Early and late recurrence patterns of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains poor because of high incidences of recurrence. The risk factors, patterns, and long-term prognosis in patients with early recurrence and late recurrence (ER and LR) for PDAC after PD were studied. METHODS: Data from patients who underwent PD for PDAC were analyzed. Recurrence was divided into ER (ER ≤1 years) and LR (LR >1 years) using the time to recurrence after surgery. Characteristics and patterns of initial recurrence, and postrecurrence survival (PRS) were compared between patients with ER and LR. RESULTS: Among the 634 patients, 281 (44.3%) and 249 (39.3%) patients developed ER and LR, respectively. In the multivariate analysis, preoperative CA19-9 levels, resection margin status, and tumor differentiation were significantly associated with both ER and LR, while lymph node metastasis and perineal invasion were associated with LR. Patients with ER, when compared with patients with LR, showed a significantly higher proportion of liver-only recurrence ( P <0.05), and worse median PRS (5.2 vs. 9.3 months, P <0.001). Lung-only recurrence had a significantly longer PRS when compared with liver-only recurrence ( P <0.001). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that ER and irregular postoperative recurrence surveillance were independently associated with a worse prognosis ( P <0.001). CONCLUSION: The risk factors for ER and LR after PD are different for PDAC patients. Patients who developed ER had worse PRS than those who developed LR. Patients with lung-only recurrence had a significantly better prognosis than those with other recurrent sites.

Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: Analysis of surgical outcomes and long-term prognosis in a high-volume center.

BACKGROUND: Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) has been reported to be safe and feasible for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) of the pancreatic head. This study aimed to analyze the surgical outcomes and risk factors for poor long-term prognosis of these patients. METHODS: Data from patients who underwent RPD for PDAC of pancreatic head were retrospectively analyzed. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to seek the independent prognostic factors for overall survival (OS), and an online nomogram calculator was developed based on the independent prognostic factors. RESULTS: Of the 273 patients who met the inclusion criteria, the median operative time was 280.0 minutes, the estimated blood loss was 100.0 mL, the median OS was 23.6 months, and the median recurrence-free survival (RFS) was 14.4 months. Multivariate analysis showed that preoperative carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.607, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.560-4.354, P < 0.001], lymph node metastasis (HR = 1.429, 95% CI: 1.005-2.034, P = 0.047), tumor moderately (HR = 3.190, 95% CI: 1.813-5.614, P < 0.001) or poorly differentiated (HR = 5.114, 95% CI: 2.839-9.212, P < 0.001), and Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III (HR = 1.657, 95% CI: 1.079-2.546, P = 0.021) were independent prognostic factors for OS. The concordance index (C-index) of the nomogram constructed based on the above four independent prognostic factors was 0.685 (95% CI: 0.640-0.729), which was significantly higher than that of the AJCC staging (8th edition): 0.541 (95% CI: 0.493-0.589) (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This large-scale study indicated that RPD was feasible for PDAC of pancreatic head. Preoperative CA19-9, lymph node metastasis, tumor poorly differentiated, and Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III were independent prognostic factors for OS. The online nomogram calculator could predict the OS of these patients in a simple and convenient manner.

A novel online calculator to predict early recurrence and long-term survival of patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma after pancreaticoduodenectomy: A multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is prone to relapse even after radical pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) (including robotic, laparoscopic and open approach). This study aimed to develop an online nomogram calculator to predict early recurrence (ER) (within one year after surgery) and long-term survival in patients with PDAC. METHODS: Patients with PDAC after radical PD were included. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent risk factors. An online nomogram calculator was developed based on independent risk factors in the training cohort and then tested in the internal and external validation cohorts. RESULTS: Of the 569 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 310, 155, and 104 patients were in the training, internal and external validation cohorts, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that preoperative carbohydrate antigen19-9 (CA19-9) [Odds Ratio (OR) 1.002; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.001-1.003; P = 0.001], fibrinogen/albumin (FAR) (OR 1.132; 95% CI 1.012-1.266; P = 0.029), N stage (OR 2.291; 95% CI 1.283-4.092; P = 0.005), and tumor differentiation (OR 3.321; 95% CI 1.278-8.631; P = 0.014) were independent risk factors for ER. Nomogram based on the above four factors achieved good C-statistics of 0.772, 0.767 and 0.765 in predicting ER in the training, internal and external validation cohorts, respectively. Time-dependent ROC analysis (timeROC) and decision curve analysis (DCA) revealed that the nomogram provided superior diagnostic capacity and net benefit compared with other staging systems. CONCLUSION: This multi-center study developed and validated an online nomogram calculator that can predict ER and long-term survival in patients with PDAC with high degrees of stability and accuracy.

Short- and long-term outcomes after robotic and open liver resection for elderly patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score-matched study.

