Total Neoadjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer-What Is Totality?

This article discusses the meaning of the word total in relation to total neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer.

International survey on opinions and use of robot-assisted and laparoscopic minimally invasive pancreatic surgery: 5-year follow up.

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the value of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS) has been increasing but it is unclear how this has influenced the view of pancreatic surgeons on MIPS. METHODS: An anonymous survey was sent to members of eight international Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Associations. Outcomes were compared with the 2016 international survey. RESULTS: Overall, 315 surgeons from 47 countries participated. The median volume of pancreatic resections per center was 70 (IQR 40-120). Most surgeons considered minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) superior to open (ODP) (94.6%) and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) superior to minimally invasive (MIPD) (67.9%). Since 2016, there has been an increase in the number of surgeons performing both MIDP (79%-85.7%, p = 0.024) and MIPD (29%-45.7%, p < 0.001), and an increase in the use of the robot-assisted approach for both MIDP (16%-45.6%, p < 0.001) and MIPD (23%-47.9%, p < 0.001). The use of laparoscopy remained stable for MIDP (91% vs. 88.1%, p = 0.245) and decreased for MIPD (51%-36.8%, p = 0.024). CONCLUSION: This survey showed considerable changes of MIPS since 2016 with most surgeons considering MIDP superior to ODP and an increased use of robot-assisted MIPS. Surgeons prefer OPD and therefore the value of MIPD remains to be determined in randomized trials.

Surveillance for Presumed BD-IPMN of the Pancreas: Stability, Size, and Age Identify Targets for Discontinuation.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Currently, most patients with branch duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (BD-IPMN) are offered indefinite surveillance, resulting in health care costs with questionable benefits regarding cancer prevention. This study sought to identify patients in whom the risk of cancer is equivalent to an age-matched population, thereby justifying discontinuation of surveillance. METHODS: International multicenter study involving presumed BD-IPMN without worrisome features (WFs) or high-risk stigmata (HRS) at diagnosis who underwent surveillance. Clusters of individuals at risk for cancer development were defined according to cyst size and stability for at least 5 years, and age-matched controls were used for comparison using standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) for pancreatic cancer. RESULTS: Of 3844 patients with presumed BD-IPMN, 775 (20.2%) developed WFs and 68 (1.8%) HRS after a median surveillance of 53 (interquartile range 53) months. Some 164 patients (4.3%) underwent surgery. Of the overall cohort, 1617 patients (42%) remained stable without developing WFs or HRS for at least 5 years. In patients 75 years or older, the SIR was 1.12 (95% CI, 0.23-3.39), and in patients 65 years or older with stable lesions smaller than 15 mm in diameter after 5 years, the SIR was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.11-3.42). The all-cause mortality for patients who did not develop WFs or HRS for at least 5 years was 4.9% (n = 79), and the disease-specific mortality was 0.3% (n = 5). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of developing pancreatic malignancy in presumed BD-IPMN without WFs or HRS after 5 years of surveillance is comparable to that of the general population depending on cyst size and patient age. Surveillance discontinuation could be justified after 5 years of stability in patients older than 75 years with cysts <30 mm, and in patients 65 years or older who have cysts ≤15 mm.

Extending Quality Improvement for Pancreatoduodenectomy Within the High-Volume Setting: The Experience Factor.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the association of a surgeon's experience with postoperative outcomes of pancreatoduodenectomies (PDs) when stratified by Fistula Risk Score (FRS). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Centralization is now well-established for pancreatic surgery. Nevertheless, the benefits of individual surgeon's experience in high-volume settings remains undefined. METHODS: Pancreatoduodenectomies performed by 82 surgeons across 18 international, specialty institutions (median:140 PD/year) were analyzed. Surgeon cumulative PD volume was linked with postoperative outcomes through multivariable models, adjusted for patient/operative characteristics and the FRS. Then, surgeon experience was also stratified by the ten, previously defined, most clinically impactful scenarios for clinically-relevant pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) development. RESULTS: Of 8,189 PDs, 18.7% suffered severe complications (Accordion≥3), 4.8% were reoperated upon and 2.2% expired. Although the most experienced surgeons (top-quartile; >525 career PDs) more often operated on riskier cases, their experience was significantly associated with declines in CR-POPF (P<0.001), severe complications (P=0.008), reoperations (P<0.001), and length of stay (LOS) (P<0.001) - accentuated even more in the most impactful FRS scenarios (2,830 patients). Risk-adjusted models indicate male gender, increasing age, ASA class and FRS, but not surgeon experience, as being associated with severe complications, failure-to-rescue and mortality. Instead, upper-echelon experience demonstrates significant reductions in CR-POPF (OR 0.66), reoperations (OR 0.64) and LOS (OR 0.65) in moderate-to-high fistula risk circumstances (FRS≥3, 68% of cases). CONCLUSIONS: At specialty institutions, major morbidity, mortality and failure-to-rescue are primarily associated with baseline patient characteristics, while cumulative surgical experience impacts pancreatic fistula occurrence and its attendant effects for most, higher-risk pancreatoduodenectomies. These data also suggest an extended proficiency curve exists for this operation.

