Patient outcome according to the 2017 international consensus on the definition of borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the usefulness of the 2017 definition of borderline pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (BR-PDAC) in fit patients (performance status 0-1) based on anatomical (A) and biological dimensions (B). METHODS: From 2011 to 2018, 139 resected patients with BR-PDAC according to the 2017 definition were included: 18 patients underwent upfront pancreatectomy (CA 19-9 > 500 U/mL and/or regional lymph node metastasis; BR-B group), and 121 received FOLFIRINOX (FX) induction chemotherapy and were divided into BR-A (CA 19-9 < 500 U/mL, no regional lymph node metastasis; n = 68) and BR-AB (CA 19-9 > 500 U/mL and/or regional lymph node metastasis; n = 53) groups. RESULTS: The 3 groups were comparable according to patient characteristics (except for back pain (P < .01) and CA 19-9 (P < .01)), intraoperative data, and postoperative courses. BR-AB patients required more venous resections (P < .01). The 3 groups were comparable on pathologic findings, except that BR-B patients had more lymph node invasions (P = .02). Median overall survival (OS) of the 121 patients was 45 months. In multivariate analysis, venous resection (P = .039) and R1 resection (P = .012) were poorly linked with OS, whereas BR-A classification (P < .01) independently favored OS. Median survival times of BR-A, BR-AB, and BR-B groups were undetermined, 27 months, and 20 months (P < .001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The 2017 definition was relevant for sub-classifying patients with BR-PDAC. The anatomical dimension (BR-A) was a favorable prognostic factor, whereas the biological dimension (BR-AB and BR-B) poorly impacted survival.

Has the non-resection rate decreased during the last two decades among patients undergoing surgical exploration for pancreatic adenocarcinoma?

PURPOSE: To determine if improvement in imaging reduces the non-resection rate (NRR) among patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). METHODS: From 2000 to 2019, 751 consecutive patients with PDAC were considered eligible for a intention-to-treat pancreatectomy and entered the operating room. In April 2011, our institution acquired a dual energy spectral computed tomography (CT) scanner and liver diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) was included in the imaging workup. We consequently considered 2 periods of inclusion: period #1 (February 2000-March 2011) and period #2 (April 2011-August 2019). RESULTS: All patients underwent a preoperative CT scan with a median delay to surgery of 18 days. Liver DW-MRI was performed among 407 patients (54%). Median delay between CT and surgery decreased (21 days to 16 days, P < .01), and liver DW-MRI was significantly most prescribed during period #2 (14% vs 75%, P < .01). According to the intraoperative findings, the overall NRR was 24.5%, and remained stable over the two periods (25% vs 24%, respectively). While vascular invasion, liver metastasis, and carcinomatosis rates remained stable, para-aortic lymph nodes invasion rate (0.4% vs 4.6%; P < 0.001) significantly increased over the 2 periods. The mean size of the bigger extra pancreatic tumor significantly decrease (7.9 mm vs 6.4 mm (P < .01), respectively) when the resection was not done. In multivariate analysis, CA 19-9 < 500 U/mL (P < .01), and liver DW-MRI prescription (P < .01) favoured the resection. CONCLUSIONS: Due to changes in our therapeutic strategies, the NRR did not decrease during two decades despite imaging improvement.

