Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy for resectable pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: A propensity score matched multicentric comparative French study.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery has gained momentum for left pancreatic resections. However, debate remains about whether it has any advantage over open surgery for distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. METHODS: This retrospective review examined pancreatectomies performed for resectable pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors at 21 centers in France between January 2014 and December 2018. Short and long-term outcomes were compared before and after propensity score matching based on tumor size, sex, age, body mass index, center, and method of pancreatic transection. RESULTS: During the period study, 274 patients underwent left pancreatic resection for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors [109 underwent distal splenopancreatectomy, and 165 underwent spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy [(splenic vessel preservation (n = 97; 58.7%)/splenic vessel resection (n = 68; 41.3%)]. Before propensity score matching, minimally invasive surgery was associated with a lower rate of major morbidity (P = .004), lower rate of postoperative delayed gastric emptying (P = .04), and higher rate of "textbook" outcomes (P = .04). After propensity score matching, there were 2 groups of 54 patients (n = 30 distal splenopancreatectomy; n = 78 spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy). Minimally invasive surgery was associated with less blood loss (P = .05), decreased rate of major morbidity (6% vs. 24%; P = .02), less delayed gastric emptying (P = .05) despite similar rates of postoperative fistula, hemorrhage, and reoperation (P > .05). The 5-year overall survival (79% vs. 75%; P = .74) and recurrence-free survival (10% vs 17%; P = .39) were similar. CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive surgery for left pancreatic resection can be safely proposed for patients with resectable left pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Minimally invasive surgery decreases the rate of major complications while providing comparable long-term oncologic outcomes.

Lymph node examination and survival in resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: The minimum number of examined lymph nodes (ELN) required for adequate staging and best prediction of survival has not been established in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The aim of the study was to investigate the influence of ELN on staging and survival in PDAC. METHODS: Patients undergoing partial or total pancreatectomy for PDAC at two European university hospitals between 2007 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Multivariate Cox regression model and survival analyses were performed to verify adequate staging. RESULTS: Overall 341 (73 per cent) patients showed lymph node metastasis (N1/N2), whereas 125 (27 per cent) patients had no lymph node involvement (N0). With increasing number of ELN, the proportion of positive lymph nodes increased. The minimum number of ELN needed to detect lymph node involvement was 21. In multivariate analysis, examination of <21 lymph nodes was a significant negative predictor for survival. Examination of ≥21 ELN reversed this effect and ruled out possible misclassification. CONCLUSION: The number of ELN affects survival in PDAC. Possible misclassification was identified when <21 lymph nodes were examined. Therefore, at least 21 lymph nodes must be examined to avoid false lymph node classification in all types of resection.

Management and outcomes of hemorrhage after distal pancreatectomy: a multicenter study at high volume centers.

BACKGROUND: Data on clinically relevant post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (CR-PPH) are derived from series mostly focused on pancreatoduodenectomy, and data after distal pancreatectomy (DP) are scarce. METHODS: All non-extended DP performed from 2014 to 2018 were included. CR-PPH encompassed grade B and C PPH. Risk factors, management, and outcomes of CR-PPH were evaluated. RESULTS: Overall, 1188 patients were included, of which 561 (47.2 %) were operated on minimally invasively. Spleen-preserving DP was performed in 574 patients (48.4 %). Ninety-day mortality, severe morbidity and CR-POPF rates were 1.1 % (n = 13), 17.4 % (n = 196) and 15.5 % (n = 115), respectively. After a median interval of 8 days (range, 0-37), 65 patients (5.5 %) developed CR-PPH, including 28 grade B and 37 grade C. Reintervention was required in 57 patients (87.7 %). CR-PPH was associated with a significant increase of 90-day mortality, morbidity and hospital stay (p < 0.001). Upon multivariable analysis, prolonged operative time and co-existing POPF were independently associated with CR-PPH (p < 0.005) while a chronic use of antithrombotic agent trended towards an increase of CR-PPH (p = 0.081). As compared to CR-POPF, the failure-to-rescue rate in patients who developed CR-PPH was significantly higher (13.8 % vs. 1.3 %, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: CR-PPH after DP remains rare but significantly associated with an increased risk of 90-day mortality and failure-to-rescue.

Impact of preoperative statin medication on long-term outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma: an international multicentric cross-sectional study.

