Fluorescence-guided minimally-invasive resection of abdominal paragangliomas using indocyanine green.

This retrospective study explores the utility of near-infrared (NIR) fluorescence imaging with indocyanine green (ICG) in enhancing the intraoperative identification and guidance for the resection of abdominal paragangliomas. They can be challenging to detect during minimally invasive surgery, due to their anatomical location, varying size and similar appearance in regard to their surrounding tissue. Patients with suspected abdominal paragangliomas planned for a minimally-invasive resection were included. As part of standard of care they received single intravenous dose of 5 mg ICG after abdominal exploration. NIR fluorescence imaging of the anatomical region of the suspected lesion was performed immediately following intravenous administration, to assess fluorescence signals, intraoperative identification, and histopathological correlation. Out of five resected suspicious lesions, four were imaged with NIR fluorescence, pathology confirming four as paragangliomas, the latter turned out to be an adrenal adenoma. NIR fluorescence identified all four lesions, surpassing the limitations of white-light visualization. Homogeneous fluorescence signals appeared 30-60 s post-ICG administration, which lasted up to 30 min. The study demonstrates the feasibility and potential clinical value of fluorescence-guided minimally-invasive resections of abdominal paragangliomas using a single intravenous ICG dose. These findings support the scientific basis for routine use of ICG-fluorescence-guided surgery in challenging anatomical cases, providing valuable assistance in lesion detection and resection.

Perioperative or adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX for resectable pancreatic cancer (PREOPANC-3): study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection followed by adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil with leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) is currently the standard of care for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. The main concern regarding adjuvant chemotherapy is that only half of patients actually receive adjuvant treatment. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, on the other hand, guarantees early systemic treatment and may increase chemotherapy use and thereby improve overall survival. Furthermore, it may prevent futile surgery in patients with rapidly progressive disease. However, some argue that neoadjuvant therapy delays surgery, which could lead to progression towards unresectable disease and thus offset the potential benefits. Comparison of perioperative (i.e., neoadjuvant and adjuvant) with (only) adjuvant administration of mFOLFIRINOX in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) is needed to determine the optimal approach. METHODS: This multicenter, phase 3, RCT will include 378 patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1. Patients are recruited from 20 Dutch centers and three centers in Norway and Sweden. Resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as no arterial contact and ≤ 90 degrees venous contact. Patients in the intervention arm are scheduled for 8 cycles of neoadjuvant mFOLFIRINOX followed by surgery and 4 cycles of adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX (2-week cycle of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, irinotecan 150 mg/m2 at day 1, followed by 46 h continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil 2400 g/m2). Patients in the comparator arm start with surgery followed by 12 cycles of adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX. The primary outcome is overall survival by intention-to-treat. Secondary outcomes include progression-free survival, resection rate, quality of life, adverse events, and surgical complications. To detect a hazard ratio of 0.70 with 80% power, 252 events are needed. The number of events is expected to be reached after the inclusion of 378 patients in 36 months, with analysis planned 18 months after the last patient has been randomized. DISCUSSION: The multicenter PREOPANC-3 trial compares perioperative mFOLFIRINOX with adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials: NCT04927780. Registered June 16, 2021.

Longitudinal changes of serum protein N-Glycan levels for earlier detection of pancreatic cancer in high-risk individuals.

BACKGROUND: Surveillance of individuals at risk of developing pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has the potential to improve survival, yet early detection based on solely imaging modalities is challenging. We aimed to identify changes in serum glycosylation levels over time to earlier detect PDAC in high-risk individuals. METHODS: Individuals with a hereditary predisposition to develop PDAC were followed in two surveillance programs. Those, of which at least two consecutive serum samples were available, were included. Mass spectrometry analysis was performed to determine the total N-glycome for each consecutive sample. Potentially discriminating N-glycans were selected based on our previous cross-sectional analysis and relative abundances were calculated for each glycosylation feature. RESULTS: 165 individuals ("FPC-cohort" N = 119; Leiden cohort N = 46) were included. In total, 97 (59%) individuals had a genetic predisposition (77 CDKN2A, 15 BRCA1/2, 5 STK11) and 68 (41%) a family history of PDAC without a known genetic predisposition (>10-fold increased risk of developing PDAC). From each individual, a median number of 3 serum samples (IQR 3) was collected. Ten individuals (6%) developed PDAC during 35 months of follow-up; nine (90%) of these patients carried a CDKN2A germline mutation. In PDAC cases, compared to all controls, glycosylation characteristics were increased (fucosylation, tri- and tetra-antennary structures, specific sialic linkage types), others decreased (complex-type diantennary and bisected glycans). The largest change over time was observed for tri-antennary fucosylated glycans, which were able to differentiate cases from controls with a specificity of 92%, sensitivity of 49% and accuracy of 90%. CONCLUSION: Serum N-glycan monitoring may support early detection in a pancreas surveillance program.