BACKGROUND: Robotic liver resection (RLR) has increasingly been accepted as it has overcome some of the limitations of open liver resection (OLR), while the outcomes following RLR in elderly patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are still uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the short and long-term outcomes of RLR vs. OLR in elderly HCC patients. METHODS: Perioperative data of elderly patients (≥ 65 years) with HCC who underwent RLR or OLR between January 2010 and December 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. A 1:2 propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis was performed to minimize the differences between RLR and OLR groups. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to identify independent prognosis factors for overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of these patients. RESULTS: Of the 427 elderly HCC patients included in this study, 113 underwent RLR and 314 underwent OLR. After the 1:2 PSM, there were 100 and 178 patients in the RLR and the OLR groups, respectively. The RLR group had a less estimated blood loss (EBL), a shorter postoperative length of stay (LOS), and a lower complications rate (all P < 0.05), compared with the OLR group before and after PSM. Univariable and multivariable analyses showed that advanced age and surgical approaches were not independent risk factors for long-term prognosis. The two groups of elderly patients who were performed RLR or OLR had similar OS (median OS 52.8 vs. 57.6 months) and RFS (median RFS 20.4 vs. 24.6 months) rates after PSM. CONCLUSIONS: RLR was comparable to OLR in feasibility and safety. For elderly patients with HCC, RLR resulted in similar oncologic and survival outcomes as OLR.

Robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for distal cholangiocarcinoma: a multicenter propensity score-matched study.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatoduodenectomy is the only potentially curative treatment for distal cholangiocarcinoma (DCC). In this study, we sought to compare the perioperative and oncological outcomes of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) based on a multicenter propensity score-matched study. METHODS: Consecutive patients with DCC who underwent RPD or OPD from five centers in China between January 2014 and June 2019 were included. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to identify independent prognosis factors for overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of these patients. RESULTS: A total of 217 patients and 228 patients underwent RPD and OPD, respectively. After PSM, 180 patients in each group were enrolled. There were no significant differences in operative time, lymph node harvest, intraoperative transfusion, vascular resection, R0 resection, postoperative major morbidity, reoperation, 90-day mortality, and long-term survival between the two groups before and after PSM. Whereas, compared with the OPD group, the RPD group had significantly lower estimated blood loss (150.0 ml vs. 250.0 ml; P < 0.001), and a shorter postoperative length of stay (LOS) (12.0 days vs. 15.0 days; P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis showed carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9), R0 resection, N stage, perineural invasion, and tumor differentiation significantly associated with OS and RFS of these patients. CONCLUSIONS: RPD was comparable to OPD in feasibility and safety. For patients with DCC, RPD resulted in similar oncologic and survival outcomes as OPD.

Step-by-step and orderly lowering of the height of inferior vena cava tumor thrombus is the key to robot-assisted thrombectomy for Mayo III/IV tumor thrombus.

BACKGROUND: The surgical management of Mayo III/IV tumor thrombi is difficult and risky, and robotic surgery is even more difficult. The purpose of this study was to introduce the step-by-step and orderly lowering of the height of inferior vena cava tumor thrombus, which was the core technique of robot operation for Mayo III/IV tumor thrombus. METHOD: A total of 18 patients were included in this study. The average tumor thrombus height was 2.4 cm above the level of the second porta hepatis (SPH), and 9 patients were prepared for cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) before surgery. During the operation, the height of the tumor thrombus was lowered orderly for 2-3 times, and the blood flow blocking method was changed sequentially. The CPB was required when tumor thrombus in the atrium; After the height of the thrombus was lowered to the atrium entrance, CPB was stopped and the blood flow was blocked in the upper- and retro-hepatic inferior vena cava (IVC); After the tumor thrombus continued to descend to the lower part of the SPH, liver blood flow could be restored, and then, the blood flow was simply blocked in the retro-hepatic IVC to complete the removal of the thrombus and the repair or resection of the IVC. Finally, the diseased kidney and renal vein were removed. RESULTS: All operations were successfully completed, and 2 cases were transferred to laparotomy. Seven cases received CPB, while the other 11 did not. 15 patients underwent two times of the lowering of the tumor thrombus, 2 patients underwent one time and 1 patient underwent three times. The mean liver/IVC dissociation and vascular suspension time was 22.0 min. All patients had less than Clavien-Dindo grade III complications, no serious complications occurred during operation, and no patient died within 90 days. CONCLUSIONS: The step-by-step and orderly decline of tumor thrombus height is the key to the success of robot Mayo III / IV tumor thrombus surgery. This method can shorten FPH and CPB time and improve the success rate of surgery.

A novel online calculator to predict recurrence risk in patients with distal cholangiocarcinoma after radical pancreaticoduodenectomy.

BACKGROUND: Patients with distal cholangiocarcinoma (DCC) are prone to relapse even after radical pancreaticoduodenectomy. In this study, we sought to create an online nomogram calculator to accurately predict the recurrence risk of DCC. METHODS: A total of 184 patients were included. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to identify independent prognosis factors for recurrence-free survival and overall survival. A nomogram was constructed according to the prognostic factors in the training cohort and then tested in the validation cohort. RESULTS: Multivariate Cox analysis showed preoperative carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (p < 0.001), maximum tumor size (p = 0.076), perineural invasion (p = 0.044), and N stage (p = 0.076) were independent prognostic factors for DCC relapse. We then constructed a nomogram with these four factors. The consistency index (C-index) of the nomogram in the training and validation cohorts were 0.703 and 0.665, respectively. Time-dependent receiver operating characteristic and decision curve analyses revealed that the nomogram provided higher diagnostic power and net benefit compared with other staging systems. CONCLUSION: In this study, we developed an online nomogram calculator that can accurately predict the recurrence risk of DCC and identify patients with a high risk of recurrence in a simple and convenient manner.

