Impact of a non-therapeutic laparotomy in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer treated with induction (m)FOLFIRINOX: Trans-Atlantic Pancreatic Surgery (TAPS) Consortium study.

BACKGROUND: Surgery in selected patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer after induction chemotherapy may have drawbacks related to surgical risks and breaks or delays in oncological treatment, in particular when curative intent resection is not possible (that is non-therapeutic laparotomy). The aim of this study was to assess the incidence and oncological impact of a non-therapeutic laparotomy in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer treated with induction (m)FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy. METHODS: This was a retrospective international multicentre study including patients diagnosed with pathology-proven locally advanced pancreatic cancer treated with at least one cycle of (m)FOLFIRINOX (2012-2019). Patients undergoing a non-therapeutic laparotomy (group A) were compared with those not undergoing surgery (group B) and those undergoing resection (group C). RESULTS: Overall, 663 patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer were included (67 patients (10.1%) in group A, 425 patients (64.1%) in group B, and 171 patients (25.8%) in group C). A non-therapeutic laparotomy occurred in 28.2% of all explorations (67 of 238), with occult metastases in 30 patients (30 of 67, 44.8%) and a 90-day mortality rate of 3.0% (2 of 67). Administration of palliative therapy (65.9% versus 73.1%; P = 0.307) and median overall survival (20.4 [95% c.i. 15.9 to 27.3] versus 20.2 [95% c.i. 19.1 to 22.7] months; P = 0.752) did not differ between group A and group B respectively. The median overall survival in group C was 36.1 (95% c.i. 30.5 to 41.2) months. The 5-year overall survival rates were 11.4%, 8.7%, and 24.7% in group A, group B, and group C, respectively. Compared with group B, non-therapeutic laparotomy (group A) was not associated with reduced overall survival (HR = 0.88 [95% c.i. 0.61 to 1.27]). CONCLUSION: More than a quarter of surgically explored patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer after induction (m)FOLFIRINOX did not undergo a resection. Such non-therapeutic laparotomy does not appear to substantially impact oncological outcomes.

Systematic review on management of high-output enterostomy in children: An urgent call for evidence.

OBJECTIVES/BACKGROUND: High-output stoma is one of the most common major morbidities in young children with an enterostomy that could lead to intestinal failure. Management of high-output enterostomy in children is mostly based on personal experience. This systematic review aims to clarify the evidence-based therapeutic approach of high-output enterostomy in children. METHODS: A systematic review was performed using Pubmed, Embase (Ovid), and Cochrane Library to identify studies published until March 20, 2023, following the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline. The study population comprised children (i.e., age <18 years) with high-output enterostomy (i.e., jejuno-, ileo-, and/or colostomy), regardless of underlying aetiology. Interventions comprised any (non)pharmacological and/or surgical treatment. Interventions were compared with each other, placebos, and/or no interventions. Primary outcome was reduction of enterostomy output. Secondary outcomes were morbidity, mortality, quality of life, associated healthcare costs, and adverse events. RESULTS: The literature search identified 4278 original articles of which 366 were screened on full text, revealing that none of the articles met the inclusion criteria. CONCLUSION: This first systematic review on management of high-output enterostomy in children revealed that any evidence on the primary and secondary outcomes is lacking. There is an urgent need for evidence on conservative treatment strategies including fluid restrictions, dietary advices, oral rehydration solution, chyme re-infusion, and pharmacological and surgical treatments of high-output enterostomy in children, aiming to reduce the risk for short- and long-term complications. Till more evidence is available, a systematic and multidisciplinary step-up approach is needed. Therefore, a therapeutic work-up is proposed that could guide the care.

Serum CEA as a Prognostic Marker for Overall Survival in Patients with Localized Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma and Non-Elevated CA19-9 Levels Treated with FOLFIRINOX as Initial Treatment: A TAPS Consortium Study.