Completion pancreatectomy or a pancreas-preserving procedure during relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy: a multicentre cohort study and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite the fact that primary percutaneous catheter drainage has become standard practice, some patients with pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy ultimately undergo a relaparotomy. The aim of this study was to compare completion pancreatectomy with a pancreas-preserving procedure in patients undergoing relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study of nine institutions included patients who underwent relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy from 2005-2018. Furthermore, a systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: From 4877 patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy, 786 (16 per cent) developed a pancreatic fistula grade B/C and 162 (3 per cent) underwent a relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula. Of these patients, 36 (22 per cent) underwent a completion pancreatectomy and 126 (78 per cent) a pancreas-preserving procedure. Mortality was higher after completion pancreatectomy (20 (56 per cent) versus 40 patients (32 per cent); P = 0.009), which remained after adjusting for sex, age, BMI, ASA score, previous reintervention, and organ failure in the 24 h before relaparotomy (adjusted odds ratio 2.55, 95 per cent c.i. 1.07 to 6.08). The proportion of additional reinterventions was not different between groups (23 (64 per cent) versus 84 patients (67 per cent); P = 0.756). The meta-analysis including 33 studies evaluating 745 patients, confirmed the association between completion pancreatectomy and mortality (Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model: odds ratio 1.99, 95 per cent c.i. 1.03 to 3.84). CONCLUSION: Based on the current data, a pancreas-preserving procedure seems preferable to completion pancreatectomy in patients in whom a relaparotomy is deemed necessary for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy.

Total neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX versus neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant gemcitabine for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (PREOPANC-2 trial): study protocol for a nationwide multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant therapy has several potential advantages over upfront surgery in patients with localized pancreatic cancer; more patients receive systemic treatment, fewer patients undergo futile surgery, and R0 resection rates are higher, thereby possibly improving overall survival (OS). Two recent randomized trials have suggested benefit of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy over upfront surgery, both including single-agent chemotherapy regimens. Potentially, the multi-agent FOLFIRINOX regimen (5-fluorouracil with leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) may further improve outcomes in the neoadjuvant setting for localized pancreatic cancer, but randomized studies are needed. The PREOPANC-2 trial investigates whether neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX improves OS compared with neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant gemcitabine in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer patients. METHODS: This nationwide multicenter phase III randomized controlled trial includes patients with pathologically confirmed resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer with a WHO performance score of 0 or 1. Resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as no arterial and ≤ 90 degrees venous involvement; borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as ≤90 degrees arterial and ≤ 270 degrees venous involvement without occlusion. Patients receive 8 cycles of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy followed by surgery without adjuvant treatment (arm A), or 3 cycles of neoadjuvant gemcitabine with hypofractionated radiotherapy (36 Gy in 15 fractions) during the second cycle, followed by surgery and 4 cycles of adjuvant gemcitabine (arm B). The primary endpoint is OS by intention-to-treat. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, quality of life, resection rate, and R0 resection rate. To detect a hazard ratio of 0.70 with 80% power, 252 events are needed. The number of events is expected to be reached after inclusion of 368 eligible patients assuming an accrual period of 3 years and 1.5 years follow-up. DISCUSSION: The PREOPANC-2 trial directly compares two neoadjuvant regimens for patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Our study will provide evidence on the neoadjuvant treatment of choice for patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Primary registry and trial identifying number: EudraCT: 2017-002036-17 . Date of registration: March 6, 2018. Secondary identifying numbers: The Netherlands National Trial Register - NL7094 , NL61961.078.17, MEC-2018-004.