PURPOSE: Statin treatment has been shown in certain population studies and meta-analyses to improve survival of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This study assessed if patients with statin treatment had better overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) after upfront pancreatoduodenectomy for PDAC. METHODS: Consecutive PDAC patients were retrospectively collected from three centers in Europe and USA (study period: 2000-2017). Adult patients who underwent upfront pancreatoduodenectomy and survived the first 90 postoperative days were included. Patients with metastasis at diagnosis or with macroscopic incomplete resection were excluded. Patients were considered under statin if started at least one month before pancreatoduodenectomy. Survival rates were calculated using Kaplan-Meier method and compared with log-rank test. RESULTS: A total of 496 patients were included. Median age was 67 years (IQR 59-75), 48% (n = 236) were women, and 141 patients (28%) received statin treatment already preoperatively. Patients with and without statin treatment were comparable in terms of demographics and pre-/intraoperative characteristics, except for age and pre-existing diabetes. Median OS and DFS were similar in patients with and without statin treatment (OS: 29, 95% CI 22-36 vs. 27 months, 95% CI 22-32, p = 0.370, DFS: 18, 95% CI 14-22 vs. 16 months, 95% CI 14-18, p = 0.430). On multivariable Cox regression, lymph node involvement (HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.6-2.2, p < 0.001), tumor differentiation (HR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.6, p = 0.003), and postoperative chemotherapy (HR 0.5, 95% CI 0.4-0.7, p < 0.001) were predictors of OS, whereas statin treatment was not a prognostic factor (HR 0.9, 95% CI 0.7-1.2, p = 0.376). CONCLUSION: In this international cohort of PDAC patients, statin treatment did not influence survival after upfront pancreatoduodenectomy. Nodal involvement, tumor differentiation, and postoperative chemotherapy were independent predictors of OS.

Tumor burden in patients with early and intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing liver resection: a retrospective multicenter study on clinical and oncological outcomes.

BACKGROUND: According to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system, liver resection (LR) is recommended for early-stage (BCLC-A) hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) but not for intermediate-stage (BCLC-B). This study aimed to assess the outcomes of LR in these patients using a subclassification tumour burden score (TBS). METHODS: All consecutive patients that underwent LR for BCLC-A and BCLC-B HCC between 01/2010 and 12/2020 in 4 tertiary referral centers were included. Clinical outcomes and overall survival (OS) were assessed in relation to TBS and BCLC stages. RESULTS: Among 612 patients included, 562 were classified as BCLC-A and 50 as BCLC-B. The incidence of overall postoperative complications (56.0 vs 41.5%, p = 0.053) and mortality (0 vs 1.6%, p = 1.000) were similar between BCLC-A and BCLC-B patients. OS was significantly higher for BCLC A/low TBS than BCLC B/low TBS (p = 0.009), while patients with medium and high TBS had similar OS, irrespective of BCLC stage (respectively p = 0.103 and p = 0.343). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with medium and high TBS had comparable OS and DFS, irrespective of BCLC A or B stage, and postoperative morbidity was comparable. These results highlight the need for refinement of the BCLC staging system, and LR could be considered for selected intermediate stage (BCLC-B) according to the tumour burden.

Defining Benchmark Outcomes for Distal Pancreatectomy: Results of a French Multicentric Study.

OBJECTIVE: Defining robust and standardized outcome references for distal pancreatectomy (DP) by using Benchmark analysis. BACKGROUND: Outcomes after DP are recorded in medium or small-sized studies without standardized analysis. Therefore, the best results remain uncertain. METHODS: This multicenter study included all patients undergoing DP for resectable benign or malignant tumors in 21 French expert centers in pancreas surgery from 2014 to 2018. A low-risk cohort defined by no significant comorbidities was analyzed to establish 18 outcome benchmarks for DP. These values were tested in high risk, minimally invasive and benign tumor cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 1188 patients were identified and 749 low-risk patients were screened to establish Benchmark cut-offs. Therefore, Benchmark rate for mini-invasive approach was ≥36.8%. Benchmark cut-offs for postoperative mortality, major morbidity grade ≥3a and clinically significant pancreatic fistula rates were 0%, ≤27%, and ≤28%, respectively. The benchmark rate for readmission was ≤16%. For patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma, cut-offs were ≥75%, ≥69.5%, and ≥66% for free resection margins (R0), 1-year disease-free survival and 3-year overall survival, respectively. The rate of mini-invasive approach in high-risk cohort was lower than the Benchmark cut-off (34.1% vs ≥36.8%). All Benchmark cut-offs were respected for benign tumor group. The proportion of benchmark cases was correlated to outcomes of DP. Centers with a majority of low-risk patients had worse results than those operating complex cases. CONCLUSION: This large-scale study is the first benchmark analysis of DP outcomes and provides robust and standardized data. This may allow for comparisons between surgeons, centers, studies, and surgical techniques.