The risk of clinically-relevant pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy is better predicted by a postoperative trend in drain fluid amylase compared to day 1 values in isolation.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies support early drain removal after pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with a drain fluid amylase on postoperative day 1 (DFA1) level of ≤5,000. The use of DFA1 to guide drain management is increasingly common among pancreatic surgeons; however, the benefit of checking additional drain fluid amylases beyond DFA1 is less known. We sought to determine whether a change in drain fluid amylase (ΔDFA) is a more reliable predictor of clinically relevant postoperative fistula than DFA1 alone. METHODS: Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Plan, pancreaticoduodenectomy patients with intraoperative drain placement, known DFA1, highest recorded drain fluid amylase value on postoperative day 2 to 5 (DFA2nd), day of drain removal, and clinically relevant postoperative fistula status were reviewed. Logistic models compared the predictive performance of DFA1 alone versus DFA1 + ΔDFA. RESULTS: A total of 2,417 patients with an overall clinically relevant postoperative fistula rate of 12.6% were analyzed. On multivariable regression, clinical predictors for clinically relevant postoperative fistula included body mass index, steroid use, operative time, and gland texture. These variables were used to develop model 1 (DFA1 alone) and model 2 (DFA1 + ΔDFA). Model 2 outperformed model 1 in predicting the risk of clinically relevant postoperative fistula. According to model 2 predictions, the risk of clinically relevant postoperative fistula increased with any rise in drain fluid amylase, regardless of whether the DFA1 was above or below 5,000 U/L. The risk of clinically relevant postoperative fistula significantly decreased with any drop in drain fluid amylase, with an odds reduction of approximately 50% corresponding with a 70% decrease in drain fluid amylase (P < .001). A risk calculator was developed using DFA1 and a secondary DFA value in conjunction with other clinical predictors for clinically relevant postoperative fistula. CONCLUSION: Clinically relevant postoperative fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy is more accurately predicted by DFA1 and ΔDFA versus DFA1 in isolation. We developed a novel risk calculator to provide an individualized approach to drain management after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Paul Greig, MD - Professor of Surgery, University of Toronto.

SummaryDr. Paul Greig is an icon of surgical education, transplantation, hepatobiliary surgery and Canadian surgery. Dr. Greig has trained experts in these fields all over the world and is regarded as one of the most important surgical educators in the past 25 years.

Distal Pancreatectomy Fistula Risk Score (D-FRS): Development and International Validation.

OBJECTIVE: To develop 2 distinct preoperative and intraoperative risk scores to predict postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after distal pancreatectomy (DP) to improve preventive and mitigation strategies, respectively. BACKGROUND: POPF remains the most common complication after DP. Despite several known risk factors, an adequate risk model has not been developed yet. METHODS: Two prediction risk scores were designed using data of patients undergoing DP in 2 Italian centers (2014-2016) utilizing multivariable logistic regression. The preoperative score (calculated before surgery) aims to facilitate preventive strategies and the intraoperative score (calculated at the end of surgery) aims to facilitate mitigation strategies. Internal validation was achieved using bootstrapping. These data were pooled with data from 5 centers from the United States and the Netherlands (2007-2016) to assess discrimination and calibration in an internal-external validation procedure. RESULTS: Overall, 1336 patients after DP were included, of whom 291 (22%) developed POPF. The preoperative distal fistula risk score (preoperative D-FRS) included 2 variables: pancreatic neck thickness [odds ratio: 1.14; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11-1.17 per mm increase] and pancreatic duct diameter (OR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.32-1.65 per mm increase). The model performed well with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.83 (95% CI: 0.78-0.88) and 0.73 (95% CI: 0.70-0.76) upon internal-external validation. Three risk groups were identified: low risk (<10%), intermediate risk (10%-25%), and high risk (>25%) for POPF with 238 (18%), 684 (51%), and 414 (31%) patients, respectively. The intraoperative risk score (intraoperative D-FRS) added body mass index, pancreatic texture, and operative time as variables with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.80 (95% CI: 0.74-0.85). CONCLUSIONS: The preoperative and the intraoperative D-FRS are the first validated risk scores for POPF after DP and are readily available at: http://www.pancreascalculator.com . The 3 distinct risk groups allow for personalized treatment and benchmarking.