Microscopic resection margin status in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma - A nationwide analysis.

INTRODUCTION: First, this study aimed to assess the prognostic value of different definitions for resection margin status on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Second, preoperative predictors of direct margin involvement were identified. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This nationwide observational cohort study included all patients who underwent upfront PDAC resection (2014-2016), as registered in the prospective Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. Patients were subdivided into three groups: R0 (≥1 mm margin clearance), R1 (<1 mm margin clearance) or R1 (direct margin involvement). Survival was compared using multivariable Cox regression analysis. Logistic regression with baseline variables was performed to identify preoperative predictors of R1 (direct). RESULTS: 595 patients with a median OS of 18 months (IQR 10-32 months) months were analysed. R0 (≥1 mm) was achieved in 277 patients (47%), R1 (<1 mm) in 146 patients (24%) and R1 (direct) in 172 patients (29%). R1 (direct) was associated with a worse OS, as compared with both R0 (≥1 mm) (hazard ratio (HR) 1.35 [95% and confidence interval (CI) 1.08-1.70); P < 0.01) and R1 (<1 mm) (HR 1.29 [95%CI 1.01-1.67]; P < 0.05). No OS difference was found between R0 (≥1 mm) and R1 (<1 mm) (HR 1.05 [95% CI 0.82-1.34]; P = 0.71). Preoperative predictors associated with an increased risk of R1 (direct) included age, male sex, performance score 2-4, and venous or arterial tumour involvement. CONCLUSION: Resection margin clearance of <1 mm, but without direct margin involvement, does not affect survival, as compared with a margin clearance of ≥1 mm. Given that any vascular tumour involvement on preoperative imaging was associated with an increased risk of R1 (direct) resection with upfront surgery, neoadjuvant therapy might be considered in these patients.

Molecular targets for diagnostic and intraoperative imaging of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma after neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX treatment.

Neoadjuvant systemic treatment is increasingly being integrated in the standard treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients to improve oncological outcomes. Current available imaging techniques remain unreliable in assessing response to therapies, as they cannot distinguish between (vital) tumor tissue and therapy induced fibrosis (TIF). Consequently, resections with tumor positive margins and subsequent early post-operative recurrences occur and patients eligible for potential radical resection could be missed. To optimize patient selection and monitor results of neoadjuvant treatment, PDAC-specific diagnostic and intraoperative molecular imaging methods are required. This study aims to evaluate molecular imaging targets for PDAC after neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX treatment. Expression of integrin αvß6, carcinoembryonic antigen cell adhesion molecule 5 (CEACAM5), mesothelin, prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA), urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor, fibroblast activating receptor, integrin α5 subunit and epidermal growth factor receptor was evaluated using immunohistochemistry. Immunoreactivity was determined using the semiquantitative H-score. Resection specimens from patients after neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX treatment containing PDAC (n = 32), tumor associated pancreatitis (TAP) and TIF (n = 15), normal pancreas parenchyma (NPP) (n = 32) and tumor positive (n = 24) and negative (n = 56) lymph nodes were included. Integrin αvß6, CEACAM5, mesothelin and PSMA stainings showed significantly higher expression in PDAC compared to TAP and NPP. No expression of αvß6, CEACAM5 and mesothelin was observed in TIF. Integrin αvß6 and CEACAM5 allow for accurate metastatic lymph node detection. Targeting integrin αvß6, CEA, mesothelin and PSMA has the potential to distinguish vital PDAC from fibrotic tissue after neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX treatment. Integrin αvß6 and CEACAM5 detect primary tumors and tumor positive lymph nodes.