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.

Management strategies of anastomotic ulcer after gastric bypass and risk factors of recurrence.

BACKGROUND: Marginal ulcers (MU) after gastric bypass are a challenging problem. The first-line treatment is a medical therapy with eviction of risk factors but is sometimes insufficient. The management strategies of intractable ulcers are still not clearly defined. The aim of our study was to analyse the risk factors for recurrence, the management strategies used and their efficiencies. METHODS: Based on a retrospective analysis of all MU managed in our tertiary care centre of bariatric surgery during the last 14 years, a descriptive analysis of the cohort, the management strategies and their efficiency were analysed. A logistic regression was done to identify the independent associated risk factors of intractable ulcer. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients matched inclusion criteria: 30 were referred to us (13 Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass-RYGB and 17 One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass-OAGB), 26 were operated on in our institution (24 RYGB and 2 OAGB). 11 patients had a complicated inaugural MU requiring an interventional procedure in emergency: 7 perforations, 4 haemorrhages. The majority of MU were treated medically as a first-line therapy (n = 45; 80.4%). 32 MU recurred: 20 patients required surgery as a 2nd line therapy, 6 were operated on as a 3rd line therapy and 1 had a surgery as a 5th line therapy. The OAGB was the only risk factor of recurrence (p = 0.018). We found that the Surgical management was significantly more frequent for patients with a OAGB (84% versus 35% for RYGB, p = 0.001); the most performed surgical procedure was a conversion of OAGB to RYGB (n = 11, 37.9%). CONCLUSION: Surgery was required for a large number of MU especially in case of recurrence, but recurrence can still occur after the surgery. The OAGB was the only risk factor of recurrence identified and conversion to RYGB seemed to be effective for the healing.

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.

Sporadic nonfunctional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: Risk of lymph node metastases and aggressiveness according to tumor size: A multicenter international study.

BACKGROUND: Although the correlation between tumor size and aggressiveness is clearly established in sporadic nonfunctional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, the management of tumors ≤2 cm remains debated. In recent guidelines, the cut-off size to operate ranged from 1 to 2 cm. The aim of this retrospective study was to report the rate of lymph nodes metastases in resected sporadic nonfunctional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, according to tumor size and, second, to identify risk factors of lymph node metastases and disease-free survival. METHODS: Resected sporadic nonfunctional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors from 9 international expert centers were included (1999-2017). Functional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, genetic syndromes, and R2 resection were excluded. Aggressiveness was defined as microvascular invasion, perineural invasion, lymph node metastases, G3 grading, distant metastases, and/or recurrence. RESULTS: Overall, 495 resected sporadic nonfunctional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors were included. For tumors up to 5 cm, the risk of lymph node metastases was increased by 1.73 for every 1 cm increase in size (odds ratio = 1.73; 95% confidence interval = 1.46-2.03). Tumor size >2 cm (P < .001), perineural invasion (P = .002), microvascular invasion (P < .001), and distant metastases (P = .008) were independently associated with lymph node metastases. Tumor size >2 cm (P = .003), R1 status (P = .004), lymph node metastases (P < .001), and World Health Organization grade 3 (P = .002) were independently associated with disease-free survival. Aggressiveness rate was 13.1% in tumors ≤1 cm and 29% in tumors between 1.1 and 2 cm. CONCLUSION: In resected sporadic nonfunctional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, the risk of lymph node metastases is correlated to tumor size. Considering that sporadic nonfunctional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors between 1.1 and 2 cm had a higher risk of lymph node metastases and recurrence compared to tumors ≤1 cm, the decision to perform surgery in this subgroup of patients should be individualized in surgically fit patients.