INTRODUCTION: About 25% of patients with localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma have non-elevated serum carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 levels at baseline, hampering evaluation of response to preoperative treatment. Serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is a potential alternative. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study from five referral centers included consecutive patients with localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma (2012-2019), treated with one or more cycles of (m)FOLFIRINOX, and non-elevated CA19-9 levels (i.e., < 37 U/mL) at baseline. Cox regression analyses were performed to assess prognostic factors for overall survival (OS), including CEA level at baseline, restaging, and dynamics. RESULTS: Overall, 277 patients were included in this study. CEA at baseline was elevated (≥5 ng/mL) in 53 patients (33%) and normalized following preoperative therapy in 14 patients (26%). In patients with elevated CEA at baseline, median OS in patients with CEA normalization following preoperative therapy was 33 months versus 19 months in patients without CEA normalization (p = 0.088). At time of baseline, only elevated CEA was independently associated with (worse) OS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.98). At time of restaging, elevated CEA at baseline was still the only independent predictor for (worse) OS (HR 1.44, 95% CI 1.04-1.98), whereas elevated CEA at restaging (HR 1.16, 95% CI 0.77-1.77) was not. CONCLUSIONS: Serum CEA was elevated in one-third of patients with localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma having non-elevated CA19-9 at baseline. At both time of baseline and time of restaging, elevated serum CEA measured at baseline was the only predictor for (worse) OS. Therefore, serum CEA may be a useful tool for decision making at both initial staging and time of restaging in patients with non-elevated CA19-9.

Preoperative chemotherapy, radiotherapy and surgical decision-making in patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

Surgical resection combined with systemic chemotherapy is the cornerstone of treatment for patients with localized pancreatic cancer. Upfront surgery is considered suboptimal in cases with extensive vascular involvement, which can be classified as either borderline resectable pancreatic cancer or locally advanced pancreatic cancer. In these patients, FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel chemotherapy is currently used as preoperative chemotherapy and is eventually combined with radiotherapy. Thus, more patients might reach 5-year overall survival. Patient selection for chemotherapy, radiotherapy and subsequent surgery is based on anatomical, biological and conditional parameters. Current guidelines and clinical practices vary considerably regarding preoperative chemotherapy and radiotherapy, response evaluation, and indications for surgery. In this Review, we provide an overview of the clinical evidence regarding disease staging, preoperative therapy, response evaluation and surgery in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer or locally advanced pancreatic cancer. In addition, a clinical work-up is proposed based on the available evidence and guidelines. We identify knowledge gaps and outline a proposed research agenda.

Nationwide Use and Outcome of Surgery for Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Following Induction Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Several international high-volume centers have reported good outcomes after resection of locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) following chemo(radio)therapy, but it is unclear how this translates to nationwide clinical practice and outcome. This study aims to assess the nationwide use and outcome of resection of LAPC following induction chemo(radio)therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multicenter retrospective study including all patients who underwent resection for LAPC following chemo(radio)therapy in all 16 Dutch pancreatic surgery centers (2014-2020), registered in the mandatory Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. LAPC is defined as arterial involvement > 90° and/or portomesenteric venous > 270° involvement or occlusion. RESULTS: Overall, 142 patients underwent resection for LAPC, of whom 34.5% met the 2022 National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria. FOLFIRINOX was the most commonly (93.7%) used chemotherapy [median 5 cycles (IQR 4-8)]. Venous and arterial resections were performed in 51.4% and 14.8% of patients. Most resections (73.9%) were performed in high-volume centers (i.e., ≥ 60 pancreatoduodenectomies/year). Overall median volume of LAPC resections/center was 4 (IQR 1-7). In-hospital/30-day major morbidity was 37.3% and 90-day mortality was 4.2%. Median OS from diagnosis was 26 months (95% CI 23-28) and 5-year OS 18%. Surgery in high-volume centers [HR = 0.542 (95% CI 0.318-0.923)], ypN1-2 [HR = 3.141 (95% CI 1.886-5.234)], and major morbidity [HR = 2.031 (95% CI 1.272-3.244)] were associated with OS. CONCLUSIONS: Resection of LAPC following chemo(radio)therapy is infrequently performed in the Netherlands, albeit with acceptable morbidity, mortality, and OS. Given these findings, a structured nationwide approach involving international centers of excellence would be needed to improve selection of patients with LAPC for surgical resection following induction therapy.