Impact of nationwide enhanced implementation of best practices in pancreatic cancer care (PACAP-1): a multicenter stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer has a very poor prognosis. Best practices for the use of chemotherapy, enzyme replacement therapy, and biliary drainage have been identified but their implementation in daily clinical practice is often suboptimal. We hypothesized that a nationwide program to enhance implementation of these best practices in pancreatic cancer care would improve survival and quality of life. METHODS/DESIGN: PACAP-1 is a nationwide multicenter stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled superiority trial. In a per-center stepwise and randomized manner, best practices in pancreatic cancer care regarding the use of (neo)adjuvant and palliative chemotherapy, pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy, and metal biliary stents are implemented in all 17 Dutch pancreatic centers and their regional referral networks during a 6-week initiation period. Per pancreatic center, one multidisciplinary team functions as reference for the other centers in the network. Key best practices were identified from the literature, 3 years of data from existing nationwide registries within the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Project (PACAP), and national expert meetings. The best practices follow the Dutch guideline on pancreatic cancer and the current state of the literature, and can be executed within daily clinical practice. The implementation process includes monitoring, return visits, and provider feedback in combination with education and reminders. Patient outcomes and compliance are monitored within the PACAP registries. Primary outcome is 1-year overall survival (for all disease stages). Secondary outcomes include quality of life, 3- and 5-year overall survival, and guideline compliance. An improvement of 10% in 1-year overall survival is considered clinically relevant. A 25-month study duration was chosen, which provides 80% statistical power for a mortality reduction of 10.0% in the 17 pancreatic cancer centers, with a required sample size of 2142 patients, corresponding to a 6.6% mortality reduction and 4769 patients nationwide. DISCUSSION: The PACAP-1 trial is designed to evaluate whether a nationwide program for enhanced implementation of best practices in pancreatic cancer care can improve 1-year overall survival and quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03513705. Trial opened for accrual on 22th May 2018.

Meta-analysis of epidural analgesia in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy.

Background: The optimal analgesic technique after pancreatoduodenectomy remains under debate. This study aimed to see whether epidural analgesia (EA) has superior clinical outcomes compared with non-epidural alternatives (N-EA) in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy. Methods: A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. On 28 August 2018, relevant literature databases were searched. Primary outcomes were pain scores. Secondary outcomes were treatment failure of initial analgesia, complications, duration of hospital stay and mortality. Results: Three RCTs and eight cohort studies (25 089 patients) were included. N-EA treatments studied were: intravenous morphine, continuous wound infiltration, bilateral paravertebral thoracic catheters and intrathecal morphine. Patients receiving EA had a marginally lower pain score on days 0-3 after surgery than those receiving intravenous morphine (mean difference (MD) -0·50, 95 per cent c.i. -0·80 to -0·21; P < 0·001) and similar pain scores to patients who had continuous wound infiltration. Treatment failure occurred in 28·5 per cent of patients receiving EA, mainly for haemodynamic instability or inadequate pain control. EA was associated with fewer complications (odds ratio (OR) 0·69, 95 per cent c.i. 0·06 to 0·79; P < 0·001), shorter duration of hospital stay (MD -2·69 (95 per cent c.i. -2·76 to -2·62) days; P < 0·001) and lower mortality (OR 0·69, 0·51 to 0 93; P = 0·02) compared with intravenous morphine. Conclusion: EA provides marginally lower pain scores in the first postoperative days than intravenous morphine, and appears to be associated with fewer complications, shorter duration of hospital stay and less mortality.

Antecedentes: La técnica analgésica óptima tras una duodenopancreatectomía permanece en debate. El objetivo de este estudio fue analizar si la analgesia epidural (epidural analgesia, EA) presenta resultados clínicos superiores en comparación con las alternativas no epidurales (non­epidural alternatives, N­EA) en pacientes que se someten a una duodenopancreatectomía. Métodos: Se realizó una revisión sistemática con metaanálisis de acuerdo con las recomendaciones PRISMA. El 28 de agosto de 2018, se realizó una búsqueda en las bases de datos relevantes de la literatura. El objetivo primario fueron las puntuaciones de dolor. Los objetivos secundarios fueron el fracaso del tratamiento de la analgesia inicial, las complicaciones, la duración de la estancia hospitalaria y la mortalidad. Resultados: Se incluyeron tres ensayos aleatorizados y controlados y ocho estudios de cohortes (25.089 pacientes). Las N­EA estudiadas fueron: morfina intravenosa (iv), infiltración continua de la herida, catéteres torácicos paravertebrales bilaterales y morfina intratecal. Los pacientes con EA tuvieron una puntuación de dolor marginalmente más baja en los días postoperatorios 0 a 3 en comparación con la morfina iv (diferencia de medias (MD) = ­ 0,50, i.c. del 95% ­0,80 a ­0,21; P < 0,001) y puntuaciones de dolor similares en comparación con la infiltración continua de la herida. El fallo del tratamiento ocurrió en el 28,5% de los pacientes con EA, principalmente por inestabilidad hemodinámica o control inadecuado del dolor. La EA se asoció con menos complicaciones (razón de oportunidades, odds ratio, OR = 0,69, i.c. del 95% 0,061 a 0,79; P < 0,001), menor duración de la estancia hospitalaria (MD = ­2,69 días, i.c. del 95% ­2,76 a ­2,62; P < 0,001) y menor mortalidad en comparación con la morfina iv (OR = 0,69, i.c. del 95% 0,51 a 0,93; P = 0,01). Conclusión: La EA proporciona puntuaciones de dolor ligeramente más bajas en los primeros días postoperatorios en comparación con la morfina iv y parece asociarse con menos complicaciones, menor duración de la estancia hospitalaria y menor mortalidad.