A Simple Classification of Pancreatic Duct Size and Texture Predicts Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula: A classification of the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop a classification system for pancreas-associated risk factors in pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is the most relevant PD-associated complication. A simple standardized surgical reporting system based on pancreas-associated risk factors is lacking. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted to identify studies investigating clinically relevant (CR) POPF (CR-POPF) and pancreas-associated risk factors after PD. A meta-analysis of CR-POPF rate for texture of the pancreas (soft vs not-soft) and main pancreatic duct (MPD) diameter was performed using the Mantel-Haenszel method. Based on the results, the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) proposes the following classification: A, not-soft (hard) texture and MPD >3 mm; B, not-soft (hard) texture and MPD ≤3 mm; C, soft texture and MPD >3 mm; D, soft texture and MPD ≤3 mm. The classification was evaluated in a multi-institutional, international cohort. RESULTS: Of the 2917 articles identified, 108 studies were included in the analyses. Soft pancreatic texture was significantly associated with the development of CR-POPF [odds ratio (OR) 4.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.67-4.89, P < 0.01) following PD. Similarly, MPD diameter ≤3 mm significantly increased CR-POPF risk compared with >3 mm diameter MPDs (OR 3.66, 95% CI 2.62-5.12, P < 0.01). The proposed 4-stage system was confirmed in an independent cohort of 5533 patients with CR-POPF rates of 3.5%, 6.2%, 16.6%, and 23.2% for type A-D, respectively ( P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: For future pancreatic surgical outcomes studies, the ISGPS recommends reporting these risk factors according to the proposed classification system for better comparability of results.

Helping Patients Understand Pancreatic Cancer Using Animated Pancreas Patient Education With Visual Formats of Learning.

OBJECTIVES: Patient education and resources that address barriers to health literacy to improve understanding in pancreatic cancer are limited. We evaluated the impact and outcomes benefits of Animated Pancreas Patient (APP) cancer educational modules (APP website and YouTube). METHODS: A retrospective study of APP metrics and utilization data from September 2013 to February 2021 was conducted. We evaluated audience reach and calculated top views by media type (animation/expert video/patient video/slideshow) and top retention videos from the modules. RESULTS: During the study period, APP had 4,551,079 views worldwide of which 2,757,064 unique visitors or 60% were from the United States. Of these, 54% were patients, 17% were family members or caregivers, 16% were health care providers, and 13% were other. The most popular topic viewed among the animations was "Understanding Clinical Trials" (n = 182,217), and the most common expert video viewed was "What are the different stages of pancreatic cancer?" (n = 15,357). CONCLUSIONS: Pancreatic cancer patient education using APP's visual formats of learning demonstrated a wide reach and had a significant impact on improved understanding among patients, families, and caregivers. Continued efforts should be made to provide patient resources that address health literacy, better quality of life and improved health outcomes in pancreatic cancer.

Fourteen years of pancreatic surgery for malignancy among ACS-NSQIP centers: Trends in major morbidity and mortality.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was established to help participating hospitals track and report surgical complications with the goal of improving surgical care. We sought to determine whether this has led to improvements in surgical outcomes for pancreatic malignancies. METHODS: Patients with pancreatic malignancies who underwent surgical resection were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2006-2019). Thirty-day postoperative major morbidity and mortality were analyzed by year. Major morbidity included organ and deep surgical site infection, venous thromboembolism, cardiac event, pneumonia, acute renal failure, sepsis, and respiratory failure. RESULTS: Of the 28,888 patients identified, 51% were male, the median age was 68, 74.3% underwent a pancreaticoduodenectomy, and 25.7% underwent a distal pancreatectomy. Among patients who underwent a pancreaticoduodenectomy, there was a significant increase in major morbidity (annual percent change 0.77, P = .012) driven by increases in organ space surgical site infection (annual percent change 3.52, P < .001) and venous thromboembolism (annual percent change 4.72, P = .005). However, there was a decrease in postoperative mortality (annual percent change -4.58, P = .001). For distal pancreatectomy patients, there was no change in rates of overall major morbidity (annual percent change -1.35, P = .08) or mortality (annual percent change -3.21, P = .25). CONCLUSION: Although major morbidity and mortality have not significantly changed for distal pancreatectomy patients, mortality has steadily decreased for patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy, despite an increase in major morbidity. Whether this trend reflects a change in patient selection, an increase in detection of postoperative morbidities and/or an improvement in mitigation of these morbidities warrants further study.

