, (surrounding) chronic pancreatitis (CP), healthy pancreatic, duodenum, positive (LN+) and negative lymph node (LN-) tissues, and quantified using a semi-automated digital image analysis workflow. Positive expression on PDAC tissues was found on 83% for Lea/c/x, 94% for sdi-Lea, 98% for sLea, 90% for sLex, 88% for sTn, 96% for MUC1 and 67% for MUC5AC, where all were not affected by the application of neoadjuvant therapy. Compared to PDAC, all biomarkers were significantly lower expressed on CP, healthy pancreatic and duodenal tissues, except for sTn and MUC1, which showed a strong expression on duodenum (sTn tumor:duodenum ratio: 0.6, p < 0.0001) and healthy pancreatic tissues (MUC1 tumor:pancreas ratio: 1.0, p > 0.9999), respectively. All biomarkers are suitable targets for correct identification of LN+, as well as the distinction of LN+ from LN- tissues. To conclude, this study paves the way for the development and evaluation of Lea/c/x-, sdi-Lea-, sLea-, sLex- and MUC5AC-specific tracers for molecular imaging of PDAC imaging and their subsequent introduction into the clinic.

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.

Incidence, timing and risk factors of venous thromboembolic events in patients with pancreatic cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Pancreatic cancer is associated with a high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, comprehensive data on incidence, timing and relevant determinants of VTE in this particular population are scarce. Current study assesses incidence, timing and predictors of VTE in pancreatic cancer through different phases of disease. METHODS: All pancreatic cancer patients treated in our tertiary referral center between 2013 through 2017 were studied. Occurrence of VTE was evaluated from diagnosis through end of follow-up or death. Relevant determinants of VTE were identified in logistic regression models. Hazard ratios were calculated to evaluate impact of VTE on overall survival. RESULTS: In total, 361 patients were followed for a median period of 43 months; 64 were diagnosed with VTE (18%). Most were tumor related thrombosis (59%), incidental (75%) and occurred after anti-cancer treatment had been stopped (80%), only 1.6% occurred during remission phase. Stage IV pancreatic cancer was a predictor for VTE (hazard ratio (HR) 2.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.9-6.8). Biliary drainage (HR 0.52, 95%CI 0.28-0.98) and tumor resection (HR 0.45, 95%CI 0.45-1.83) were protective factors. VTE was not associated with worse survival (HR 1.3; 95% CI 0.97-1.74). CONCLUSIONS: VTE in pancreatic cancer is disease-stage dependent, with 80% occurring in advanced phases of disease when patients no longer receive active treatment. We speculate that this is the main reason for the absence of a survival effect of VTE in our cohort. These practice-based findings should be taken into account when considering wide-spread introduction of primary thromboprophylaxis in patients with pancreatic cancer.