Yield of staging laparoscopy before treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer to detect occult metastases.

INTRODUCTION: Locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) is found in 35% of patients with pancreatic cancer. However, these patients often have occult metastatic disease. Patients with occult metastases are unlikely to benefit from locoregional treatments. This study evaluated the yield of occult metastases during staging laparoscopy in patients with LAPC. METHODS: Between January 2013 and January 2017 all patients with LAPC underwent a staging laparoscopy after a recent tri-phasic CT-scan of the chest and abdomen. Data were retrospectively reviewed from a prospectively maintained database. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted to predict metastasis found at laparoscopy. RESULTS: A total of 91 (41% male, median age 64 years) LAPC patients were included. The median time between CT-scan and staging laparoscopy was 21 days. During staging laparoscopy metastases were found in 17 patients (19%, 95% CI: 12%-28%). Seven (8%) patients had liver-only, 9 (10%) patients peritoneal-only, and 1 (1%) patient both liver and peritoneal metastases. Univariate logistic regression analysis showed that CEA (OR 1.056, 95% CI 1.007-1.107, p = 0.02) was the only preoperative predictor for occult metastases. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis of the preoperative risk factors again only CEA was an independent predictor for occult metastatic disease (p = 0.03). Patients with a CEA above 5 µg/L had a risk of occult metastasis of 91%. FOLFIRINOX was given to 69 (76%) of the patients with a median number of cycles of 8. Subsequent radiotherapy was given to 44 (48%) patients after the FOLFIRINOX treatment. Six (14%) patients underwent a resection after FOLFIRINOX and radiotherapy. The overall 1-year survival was 53% in patients without occult metastasis versus 29% with occult metastasis (p = 0.11). The 1-year OS for patients that completed FOLFIRINOX and radiotherapy was 84%. CONCLUSION: The yield of staging laparoscopy for occult intrahepatic or peritoneal metastases in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer was 19%. Staging laparoscopy is recomended for patients with LAPC for accurate staging to determine optimal treatment.

Impact of resection margin status on recurrence and survival in pancreatic cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: The prognosis of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is poor and selection of patients for surgery is challenging. This study examined the impact of a positive resection margin (R1) on locoregional recurrence (LRR) and overall survival (OS); and also aimed to identified tumour characteristics and/or technical factors associated with a positive resection margin in patients with PDAC. METHODS: Patients scheduled for pancreatic resection for PDAC between 2006 and 2016 were identified from an institutional database. The effect of resection margin status, patient characteristics and tumour characteristics on LRR, distant metastasis and OS was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 322 patients underwent pancreatectomy for PDAC. A positive resection (R1) margin was found in 129 patients (40·1 per cent); this was associated with decreased OS compared with that in patients with an R0 margin (median 15 (95 per cent c.i. 13 to 17) versus 22 months; P < 0·001). R1 status was associated with reduced time to LRR (median 16 versus 36 (not estimated, n.e.) months; P = 0·002). Disease recurrence patterns were similar in the R1 and R0 groups. Risk factors for early recurrence were tumour stage, positive lymph nodes (N1) and perineural invasion. Among 100 patients with N0 disease, R1 status was associated with shorter OS compared with R0 resection (median 17 (10 to 24) versus 45 (n.e.) months; P = 0·002), whereas R status was not related to OS in 222 patients with N1 disease (median 14 (12 to 16) versus 17 (15 to 19) months after R1 and R0 resection respectively; P = 0·068). CONCLUSION: Although pancreatic resection with a positive margin was associated with poor survival and early recurrence, particularly in patients with N1 disease, disease recurrence patterns were similar between R1 and R0 groups.