International Validation of a Nomogram to Predict Recurrence after Resection of Grade 1 and 2 Nonfunctioning Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Despite the low recurrence rate of resected nonfunctional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NF-pNETs), nearly all patients undergo long-term surveillance. A prediction model for recurrence may help select patients for less intensive surveillance or identify patients for adjuvant therapy. The objective of this study was to assess the external validity of a recently published model predicting recurrence within 5 years after surgery for NF-pNET in an international cohort. This prediction model includes tumor grade, lymph node status and perineural invasion as predictors. METHODS: Retrospectively, data were collected from 7 international referral centers on patients who underwent resection for a grade 1-2 NF-pNET between 1992 and 2018. Model performance was evaluated by calibration statistics, Harrel's C-statistic, and area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic curve for 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS). A sub-analysis was performed in pNETs >2 cm. The model was improved to stratify patients into 3 risk groups (low, medium, high) for recurrence. RESULTS: Overall, 342 patients were included in the validation cohort with a 5-year RFS of 83% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 78-88%). Fifty-eight patients (17%) developed a recurrence. Calibration showed an intercept of 0 and a slope of 0.74. The C-statistic was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.70-0.83), and the AUC for the prediction of 5-year RFS was 0.74. The prediction model had a better performance in tumors >2 cm (C-statistic 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: External validity of this prediction model for recurrence after curative surgery for grade 1-2 NF-pNET showed accurate overall performance using 3 easily accessible parameters. This model is available via www.pancreascalculator.com.

Management and follow-up of gallbladder polyps: updated joint guidelines between the ESGAR, EAES, EFISDS and ESGE.

MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Primary investigation of polypoid lesions of the gallbladder should be with abdominal ultrasound. Routine use of other imaging modalities is not recommended presently, but further research is needed. In centres with appropriate expertise and resources, alternative imaging modalities (such as contrast-enhanced and endoscopic ultrasound) may be useful to aid decision-making in difficult cases. Strong recommendation, low-moderate quality evidence. 2. Cholecystectomy is recommended in patients with polypoid lesions of the gallbladder measuring 10 mm or more, providing the patient is fit for, and accepts, surgery. Multidisciplinary discussion may be employed to assess perceived individual risk of malignancy. Strong recommendation, low-quality evidence. 3. Cholecystectomy is suggested for patients with a polypoid lesion and symptoms potentially attributable to the gallbladder if no alternative cause for the patient's symptoms is demonstrated and the patient is fit for, and accepts, surgery. The patient should be counselled regarding the benefit of cholecystectomy versus the risk of persistent symptoms. Strong recommendation, low-quality evidence. 4. If the patient has a 6-9 mm polypoid lesion of the gallbladder and one or more risk factors for malignancy, cholecystectomy is recommended if the patient is fit for, and accepts, surgery. These risk factors are as follows: age more than 60 years, history of primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), Asian ethnicity, sessile polypoid lesion (including focal gallbladder wall thickening > 4 mm). Strong recommendation, low-moderate quality evidence. 5. If the patient has either no risk factors for malignancy and a gallbladder polypoid lesion of 6-9 mm, or risk factors for malignancy and a gallbladder polypoid lesion 5 mm or less, follow-up ultrasound of the gallbladder is recommended at 6 months, 1 year and 2 years. Follow-up should be discontinued after 2 years in the absence of growth. Moderate strength recommendation, moderate-quality evidence. 6. If the patient has no risk factors for malignancy, and a gallbladder polypoid lesion of 5 mm or less, follow-up is not required. Strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence. 7. If during follow-up the gallbladder polypoid lesion grows to 10 mm, then cholecystectomy is advised. If the polypoid lesion grows by 2 mm or more within the 2-year follow-up period, then the current size of the polypoid lesion should be considered along with patient risk factors. Multidisciplinary discussion may be employed to decide whether continuation of monitoring, or cholecystectomy, is necessary. Moderate strength recommendation, moderate-quality evidence. 8. If during follow-up the gallbladder polypoid lesion disappears, then monitoring can be discontinued. Strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence. SOURCE AND SCOPE: These guidelines are an update of the 2017 recommendations developed between the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR), European Association for Endoscopic Surgery and other Interventional Techniques (EAES), International Society of Digestive Surgery-European Federation (EFISDS) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). A targeted literature search was performed to discover recent evidence concerning the management and follow-up of gallbladder polyps. The changes within these updated guidelines were formulated after consideration of the latest evidence by a group of international experts. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was adopted to define the strength of recommendations and the quality of evidence. KEY POINT: • These recommendations update the 2017 European guidelines regarding the management and follow-up of gallbladder polyps.