Nationwide Outcome after Pancreatoduodenectomy in Patients at very High Risk (ISGPS-D) for Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula.

OBJECTIVE: To assess nationwide surgical outcome after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) in patients at very high risk for postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), categorized as ISGPS-D. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Morbidity and mortality after ISGPS-D PD is perceived so high that a recent randomized trial advocated prophylactic total pancreatectomy (TP) as alternative aiming to lower this risk. However, current outcomes of ISGPS-D PD remain unknown as large nationwide series are lacking. METHODS: Nationwide retrospective analysis including consecutive patients undergoing ISGPS-D PD (i.e., soft texture and pancreatic duct ≤3 mm), using the mandatory Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (2014-2021). Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and secondary outcomes included major morbidity (i.e., Clavien-Dindo grade ≥IIIa) and POPF (ISGPS grade B/C). The use of prophylactic TP to avoid POPF during the study period was assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 1402 patients were included. In-hospital mortality was 4.1% (n=57), which decreased to 3.7% (n=20/536) in the last 2 years. Major morbidity occurred in 642 patients (45.9%) and POPF in 410 (30.0%), which corresponded with failure to rescue in 8.9% (n=57/642). Patients with POPF had increased rates of major morbidity (88.0% vs. 28.3%; P<0.001) and mortality (6.3% vs. 3.5%; P=0.016), compared to patients without POPF. Among 190 patients undergoing TP, prophylactic TP to prevent POPF was performed in 4 (2.1%). CONCLUSION: This nationwide series found a 4.1% in-hospital mortality after ISGPS-D PD with 45.9% major morbidity, leaving little room for improvement through prophylactic TP. Nevertheless, given the outcomes in 30% of patients who develop POPF, future randomized trials should aim to prevent and mitigate POPF in this high-risk category.

Risk Factors, Management, and Outcome of Gastric Venous Congestion After Total Pancreatectomy: An Underestimated Complication Requiring Standardized Identification, Grading, and Management.

BACKGROUND: Gastric venous congestion (GVC) after total pancreatectomy (TP) is rarely studied despite its high 5% to 28% incidence and possible association with mortality. This study aimed to provide insight about incidence, risk factors, management, and outcome of GVC after TP. METHODS: This retrospective observational single-center study included all patients undergoing elective TP from 2008 to 2021. The exclusion criteria ruled out a history of gastric resection, concomitant (sub)total gastrectomy for oncologic indication(s) or celiac axis resection, and postoperative (sub)total gastrectomy for indication(s) other than GVC. RESULTS: The study enrolled 268 patients. The in-hospital major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥IIIa) rate was 28%, and the 90-day mortality rate was 3%. GVC was identified in 21% of patients, particularly occurring during index surgery (93%). Intraoperative GVC was managed with (sub)total gastrectomy for 55% of the patients. The major morbidity rate was higher for the patients with GVC (44% vs 24%; p = 0.003), whereas the 90-day mortality did not differ significantly (5% vs 3%; p = 0.406). The predictors for major morbidity were intraoperative GVC (odds ratio [OR], 2.207; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.142-4.268) and high TP volume (> 20 TPs/year: OR, 0.360; 95% CI, 0.175-0.738). The predictors for GVC were portomesenteric venous resection (PVR) (OR, 2.103; 95% CI, 1.034-4.278) and left coronary vein ligation (OR, 11.858; 95% CI, 5.772-24.362). CONCLUSIONS: After TP, GVC is rather common (in 1 of 5 patients). GVC during index surgery is predictive for major morbidity, although not translating into higher mortality. Left coronary vein ligation and PVR are predictive for GVC, requiring vigilance during and after surgery, although gastric resection is not always necessary. More evidence on prevention, identification, classification, and management of GVC is needed.