BRAF mutation is not associated with an increased risk of recurrence in patients undergoing resection of colorectal liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: BRAF mutation is associated with a poor prognosis in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. For patients with resectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs), the prognostic impact of BRAF mutation is unknown and the benefit of surgery debated. This nationwide intergroup (ACHBT, FRENCH, AGEO) study aimed to evaluate the oncological outcome of patients undergoing liver resection for BRAF-mutated CRLMs. METHODS: The study included patients who underwent resection for BRAF-mutated CRLMs in 24 centres between 2012 and 2016. A case-matched comparison was made with 183 patients who underwent resection of CRLMs with wild-type BRAF during the same interval. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients who underwent resection for BRAF-mutated CRLMs in 24 centres were compared with 183 patients with wild-type BRAF. The 1- and 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 46 and 19 per cent for the BRAF-mutated group, and 55·4 and 27·8 per cent for the group with wild-type BRAF (P = 0·430). In multivariable analysis, BRAF mutation was not associated with worse DFS (hazard ratio 1·16, 95 per cent c.i. 0·72 to 1·85; P = 0·547). The 1- and 3-year overall survival rates after surgery were 94 and 54 per cent respectively among patients with BRAF mutation, and 95·8 and 82·9 per cent in those with wild-type BRAF (P = 0·004). Median survival after disease progression was 23·0 (95 per cent c.i. 11·0 to 35·0) months among patients with mutated BRAF and 44·3 (35·9 to 52·6) months in those with wild-type BRAF (P = 0·050). Multisite disease progression was more common in the BRAF-mutated group (48 versus 29·8 per cent; P = 0·034). CONCLUSION: These results support surgical treatment for resectable BRAF-mutated CRLM, as BRAF mutation by itself does not increase the risk of relapse after resection. BRAF mutation is associated with worse survival in patients whose disease relapses after resection of CRLM, as for non-metastatic colorectal cancer.

Highlights, limitations and future challenges of laparoscopic resection for colorectal liver metastases.

The liver is the most common site for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRLM). Despite advances in oncologic treatment, resection of metastases is still the only curative option. Although laparoscopic surgery for primary colorectal cancer is well documented and widely used, laparoscopic surgery for liver metastases has developed more slowly. However, in spite of some difficulties, laparoscopic approach demonstrated strong advantages including minimal parietal damage, decreased morbidity (reduced blood loss and need for transfusion, fewer pulmonary complications), and simplification of subsequent iterative hepatectomy. Up to now, more than 9 000 laparoscopic procedures have been reported worldwide and long-term results in colorectal liver metastases seem comparable to the open approach. Only one recent randomized controlled trial has compared the laparoscopic and the open approach. The purpose of the present update was to identify the barriers limiting widespread acceptance of laparoscopic approach, the benefits and the limits of laparoscopic hepatectomies in CRLM.

Outcomes of pancreatic adenocarcinoma that was not resected because of isolated para-aortic lymph node involvement.

PURPOSE: Survival appears to be poor in cases of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) with para-aortic lymph node involvement (PALN+). However, resection is still performed in these cases because the prognostic impact of PALN+remains controversial. METHODS: PALN+was intraoperatively found in 14 patients (4.8%) with resectable PDAC who consequently did not undergo pancreatectomy. RESULTS: The median overall survival time after laparotomy was 21 months. The 1- and 3-year overall survival rates were 58.3% and 25%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We support the advisability of reconsidering pancreatectomy in patients with intraoperatively detected PALN+because the reported survival of such patients who undergo pancreatectomy is poorer than the survival observed for patients in our series.

A Multidisciplinary Approach on the Perioperative Antithrombotic Management of Patients With Coronary Stents Undergoing Surgery: Surgery After Stenting 2.

Perioperative management of antithrombotic therapy in patients treated with coronary stents undergoing surgery remains poorly defined. Importantly, surgery represents a common reason for premature treatment discontinuation, which is associated with an increased risk in mortality and major adverse cardiac events. However, maintaining antithrombotic therapy to minimize the incidence of perioperative ischemic complications may increase the risk of bleeding complications. Although guidelines provide some recommendations with respect to the perioperative management of antithrombotic therapy, these have been largely developed according to the thrombotic risk of the patient and a definition of the hemorrhagic risk specific to each surgical procedure, key to defining the trade-off between ischemia and bleeding, is not provided. These observations underscore the need for a multidisciplinary collaboration among cardiologists, anesthesiologists, hematologists and surgeons to reach this goal. The present document is an update on practical recommendations for standardizing management of antithrombotic therapy management in patients treated with coronary stents (Surgery After Stenting 2) in various types of surgery according to the predicted individual risk of thrombotic complications against the anticipated risk of surgical bleeding complications. Cardiologists defined the thrombotic risk using a "combined ischemic risk" approach, while surgeons classified surgeries according to their inherent hemorrhagic risk. Finally, a multidisciplinary agreement on the most appropriate antithrombotic treatment regimen in the perioperative phase was reached for each surgical procedure.