Search

Aim: To investigate the impact of total pancreatectomy (TP) on oncological outcomes for patients at high-risk of local recurrence or secondary progression in the remnant gland after partial pancreatectomy (PP) for IPMN-associated cancer., Summary Background Data: Major risk factors for invasive progression in the remnant gland include multifocality, diffuse main duct dilation, and the presence of invasive cancer. In these high-risk patients, a TP may be oncologically beneficial. However, current guidelines discourage TP, especially in elderly patients., Methods: This international multicenter study compares TP versus PP in patients with adenocarcinoma arising from multifocal or diffuse IPMN (2002-2022). Log-rank test and multivariable Cox-analysis with interaction analysis was performed to assess overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and local-DFS., Results: Of 359 included patients, 162 (45%) were treated with TP, whereas 197 (55%) underwent PP. Despite TP and PP having similar R0-rates (59% vs. 58%, P=0.866), patients undergoing a TP had significantly longer local-DFS compared to PP (P=0.039). However, no difference in OS was observed between the two surgical approaches (P=0.487). In a multivariable analysis, young age (optimal cut-off ≤63.6 yrs) was associated with an OS benefit derived from TP (HR:0.44, 95%CI:0.22-0.89), whereas no significant difference was observed in elderly patients (HR:1.24, 95%CI:0.92-1.67, Pinteraction=0.007)., Conclusion: Since overall, patients with diffuse or multifocal IPMN with an invasive component do not benefit from TP in terms of OS, the indication for TP may be individualized to young patients who have sufficient life expectancy to benefit from the prevention of secondary progression or local recurrence., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: None declared. Disclosures: There are no conflicts of interest for any of the authors., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To measure the rate of LTS in resected PDAC and determine the association between predictors of OS and LTS., Summary Background Data: Long-term survival (>5 y, LTS) remains rare in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Multiple predictors of overall survival (OS) are known but their association with LTS remains unclear., Methods: An international, multicenter retrospective study was conducted. Included were patients from 2012-2019 with resected PDAC. Excluded were those with metastases at diagnosis or resection, R2 resections, and 90-day mortality. Predictors of OS were identified using multivariable Cox regression and their prevalence in patients with LTS assessed. LTS was calculated by excluding patients with shorter follow-up and predictors of LTS were identified using multivariable logistic regression., Results: 3,003 patients were included (27.4% received neoadjuvant chemotherapy). Elevated baseline CA19-9, high tumor grade, nodal disease, and perineural and lymphovascular invasion were negative independent predictors of OS, while receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy predicted improved OS (all P<0.05). LTS was observed in 220/2,436 patients (9.0%), of whom 198 (90%) harbored poor prognostic factors: elevated baseline CA19-9 (58.1%), poor tumor differentiation (51.0%), nodal disease (46.8%), and perineural invasion (76.0%). Of those without any of these four features, 50.0% achieved LTS as compared to 21.3%, 13.3%, 5.2%, and 3.5% in those with 1, 2, 3, or 4 features., Conclusions: This bi-national cohort demonstrates a true LTS rate of 9.0% in resected PDAC. Clinicians should remain aware that presence of poor prognostic factors does not preclude LTS., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To determine the interobserver variability for complications of pancreatoduodenectomy as defined by the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) and others., Summary Background Data: Good interobserver variability for the definitions of surgical complications is of major importance in comparing surgical outcomes between and within centers. However, data on interobserver variability for pancreatoduodenectomy-specific complications are lacking., Methods: International cross-sectional multicenter study including 52 raters from 13 high-volume pancreatic centers in 8 countries on 3 continents. Per center, 4 experienced raters scored 30 randomly selected patients after pancreatoduodenectomy. In addition, all raters scored six standardized case vignettes. This variability and the 'within centers' variability were calculated for twofold scoring (no complication/grade A vs grade B/C) and threefold scoring (no complication/grade A vs grade B vs grade C) of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), post-pancreatoduodenectomy hemorrhage (PPH), chyle leak (CL), bile leak (BL), and delayed gastric emptying (DGE). Interobserver variability is presented with Gwet's AC-1 measure for agreement., Results: Overall, 390 patients after pancreatoduodenectomy were included. The overall agreement rate for the standardized cases vignettes for twofold scoring was 68% (95%-CI: 55%-81%, AC1 score: moderate agreement) and for threefold scoring 55% (49%-62%, AC1 score: fair agreement). The mean 'within centers' agreement for twofold scoring was 84% (80%-87%, AC1 score; substantial agreement)., Conclusion: The interobserver variability for the ISGPS defined complications of pancreatoduodenectomy was too high even though the 'within centers' agreement was acceptable. Since these findings will decrease the quality and validity of clinical studies, ISGPS has started efforts aimed at reducing the interobserver variability., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest and Source of Funding: No conflicts of interest declared or source of funding, (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: This nationwide multicenter study aimed to define clinically relevant thresholds of relative serum CA19-9 response after 2 months of induction chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC)., Background: 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 median OS difference (12.7 vs. 19.6 months) was seen at ≥40% CA19-9 decrease. The optimal cutoff 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% [hazard ratio (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)., Conclusions: 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., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

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., (© 2023 The Authors. Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition and North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition.)