Comparison of robotic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy for primary nonampullary duodenal adenocarcinoma: a retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: Robotic surgery has been increasingly applied in pancreatic surgery and showed many advantages over conventional open surgery. The robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) is a surgical option for primary nonampullary duodenal adenocarcinoma (PNDA). However, whether RPD is superior to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) for PNDA has not been reported. The comparative study was designed to analyze the short- and long-term outcomes of RPD versus OPD on patients with PNDA. METHODS: Demographics, perioperative, and survival outcomes among patients who underwent RPD (n = 49) versus OPD (n = 43) for PNDAs between January 2013 and March 2018 were collected and analyzed RESULTS: Demographic characteristics were comparable between the RPD group and the OPD group. The RPD group demonstrated a decreased estimated blood loss (100 vs. 200 ml, p < 0.001), time to oral intake (4.0 vs. 4.0 days, p = 0.04), and postoperative hospital stay (12.9 vs. 15.0 days, p = 0.01) compared with the OPD group. However, no differences were observed between the two groups in terms of operative time and the rates of major complications, grade B and C POPF, PPH, grade B and C DGE, biliary fistular, reoperation, and 90-day readmission. No patient died within 90 days. There were no significant differences in tumor size, differentiation, TNM stage, number of harvested lymph nodes, and the rates of nerve invasion, lymph node invasion, R0 resection, and the median overall survival between the two groups (p > 0.05) CONCLUSIONS: RPD is a safe, feasible, and effective treatment for PNDA compared with OPD and can be used as an alternative for surgeons in the treatment of PNDA. Further multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of RPD in patients with PNDA.

Development and validation of an online calculator to predict early recurrence and long-term survival in patients with distal cholangiocarcinoma after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

BACKGROUND: Distal cholangiocarcinoma (DCC) is a malignancy associated with a short survival time. In this study, we aimed to create an online nomogram calculator to predict early recurrence and long-term survival in patients with DCC after pancreaticoduodenectomy. METHODS: A total of 486 patients with DCC were included. An online nomogram calculator was developed and validated in training, internal validation and external validation cohorts, respectively. RESULTS: Of the 486 patients who met the inclusion criteria, we allocated 240, 120, and 126 patients to the training, internal validation, and external validation cohorts, respectively. Multivariable analysis showed that preoperative CA19-9, maximum tumor diameter, perineural invasion, and tumor differentiation were significant risk factors for early recurrence in patients with DCC. Incorporating these four factors, the nomogram achieved good AUC values of 0.788, 0.771, and 0.723 for predicting early recurrence in the training, internal validation, and external validation cohorts, respectively. Notably, this nomogram also had good power to predict overall survival. The discrimination ability of the nomogram was evaluated by dividing the predicted probabilities of early recurrence and survival into two risk groups in the training cohort (low risk ≤ 132; high risk > 132; P < .001). Time-dependent ROC and decision curve analysis further revealed that the nomogram provided higher diagnostic capacity and superior net benefit compared to other staging systems. CONCLUSION: This study developed and validated a web-based nomogram calculator that was capable of predicting early recurrence and long-term prognosis in patients with DCC after pancreaticoduodenectomy with high degrees of stability and accuracy.

Robotic resection of duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumour: Preliminary experience from a single centre.

BACKGROUND: Experience in minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (DGISTs) is accumulating, but there is no consensus on the choice of surgical method. AIM: To summarize the technique and feasibility of robotic resection of DGISTs. METHODS: The perioperative and demographic outcomes of a consecutive series of patients who underwent robotic resection and open resection of DGISTs between May 1, 2010 and May 1, 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into the open surgery group and the robotic surgery group. Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) or limited resection was performed based on the location of the tumour and the distance between the tumour and duodenal papilla. Age, sex, tumour location, tumour size, operation time (OT), estimated blood loss (EBL), postoperative hospital stay (PHS), tumour mitosis, postoperative risk classification, postoperative recurrence and recurrence-free survival were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Of the 28 patients included, 19 were male and 9 were female aged 51.3 ± 13.1 years. Limited resection was performed in 17 patients, and PD was performed in 11 patients. Eleven patients underwent open surgery, and 17 patients underwent robotic surgery. Two patients in the robotic surgery group underwent conversion to open surgery. All the tumours were R0 resected, and there was no significant difference in age, sex, tumour size, operation mode, PHS, tumour mitosis, incidence of postoperative complications, risk classification, postoperative targeted drug therapy or postoperative recurrence between the two groups (P > 0.05). OT and EBL in the robotic group were significantly different to those in the open surgery group (P < 0.05). All the patients survived during the follow-up period, and 4 patients had recurrence and metastasis. No significant difference in recurrence-free survival was noted between the open surgery group and the robotic surgery group (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Robotic resection is safe and feasible for patients with DGISTs, and its therapeutic effect is equivalent to open surgery.