Outcomes following pancreatic surgery using three different thromboprophylaxis regimens.

BACKGROUND: Postpancreatectomy haemorrhage (PPH) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) are serious complications following pancreatic surgery. The aim was to assess the timing, occurrence and predictors of PPH and VTE. METHODS: Elective pancreatic resections undertaken in a single university hospital between November 2013 and September 2017 were assessed. Three intervals were reviewed, each with a different routine regimen of nadroparin: 2850 units once daily (single dose) administered in hospital only, or 5700 units once daily (double dose) or 2850 units twice daily (split dose) administered in hospital and continued for 6 weeks after surgery. Clinically relevant PPH (CR-PPH) was classified according to International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery criteria. VTE was defined according to a number of key diagnostic criteria within 6 weeks of surgery. Cox regression analyses were performed to test the hypotheses that the double-dose group would experience more PPH than the other two groups, the single-dose group would experience more VTE than the other two groups, and the split-dose group would experience the fewest adverse events (PPH or VTE). RESULTS: In total, 240 patients were included, 80 per group. The double-dose group experienced significantly more CR-PPH (hazard ratio (HR) 2·14, 95 per cent c.i. 1·16 to 3·94; P = 0·015). More relaparotomies due to CR-PPH were performed in the double-dose group (16 versus 3·8 per cent; P = 0·002). The single-dose group did not experience more VTE (HR 1·41, 0·43 to 4·62; P = 0·570). The split dose was not associated with fewer adverse events (HR 0·77, 0·41 to 1·46; P = 0·422). Double-dose low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), high BMI and pancreatic fistula were independent predictors of CR-PPH. CONCLUSION: A double dose of LMWH prophylaxis continued for 6 weeks after pancreatic resection was associated with a twofold higher rate of CR-PPH, resulting in four times more relaparotomies. Patients receiving a single daily dose of LMWH in hospital only did not experience a higher rate of VTE.

Staging laparoscopy with ultrasound and near-infrared fluorescence imaging to detect occult metastases of pancreatic and periampullary cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Up to 38% of pancreatic and periampullary cancer patients undergoing curative intended surgery turn out to have incurable disease. Therefore, staging laparoscopy (SL) prior to laparotomy is advised to spare patients the morbidity, inconvenience and expense of futile major surgery. The aim of this study was to assess the added value of SL with laparoscopic ultrasonography (LUS) and laparoscopic near-infrared fluorescence imaging (LFI). METHODS: All patients undergoing curative intended surgery of pancreatic or periampullary cancer were included prospectively in this single arm study. Patients received an intravenous infusion of 10 mg indocyanine green (ICG) one or two days prior to surgery to allow LFI. Suspect lesions were analyzed via biopsy or resection. Follow-up visits after surgery occurred every three months. RESULTS: A total of 25 patients were included. Suspect lesions were identified in 7 patients: liver metastases (n = 2; identified by inspection, LUS, and LFI), peritoneal metastases (n = 1; identified by inspection only), and benign lesions (n = 4; identified by inspection or LUS). Quality of LFI was good in 67% (10/15) of patients dosed one day and 89% (8/9) dosed two days prior to surgery. A futile laparotomy was averted in 3 patients (12%). Following SL the primary tumor was resected in 20 patients. Two patients (10%) developed metastases within 3 months after resection. CONCLUSIONS: Despite current preoperative imaging modalities metastases are still identified during surgery. This study shows limited added value of LUS during SL in patients with pancreatic or periampullary cancer. LFI was of added value due to its high negative predictive value in case of suspect hepatic lesions identified by inspection.

Differences in Treatment and Outcome of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Stage I and II in the EURECCA Pancreas Consortium.