Minimum and Optimal CA19-9 Response After Two Months Induction Chemotherapy in Patients with Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Nationwide Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: This nationwide multicenter study aimed to define clinically relevant thresholds of relative serum CA19-9 response after 2 months induction chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: CA19-9 is seen as leading biomarker for response evaluation in patients with LAPC, but early clinically useful cut-offs are lacking. METHODS: All consecutive patients with LAPC after 4 cycles (m)FOLFIRINOX or 2 cycles gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel induction chemotherapy (±radiotherapy) with CA19-9 ≥5 U/mL at baseline were analyzed (2015-2019). The association of CA19-9 response with median OS (mOS) was evaluated for different CA19-9 cut-off points. Minimum and optimal CA19-9 response were established via log-rank test. Predictors for OS were analyzed, using cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 212 patients were included of whom 42 (19.8%) underwent resection. Minimum CA19-9 response demonstrating a clinically significant mOS difference (12.7 vs. 19.6 mo) was seen at ≥40% CA19-9 decrease. The optimal cut-off for CA19-9 response was ≥60% decrease (21.7 vs. 14.0 mo, P=0.021). Only for patients with elevated CA19-9 levels at baseline (n=184), CA19-9 decrease ≥60% (HR=0.59, 95%CI 0.36-0.98, P=0.042) was independently associated with prolonged OS, as were SBRT (HR=0.42, 95%CI 0.25-0.70; P=0.001), and resection (HR=0.25, 95%CI 0.14-0.46, P<0.001), and duration of chemotherapy (HR=0.75, 95%CI 0.69-0.82, P<0.001). CONCLUSION: CA19-9 decrease of ≥60% following induction chemotherapy as optimal response cut-off in patients with LAPC is an independent predictor for OS when CA19-9 is increased at baseline. Furthermore, ≥40% is the minimum cut-off demonstrating survival benefit. These cut-offs may be used when discussing treatment strategies during early response evaluation.

"Conversion surgery" for locally advanced pancreatic cancer: A position paper by the study group at the joint meeting of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) & Japan Pancreas Society (JPS) 2022.

Locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), which progresses locally and surrounds major vessels, has historically been deemed unresectable. Surgery alone failed to provide curative resection and improve overall survival. With the advancements in treatment, reports have shown favorable results in LAPC after undergoing successful chemotherapy therapy or chemoradiation therapy followed by surgical resection, so-called "conversion surgery", at experienced high-volume centers. However, recognizing significant regional and institutional disparities in the management of LAPC, an international consensus meeting on conversion surgery for LAPC was held during the Joint Congress of the 26th Meeting of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) and the 53rd Annual Meeting of Japan Pancreas Society (JPS) in Kyoto in July 2022. During the meeting, presenters reported the current best multidisciplinary practices for LAPC, including preoperative modalities, best systemic treatment regimens and durations, procedures of conversion surgery with or without vascular resections, biomarkers, and genetic studies. It was unanimously agreed among the experts in this meeting that "cancer biology is surpassing locoregional anatomical resectability" in the era of effective multiagent treatment. The biology of pancreatic cancer has yet to be further elucidated, and we believe it is essential to improve the treatment outcomes of LAPC patients through continued efforts from each institution and more international collaboration. This article summarizes the agreement during the discussion amongst the experts in the meeting. We hope that this will serve as a foundation for future international collaboration and recommendations for future guidelines.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Role of Total Pancreatectomy as an Alternative to Pancreatoduodenectomy in Patients at High Risk for Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula: Is it a Justifiable Indication?

OBJECTIVE: Examine the potential benefit of total pancreatectomy (TP) as an alternative to pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) in patients at high risk for postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: TP is mentioned as an alternative to PD in patients at high risk for POPF, but a systematic review is lacking. METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analyses using Pubmed, Embase (Ovid), and Cochrane Library to identify studies published up to October 2022, comparing elective single-stage TP for any indication versus PD in patients at high risk for POPF. The primary endpoint was short-term mortality. Secondary endpoints were major morbidity (i.e., Clavien-Dindo grade ≥IIIa) on the short-term and quality of life. RESULTS: After screening 1212 unique records, five studies with 707 patients (334 TP and 373 high-risk PD) met the eligibility criteria, comprising one randomized controlled trial and four observational studies. The 90-day mortality after TP and PD did not differ (6.3% vs. 6.2%; RR=1.04 [95%CI 0.56-1.93]). Major morbidity rate was lower after TP compared to PD (26.7% vs. 38.3%; RR=0.65 [95%CI 0.48-0.89]), but no significance was seen in matched/randomized studies (29.0% vs. 36.9%; RR = 0.73 [95%CI 0.48-1.10]). Two studies investigated quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30) at a median of 30-52 months, demonstrating comparable global health status after TP and PD (77% [±15] vs. 76% [±20]; P =0.857). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis found no reduction in short-term mortality and major morbidity after TP as compared to PD in patients at high risk for POPF. However, if TP is used as a bail-out procedure, the comparable long-term quality of life is reassuring.