The Fistula Risk Score Catalog: Toward Precision Medicine for Pancreatic Fistula After Pancreatoduodenectomy.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to present a full spectrum of individual patient presentations of pancreatic fistula risk, and to define the utility of mitigation strategies amongst some of the most prevalent, and vulnerable scenarios surgeons encounter. BACKGROUND: The FRS has been utilized to identify technical strategies associated with reduced CR-POPF incidence across various risk strata. However, risk-stratification using the FRS has never been investigated with greater granularity. By deriving all possible combinations of FRS elements, individualized risk assessment could be utilized for precision medicine purposes. METHODS: FRS profiles and outcomes of 5533 PDs were accrued from 17 international institutions (2003-2019). The FRS was used to derive 80 unique combinations of patient "scenarios." Risk-matched analyses were conducted using a Bonferroni adjustment to identify scenarios with increased vulnerability for CR-POPF occurrence. Subsequently, these scenarios were analyzed using multivariable regression to explore optimal mitigation approaches. RESULTS: The overall CR-POPF rate was 13.6%. All 80 possible scenarios were encountered, with the most frequent being scenario #1 (8.1%) - the only negligible-risk scenario (CR-POPF rate = 0.7%). The moderate-risk zone had the most scenarios (50), patients (N = 3246), CR-POPFs (65.2%), and greatest non-zero discrepancy in CR-POPF rates between scenarios (18-fold). In the risk-matched analysis, 2 scenarios (#59 and 60) displayed increased vulnerability for CR-POPF relative to the moderate-risk zone (both P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis revealed factors associated with CR-POPF in these scenarios: pancreaticogastrostomy reconstruction [odds ratio (OR) 4.67], omission of drain placement (OR 5.51), and prophylactic octreotide (OR 3.09). When comparing the utilization of best practice strategies to patients who did not have these conjointly utilized, there was a significant decrease in CR-POPF (10.7% vs 35.5%, P < 0.001; OR 0.20, 95% confidence interval 0.12-0.33). CONCLUSION: Through this data, a comprehensive fistula risk catalog has been created and the most clinically-impactful scenarios have been discerned. Focusing on individual scenarios provides a practical way to approach precision medicine, allowing for more directed and efficient management of CR-POPF.

Postpancreatectomy Acute Pancreatitis (PPAP): Definition and Grading From the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS).

OBJECTIVE: The ISGPS aimed to develop a universally accepted definition for PPAP for standardized reporting and outcome comparison. BACKGROUND: PPAP is an increasingly recognized complication after partial pancreatic resections, but its incidence and clinical impact, and even its existence are variable because an internationally accepted consensus definition and grading system are lacking. METHODS: The ISGPS developed a consensus definition and grading of PPAP with its members after an evidence review and after a series of discussions and multiple revisions from April 2020 to May 2021. RESULTS: We defined PPAP as an acute inflammatory condition of the pancreatic remnant beginning within the first 3 postoperative days after a partial pancreatic resection. The diagnosis requires (1) a sustained postoperative serum hyperamylasemia (POH) greater than the institutional upper limit of normal for at least the first 48 hours postoperatively, (2) associated with clinically relevant features, and (3) radiologic alterations consistent with PPAP. Three different PPAP grades were defined based on the clinical impact: (1) grade postoperative hyperamylasemia, biochemical changes only; (2) grade B, mild or moderate complications; and (3) grade C, severe life-threatening complications. DISCUSSIONS: The present definition and grading scale of PPAP, based on biochemical, radiologic, and clinical criteria, are instrumental for a better understanding of PPAP and the spectrum of postoperative complications related to this emerging entity. The current terminology will serve as a reference point for standard assessment and lend itself to developing specific treatments and prevention strategies.

A risk-adjusted analysis of drain use in pancreaticoduodenectomy: Some is good, but more may not be better.

BACKGROUND: Intraperitoneal drain placement decreases morbidity and mortality in patients who develop a clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). It is unknown whether multiple drains mitigate CR-POPF better than a single drain. We hypothesized that multiple drains decrease the complication burden more than a single drain in cases at greater risk for CR-POPF. METHODS: The Fistula Risk Score (FRS), mitigation strategies (including number of drains placed), and clinical outcomes were obtained from a multi-institutional database of PDs performed from 2003 to 2020. Outcomes were compared between cases utilizing 0, 1, or 2 intraperitoneal drains. Multivariable regression analysis was used to evaluate the optimal drainage approach. RESULTS: A total of 4,292 PDs used 0 (7.3%), 1 (45.2%), or 2 (47.5%) drains with an observed CR-POPF rate of 9.6%, which was higher in intermediate/high FRS zone cases compared with negligible/low FRS zone cases (13% vs 2.4%, P < .001). The number of drains placed also correlated with FRS zone (median of 2 in intermediate/high vs 1 in negligible/low risk cases). In intermediate/high risk cases, the use of 2 drains instead of 1 was not associated with a reduced rate of CR-POPF, average complication burden attributed to a CR-POPF, reoperations, or mortality. Obviation of drains was associated with significant increases in complication burden and mortality - regardless of the FRS zone. CONCLUSION: In intermediate/high risk zone cases, placement of a single drain or multiple drains appears to mitigate the complication burden while use of no drains is associated with inferior outcomes.