BACKGROUND: The EUropean REgistration of Cancer CAre (EURECCA) consortium aims to investigate differences in treatment and to improve cancer care through Europe. The purpose of this study was to compare neo- and adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) and outcome after tumor resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma stage I and II in the EURECCA Pancreas consortium. METHODS: The eight, collaborating national, regional, and single-center partners shared their anonymized dataset. Patients diagnosed in 2012-2013 who underwent tumor resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma stage I and II were investigated with respect to treatment and survival and compared using uni- and multivariable logistic and Cox regression analyses. All comparisons were performed separately per registry type: national, regional, and single-center registries. RESULTS: In total, 2052 patients were included. Stage II was present in the majority of patients. The use of neo-ACT was limited in most registries (range 2.8-15.5%) and was only different between Belgium and The Netherlands after adjustment for potential confounders. The use of ACT was different between the registries (range 40.5-70.0%), even after adjustment for potential confounders. Ninety-day mortality was also different between the registries (range 0.9-13.6%). In multivariable analyses for overall survival, differences were observed between the national and regional registries. Furthermore, patients in ascending age groups and patients with stage II showed a significant worse overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a clear insight in clinical practice in the EURECCA Pancreas consortium. The differences observed in (neo-)ACT and outcome give us the chance to further investigate the best practices and improve outcome of pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Multicentre randomized clinical trial of the effect of chewing gum after abdominal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative ileus is a common complication of abdominal surgery, leading to patient discomfort, morbidity and prolonged postoperative length of hospital stay (LOS). Previous studies suggested that chewing gum stimulates bowel function after abdominal surgery, but were underpowered to evaluate its effect on LOS and did not include enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS)-based perioperative care. This study evaluated whether chewing gum after elective abdominal surgery reduces LOS and time to bowel recovery in the setting of ERAS-based perioperative care. METHODS: A multicentre RCT was performed of patients over 18 years of age undergoing abdominal surgery in 12 hospitals. Standard postoperative care (control group) was compared with chewing gum three times a day for 30 min in addition to standard postoperative care. Randomization was computer-generated; allocation was concealed. The primary outcome was postoperative LOS. Secondary outcomes were time to bowel recovery and 30-day complications. RESULTS: Between 2011 to 2015, 1000 patients were assigned to chewing gum and 1000 to the control arm. Median LOS did not differ: 7 days in both arms (P = 0·364). Neither was any difference found in time to flatus (24 h in control group versus 23 h with chewing gum; P = 0·873) or time to defaecation (60 versus 52 h respectively; P = 0·562). The rate of 30-day complications was not significantly different either. CONCLUSION: The addition of chewing gum to an ERAS postoperative care pathway after elective abdominal surgery does not reduce the LOS, time to bowel recovery or the rate of postoperative complications. Registration number: NTR2594 (Netherlands Trial Register).

Effect of low-dose aspirin use on survival of patients with gastrointestinal malignancies; an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggested a relationship between aspirin use and mortality reduction. The mechanism for the effect of aspirin on cancer outcomes remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate aspirin use and survival in patients with gastrointestinal tract cancer. METHODS: Patients with gastrointestinal tract cancer diagnosed between 1998 and 2011 were included. The population-based Eindhoven Cancer Registry was linked to drug-dispensing data from the PHARMO Database Network. The association between aspirin use after diagnosis and overall survival was analysed using Cox regression models. RESULTS: In total, 13 715 patients were diagnosed with gastrointestinal cancer. A total of 1008 patients were identified as aspirin users, and 8278 patients were identified as nonusers. The adjusted hazard ratio for aspirin users vs nonusers was 0.52 (95% CI 0.44-0.63). A significant association between aspirin use and survival was observed for patients with oesophageal, hepatobiliary and colorectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Post-diagnosis use of aspirin in patients with gastrointestinal tract malignancies is associated with increased survival in cancers with different sites of origin and biology. This adds weight to the hypothesis that the anti-cancer effects of aspirin are not tumour-site specific and may be modulated through the tumour micro-environment.