Surgical outcome of a double versus a single pancreatoduodenectomy per operating day.

BACKGROUND: For logistical reasons, some high-volume centers have developed surgical programs wherein 1 surgical team performs 2 pancreatoduodenectomies on a single day. It is unclear whether this practice has a negative impact on surgical outcome. METHODS: We conuducted a retrospective analysis including all consecutive open pancreatoduodenectomies in a single high-volume center (2014-2021). Pancreatoduodenectomies were grouped as the first (pancreatoduodenectomy-1) or second (pancreatoduodenectomy-2) pancreatoduodenectomy on a single day (ie, paired pancreatoduodenectomies) and as pancreatoduodenectomy-3 whenever 1 pancreatoduodenectomy was performed per day (ie, unpaired). Patients undergoing minimally invasive procedures were excluded. The primary outcomes were major morbidity (ie, Clavien-Dindo grade ≥IIIa) and mortality. RESULTS: Among 689 patients, 151 patients had undergone minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy, leaving 538 patients after open pancreatoduodenectomy for inclusion. The overall rate of major morbidity was 37.4% (n = 200/538) and in-hospital/30-day mortality 1.7% (n = 9/538). Overall, 136 (25.3%) patients were operated in 68 pancreatoduodenectomy-1/ pancreatoduodenectomy-2 pairs and 402 (74.7%) patients as unpaired pancreatoduodenectomy (pancreatoduodenectomy-3). No differences were found between pancreatoduodenectomy-1 and pancreatoduodenectomy-2 regarding the rates of major morbidity (35.3% vs 26.5%; P = .265) and mortality (1.5% vs 0%; P = .999). Between the 68 pancreatoduodenectomy-1/ pancreatoduodenectomy-2 pairs and the 402 unpaired pancreatoduodenectomies, the rates of major morbidity (30.9% vs 39.6%; P = .071) and mortality (0.7% vs 2.0%; P = .461) did not differ significantly. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, pancreatoduodenectomy-1 was not associated with major morbidity (odds ratio = 0.913 [95% confidence interval 0.515-1.620]; P = .756), whereas pancreatoduodenectomy-2 was associated with less major morbidity (odds ratio = 0.522 [95% confidence interval 0.277-0.983]; P = .045). CONCLUSION: In a high-volume setting, performing 2 consecutive open pancreatoduodenectomies on a single operating day appears to be safe. This approach may be an option when logistically required.

Surgical management of severe pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy: a comparison of early versus late rescue pancreatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Rescue pancreatectomy for postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is associated with high mortality. However, in-depth literature is scarce and hard to interpret. This study aimed to evaluate the indications, timing and perioperative outcomes of rescue pancreatectomy for severe POPF after PD. METHODS: Retrospective single-centre study from all consecutive patients (2008-2020) with POPF-C after PD (ISGPS 2016 definition). Major morbidity and mortality during hospitalization or within 90 days after index surgery were evaluated. Time from index surgery to rescue pancreatectomy was dichotomized in early and late (≤ 11 versus > 11 days). RESULTS: From 1076 PDs performed, POPF-B/C occurred in 190 patients (17.7%) of whom 53 patients (4.9%) with POPF-C were included. Mortality after early rescue pancreatectomy did not differ significantly compared to late rescue pancreatectomy (13.6% versus 35.3%; p = 0.142). Timing of a rescue pancreatectomy did not change significantly during the study period: 11 (IQR, 8-14) (2008-2012) versus 14 (IQR, 7-33) (2013-2016) versus 8 days (IQR, 6-11) (2017-2020) (p = 0.140). Over time, the mortality in patients with POPF grade C decreased from 43.5% in 2008-2012 to 31.6% in 2013-2016 up to 0% in 2017-2020 (p = 0.014). However, mortality rates after rescue pancreatectomy did not differ significantly: 31.3% (2008-2012) versus 28.6% (2013-2016) versus 0% (2017-2020) (p = 0.104). CONCLUSIONS: Rescue pancreatectomy for severe POPF is associated with high mortality, but an earlier timing might favourably influence the mortality. Hypothetically, this could be of value for pre-existent vulnerable patients. These findings must be carefully interpreted considering the sample sizes and differences among subgroups by patient selection.