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., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

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., Competing Interests: M.D.C. has been awarded an industry grant (Haemonetics, Inc) to conduct a multicentre study to evaluate the prognostic implications of TEG in pancreatic cancer. M.D.C. is co-principal investigator of a Boston Scientific-sponsored international multicentre study on the use of intraoperative pancreatoscopy of patients with IPMN.The remaining authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) critically influenced microscopically complete resection (R0) rates and long-term outcomes for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) with portomesenteric vein resection (PVR) from a diverse, world-wide group of high-volume centers., Summary of Background Data: Limited size studies suggest that NAT improves R0 rates and overall survival compared to upfront surgery in R/BR-PDAC patients., Methods: This multicenter study analyzed consecutive patients with R/BR-PDAC who underwent PD with PVR in 23 high-volume centers from 2009 to 2018., Results: Data from 1192 patients with PD and PVR were collected and analyzed. The median age was 68 [interquartile range (IQR) 60-73] years and 52% were males. Some 186 (15.6%) and 131 (10.9%) patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) alone and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, respectively. The R0/R1/R2 rates were 57%, 39.3%, and 3.2% in patients who received NAT compared to 46.6%, 49.9%, and 3.5% in patients who did not, respectively (P =0.004). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS in patients receiving NAT was 79%, 41%, and 29%, while for those that did not it was 73%, 29%, and 18%, respectively (P <0.001). Multivariable analysis showed no administration of NAT, high tumor grade, lymphovascular invasion, R1/R2 resection, no adjuvant chemotherapy, occurrence of Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher postoperative complications within 90 days, preoperative diabetes mellitus, male sex and portal vein involvement were negative independent predictive factors for OS., Conclusion: Patients with PDAC of the pancreatic head expected to undergo venous reconstruction should routinely be considered for NAT., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The aim of this study was to establish clinically relevant outcome benchmark values using criteria for pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) with portomesenteric venous resection (PVR) from a low-risk cohort managed in high-volume centers., Summary Background Data: PD with PVR is regarded as the standard of care in patients with cancer involvement of the portomesenteric venous axis. There are, however, no benchmark outcome indicators for this population which hampers comparisons of patients undergoing PD with and without PVR resection., Methods: This multicenter study analyzed patients undergoing PD with any type of PVR in 23 high-volume centers from 2009 to 2018. Nineteen outcome benchmarks were established in low-risk patients, defined as the 75th percentile of the median outcome values of the centers (NCT04053998)., Results: Out of 1462 patients with PD and PVR, 840 (58%) formed the benchmark cohort, with a mean age was 64 (SD11) years, 413 (49%) were females. Benchmark cutoffs, among others, were calculated as follows: Clinically relevant pancreatic fistula rate (International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery): ≤14%; in-hospital mortality rate: ≤4%; major complication rate Grade≥3 and the CCI up to 6 months postoperatively: ≤36% and ≤26, respectively; portal vein thrombosis rate: ≤14% and 5-year survival for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: ≥9%., Conclusion: These novel benchmark cutoffs targeting surgical performance, morbidity, mortality, and oncological parameters show relatively inferior results in patients undergoing vascular resection because of involvement of the portomesenteric venous axis. These benchmark values however can be used to conclusively assess the results of different centers or surgeons operating on this high-risk group.

Objective: The aim of this study was to clarify the role of pancreatic surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic to optimize patients' and clinicians' safety and safeguard health care capacity., Summary Background Data: The COVID-19 pandemic heavily impacts health care systems worldwide. Cancer patients appear to have an increased risk for adverse events when infected by COVID-19, but the inability to receive oncological care seems may be an even larger threat, particularly in case of pancreatic cancer., Methods: An online survey was submitted to all members of seven international pancreatic associations and study groups, investigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pancreatic surgery using 21 statements (April, 2020). Consensus was defined as >80% agreement among respondents and moderate agreement as 60% to 80% agreement., Results: A total of 337 respondents from 267 centers and 37 countries spanning 5 continents completed the survey. Most respondents were surgeons (n = 302, 89.6%) and working in an academic center (n = 286, 84.9%). The majority of centers (n = 166, 62.2%) performed less pancreatic surgery because of the COVID-19 pandemic, reducing the weekly pancreatic resection rate from 3 [interquartile range (IQR) 2-5] to 1 (IQR 0-2) (P < 0.001). Most centers screened for COVID-19 before pancreatic surgery (n = 233, 87.3%). Consensus was reached on 13 statements and 5 statements achieved moderate agreement., Conclusions: This global survey elucidates the role of pancreatic surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic, regarding patient selection for the surgical and oncological treatment of pancreatic diseases to support clinical decision-making and creating a starting point for further discussion.