Refinement of screening for familial pancreatic cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Surveillance programmes are recommended for individuals at risk (IAR) of familial pancreatic cancer (FPC) to detect early pancreatic cancer (pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, PDAC). However, the age to begin screening and the optimal screening protocol remain to be determined. METHODS: IAR from non-CDKN2A FPC families underwent annual screening by MRI with endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in board-approved prospective screening programmes at three tertiary referral centres. The diagnostic yield according to age and different screening protocols was analysed. RESULTS: 253 IAR with a median age of 48 (25-81) years underwent screening with a median of 3 (1-11) screening visits during a median follow-up of 28 (1-152) months. 134 (53%) IAR revealed pancreatic lesions on imaging, mostly cystic (94%), on baseline or follow-up screening. Lesions were significantly more often identified in IAR above the age of 45 years (p<0.0001). In 21 IAR who underwent surgery, no significant lesions (PDAC, pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN) 3 lesions, high-grade intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia (IPMN)) were detected before the age of 50 years. Potentially relevant lesions (multifocal PanIN2 lesions, low/moderate-grade branch-duct IPMNs) occurred also significantly more often after the age of 50 years (13 vs 2, p<0.0004). The diagnostic yield of potentially relevant lesions was not different between screening protocols using annual MRI with EUS (n=98) or annual MRI with EUS every 3rd year (n=198) and between IAR screened at intervals of 12 months (n=180) or IAR that decided to be screened at ≥24 months intervals (n=30). CONCLUSIONS: It appears safe to start screening for PDAC in IAR of non-CDKN2a FPC families at the age of 50 years. MRI-based screening supplemented by EUS at baseline and every 3rd year or when changes in MRI occur appears to be efficient.

Common variables in European pancreatic cancer registries: The introduction of the EURECCA pancreatic cancer project.

BACKGROUND: Quality assurance of cancer care is of utmost importance to detect and avoid under and over treatment. Most cancer data are collected by different procedures in different countries, and are poorly comparable at an international level. EURECCA, acronym for European Registration of Cancer Care, is a platform aiming to harmonize cancer data collection and improve cancer care by feedback. After the prior launch of the projects on colorectal, breast and upper GI cancer, EURECCA's newest project is collecting data on pancreatic cancer in several European countries. METHODS: National cancer registries, as well as specific pancreatic cancer audits/registries, were invited to participate in EURECCA Pancreas. Participating countries were requested to share an overview of their collected data items. Of the received datasets, a shared items list was made which creates insight in similarities between different national registries and will enable data comparison on a larger scale. Additionally, first data was requested from the participating countries. RESULTS: Over 24 countries have been approached and 11 confirmed participation: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Germany, The Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Ukraine and United Kingdom. The number of collected data items varied between 16 and 285. This led to a shared items list of 25 variables divided into five categories: patient characteristics, preoperative diagnostics, treatment, staging and survival. Eight countries shared their first data. CONCLUSIONS: A list of 25 shared items on pancreatic cancer coming from eleven participating registries was created, providing a basis for future prospective data collection in pancreatic cancer treatment internationally.

Impact of centralization of pancreatic cancer surgery on resection rates and survival.

BACKGROUND: Centralization of pancreatic surgery has been shown to reduce postoperative mortality. It is unknown whether resection rates and survival have also improved. The aim of this study was to analyse the impact of nationwide centralization of pancreatic surgery on resection rates and long-term survival. METHODS: All patients diagnosed in the Netherlands between 2000 and 2009 with cancer of the pancreatic head were identified in the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Changes in referral pattern, resection rates and survival after pancreatoduodenectomy were analysed. Multivariable regression analysis was used to assess the impact of hospital volume (20 or more procedures per year) on survival after resection. RESULTS: Between 2000 and 2009, 11,160 patients were diagnosed with cancer of the pancreatic head. The resection rate increased from 10.7 per cent in 2000-2004 to 15.3 per cent in 2005-2009 (P < 0.001). No significant difference in survival after resection was observed between the two intervals (P = 0.135), although survival was significantly better in high-volume hospitals (median survival 18 months versus 16 months in low/medium-volume hospitals; P = 0.017). After adjustment for patient and tumour characteristics, high hospital volume remained associated with better overall survival after resection (hazard ratio 0.70, 95 per cent confidence interval 0.58 to 0.84; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Centralization of pancreatic cancer surgery led to increased resection rates. High-volume centres had significantly better survival rates. Centralization improves patient outcomes and should be encouraged.