Added value of 3T MRI and the MRI-halo sign in assessing resectability of locally advanced pancreatic cancer following induction chemotherapy (IMAGE-MRI): prospective pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Restaging of locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) after induction chemotherapy using contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT) imaging is imprecise in evaluating local tumor response. This study explored the value of 3 Tesla (3 T) contrast-enhanced (CE) and diffusion-weighted (DWI) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for local tumor restaging. METHODS: This is a prospective pilot study including 20 consecutive patients with LAPC with RECIST non-progressive disease on CE-CT after induction chemotherapy. Restaging CE-CT, CE-MRI, and DWI-MRI were retrospectively evaluated by two abdominal radiologists in consensus, scoring tumor size and vascular involvement. A halo sign was defined as replacement of solid perivascular (arterial and venous) tumor tissue by a zone of fatty-like signal intensity. RESULTS: Adequate MRI was obtained in 19 patients with LAPC after induction chemotherapy. Tumor diameter was non-significantly smaller on CE-MRI compared to CE-CT (26 mm vs. 30 mm; p = 0.073). An MRI-halo sign was seen on CE-MRI in 52.6% (n = 10/19), whereas a CT-halo sign was seen in 10.5% (n = 2/19) of patients (p = 0.016). An MRI-halo sign was not associated with resection rate (60.0% vs. 62.5%; p = 1.000). In the resection cohort, patients with an MRI-halo sign had a non-significant increased R0 resection rate as compared to patients without an MRI-halo sign (66.7% vs. 20.0%; p = 0.242). Positive and negative predictive values of the CE-MRI-halo sign for R0 resection were 66.7% and 66.7%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: 3 T CE-MRI and the MRI-halo sign might be helpful to assess the effect of induction chemotherapy in patients with LAPC, but its diagnostic accuracy has to be evaluated in larger series.

Total pancreatectomy as an alternative to high-risk pancreatojejunostomy after pancreatoduodenectomy: a propensity score analysis on surgical outcome and quality of life.

BACKGROUND: Total pancreatectomy (TP) is mentioned as alternative to pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) with high-risk pancreatojejunostomy (PJ) to avoid severe pancreatic fistula-related complications, but its benefit is controversial and comparative studies are scarce. METHODS: Cross-sectional single-center study among patients after PD with high-risk PJ versus patients after single-stage elective TP for any indication (2015-2017), using propensity scores to evaluate surgical outcomes and long-term quality of life (QoL) in three risk strata. EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-5L were used for QoL assessment. RESULTS: Overall, 77 patients after TP (68.8%) and 102 patients after high-risk PD (34.5%) were included. Major morbidity (29.9% vs. 41.2%; p = 0.119) and 90-day mortality (5.2% vs. 8.8%; p = 0.354) did not differ significantly between TP and high-risk PD. Interventions for intra-abdominal fluid collections (9.1% vs. 23.5%, p = 0.011) and postpancreatectomy haemorrhage (6.5% vs. 18.6%; p = 0.018) were more often required after high-risk PD, but these differences did not remain after stratification. QoL was comparable after TP and high-risk PD (75% vs. 83%; p = 0.720), even after stratification. CONCLUSIONS: TP seems not to be inferior to high-risk PD regarding surgical outcomes and QoL. TP could be considered as an alternative to a very high-risk PD, but reluctance persists since TP does not appear to reduce mortality.