Third bariatric procedure for insufficient weight loss or weight regain: how far should we go?

BACKGROUND: Revisional procedures in bariatric surgery are increasing with several debated failure risk factors, such as super obesity and old age. No study has yet evaluated the outcomes and risks of a third bariatric procedure indicated for weight loss failure or weight regain. OBJECTIVES: To assess failure risks of a third bariatric procedure according to Reinhold's criteria (percentage excess weight loss [%EWL] ≤50% and/or body mass index [BMI] ≥35 kg/m2). SETTING: A university-affiliated tertiary care center, France. METHODS: From 2009 to 2019, clinical data and weight loss results of patients who benefited from 3 bariatric procedures for weight loss failure or weight regain were collected prospectively and analyzed using a binary logistic regression. Weight loss failure was defined according to Reinhold's criteria. RESULTS: Among 1401 bariatric procedures performed, 336 patients benefited from 2 or more procedures, and 45 had a third surgery. Eleven patients that were reoperated on because of malnutrition or gastroesophageal reflux disease were excluded from the final analysis. Among 34 patients with 3 procedures because of weight loss failure or regain, mean BMI was 48.3 ± 8.3 kg/m2, and mean age was 30 ± 10.7 years. Three out of 34 patients (9%) presented a severe complication (Dindo-Clavien IIIb) and 2 (6%) had a minor one. Achieving Reinhold's weight loss criteria after the second bariatric procedure was a significant predictor of success of the third procedure (ß = 2.9 ± 1.3 S.E.). CONCLUSION: Not reaching Reinhold's criteria after a second bariatric procedure was identified as a significant risk factor of failure of a third procedure. A third surgery should be carefully discussed especially in case of primary failure of previous procedures.

Prognostic value of positive histological margins in patients with pancreatic head ductal adenocarcinoma and lymph node involvement: an international multicentric study.

BACKGROUND: Resection margin status and lymph node (LN) involvement are known prognostic factors for patients who undergo pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This study aimed to compare overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) by resection margin status in patients with PDAC and LN involvement. METHODS: A retrospective international multicentric study was performed including four Western centers. Multivariable Cox analysis was performed to identify prognostic factors of OS and DFS. Median OS and DFS were calculated using Kaplan-Meier curves and compared using log-rank tests. RESULTS: A cohort of 814 PDAC patients with pancreatoduodenectomy were analyzed. A total of 651 patients had LN involvement (80%). On multivariable analysis R1 resection was not an independent factor of worse OS and DFS in patients with LN involvement (HR 1.1, p = 0.565; HR 1.2, p = 0.174). Only tumor size, grade, and adjuvant chemotherapy were associated with OS and DFS. Median OS and DFS were similar between patients with R0 and R1 resections (23 vs. 20 months, p = 0.196; 15 vs. 14 months, p = 0.080). CONCLUSION: Resection status was not identified as predictor of OS or DFS in PDAC patients with LN involvement. Extensive surgery to achieve R0 resection in such patients might not influence the disease course.

Reappraisal of a 2-Cm Cut-off Size for the Management of Cystic Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: A Multicenter International Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to characterize an international cohort of resected cystic pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (cPanNENs) and identify preoperative predictors of aggressive behavior. BACKGROUND: The characteristics of cPanNENs are unknown and their clinical management remains unclear. An observational strategy for asymptomatic cPanNENs ≤2 cm has been proposed by recent guidelines, but evidence is scarce and limited to single-institutional series. METHODS: Resected cPanNENs (1995-2017) from 16 institutions worldwide were included. Solid lesions (>50% solid component), functional tumors, and MEN-1 patients were excluded. Aggressiveness was defined as lymph node (LN) involvement, G3 grading, distant metastases, and/or recurrence. RESULTS: Overall, 263 resected cPanNENs were included, among which 177 (63.5%) were >2 cm preoperatively. A preoperative diagnosis of cPanNEN was established in 162 cases (61.6%) and was more frequent when patients underwent endoscopic ultrasound [EUS, odds ratio (OR) 2.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.52-4.77] and somatostatin-receptor imaging (OR 3.681, 95% CI 1.809-7.490), and for those managed in specialized institutions (OR 3.12, 95% CI 1.57-6.21). Forty-one cPanNENs (15.6%) were considered aggressive. In the whole cohort, LN involvement on imaging, age >65 years, preoperative size >2 cm, and pancreatic duct dilation were independently associated with aggressive behavior. In asymptomatic patients, older age and a preoperative size >2 cm remained independently associated with aggressiveness. Only 1 of 61 asymptomatic cPanNENs ≤2 cm displayed an aggressive behavior. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic accuracy of cPanNENs is increased by the use of EUS and somatostatin-receptor imaging and is higher in specialized institutions. Preoperative size >2 cm is independently associated with aggressive behavior. Consequently, a watch-and-wait policy for sporadic asymptomatic cPanNENs ≤2 cm seems justified and safe for most patients.

Management and Prognosis of Localized Duodenal Neuroendocrine Neoplasms.

INTRODUCTION: The characteristics, prognostic factors, and management of duodenal neuroendocrine neoplasms (dNEN) are ill-defined, given their rarity. Whether nonsurgical management might be appropriate for patients with nonmetastatic dNEN and a good prognosis, as is the case for pancreatic NEN (pNEN), is unknown. We aimed to describe the management and prognosis of nonmetastatic dNEN patients. METHODS: All consecutive patients with nonmetastatic dNEN managed between 1981 and 2018 in 2 expert centers were included. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and factors associated with recurrence were estimated. RESULTS: A total of 145 patients with dNEN were included. Twenty-eight patients with sporadic, nonfunctioning, small (median 7 mm) dNEN underwent endoscopic resection, with a 5-year RFS rate of 89.4%. Local recurrence occurred in 2 patients, who underwent surgery with no new events. The 5-year RFS rate was 87.9% in patients who underwent surgery. Upon univariate analysis, age, size, Ki67 index, and lymph node involvement (LN+) were significantly associated with worse RFS for all dNEN treated (endoscopy/surgery); multivariate analysis found that age, size, and LN+ were associated with worse RFS. CONCLUSION: Selected nonmetastatic dNEN had a favorable outcome, and a less invasive therapeutic strategy appeared more suitable than oncological surgery.

Enteral versus parenteral nutrition in the conservative treatment of upper gastrointestinal fistula after surgery: a multicenter, randomized, parallel-group, open-label, phase III study (NUTRILEAK study).

BACKGROUND: Postoperative upper gastrointestinal fistula (PUGIF) is a devastating complication, leading to high mortality (reaching up to 80%), increased length of hospital stay, reduced health-related quality of life and increased health costs. Nutritional support is a key component of therapy in such cases, which is related to the high prevalence of malnutrition. In the prophylactic setting, enteral nutrition (EN) is associated with a shorter hospital stay, a lower incidence of severe infectious complications, lower severity of complications and decreased cost compared to total parenteral nutrition (TPN) following major upper gastrointestinal (GI) surgery. There is little evidence available for the curative setting after fistula occurrence. We hypothesize that EN increases the 30-day fistula closure rate in PUGIF, allowing better health-related quality of life without increasing the morbidity or mortality. METHODS/DESIGN: The NUTRILEAK trial is a multicenter, randomized, parallel-group, open-label phase III trial to assess the efficacy of EN (the experimental group) compared with TPN (the control group) in patients with PUGIF. The primary objective of the study is to compare EN versus TPN in the treatment of PUGIF (after esophagogastric resection including bariatric surgery, duodenojejunal resection or pancreatic resection with digestive tract violation) in terms of the 30-day fistula closure rate. Secondary objectives are to evaluate the 6-month postrandomization fistula closure rate, time of first fistula closure (in days), the medical- and surgical treatment-related complication rate at 6 months after randomization, the fistula-related complication rate at 6 months after randomization, the type and severity of early (30 days after randomization) and late fistula-related complications (over 30 days after randomization), 30-day and 6-month postrandomization mortality rate, nutritional status at day 30, day 60, day 90 and day 180 postrandomization, the mean length of hospital stay, the patient's health-related quality of life (by self-assessment questionnaire), oral feeding time and direct costs of treatment. A total of 321 patients will be enrolled. DISCUSSION: The two nutritional supports are already used in daily practice, but most surgeons are reluctant to use the enteral route in case of PUGIF. This study will be the first randomized trial testing the role of EN versus TPN in PUGIF. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03742752. Registered on 14 November 2018.