Search

Background The aim is to develop and test the utility of an event-initiated, team-based check list to optimize the response to bleeding during laparoscopic HPB surgery. Methods To build a checklist for managing bleeding events, we conducted a systematic review. Using nominal group technique (NGT), a checklist consisting of four domains was developed. Following team-based training of anesthesia and surgical staff, the checklist was implemented. HPB cases before and after implementation of the checklist were compared for adverse outcomes, bleeding complications, and transfusions. Results NGT identified four domains: Communicate Control, Expose, and Repair under which the checklist was organized. Supplemental Video for a detailed review of how each domain was applied to a specific case example. We compared 169 HPB cases before to 53 cases after implementation. We found a significant decrease in mean EBL (from 518 ± 852.8 to 151.5 ± 221.7 ml (P = 0.001)) for cases performed after implementation of the checklist and a trends toward less volume of pRBC transfused (2.7 ± 2.5 vs 2.3 ± 1.7 units/per patient, P = 0.611) and transfusion rates (22% vs 11%, P = 0.703). Conclusion An event-initiated, team-based response to an adverse bleeding event during laparoscopic HPB surgery correlates with positive effects on bleeding management, and transfusion rates.

Intraperitoneal drain placement decreases morbidity and mortality in patients who develop a clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). It is unknown whether multiple drains mitigate CR-POPF better than a single drain. We hypothesized that multiple drains decrease the complication burden more than a single drain in cases at greater risk for CR-POPF.The Fistula Risk Score (FRS), mitigation strategies (including number of drains placed), and clinical outcomes were obtained from a multi-institutional database of PDs performed from 2003 to 2020. Outcomes were compared between cases utilizing 0, 1, or 2 intraperitoneal drains. Multivariable regression analysis was used to evaluate the optimal drainage approach.A total of 4,292 PDs used 0 (7.3%), 1 (45.2%), or 2 (47.5%) drains with an observed CR-POPF rate of 9.6%, which was higher in intermediate/high FRS zone cases compared with negligible/low FRS zone cases (13% vs 2.4%, P.001). The number of drains placed also correlated with FRS zone (median of 2 in intermediate/high vs 1 in negligible/low risk cases). In intermediate/high risk cases, the use of 2 drains instead of 1 was not associated with a reduced rate of CR-POPF, average complication burden attributed to a CR-POPF, reoperations, or mortality. Obviation of drains was associated with significant increases in complication burden and mortality - regardless of the FRS zone.In intermediate/high risk zone cases, placement of a single drain or multiple drains appears to mitigate the complication burden while use of no drains is associated with inferior outcomes.

Although the number of minimally invasive liver resections (MILRs) has been steadily increasing in many institutions, minimally invasive anatomic liver resection (MIALR) remains a complicated procedure that has not been standardized. We present the results of a survey among expert liver surgeons as a benchmark for standardizing MIALR.We administered this survey to 34 expert liver surgeons who routinely perform MIALR. The survey contained questions on personal experience with liver resection, inflow/outflow control methods, and identification techniques of intersegmental/sectional planes (IPs).All 34 participants completed the survey; 24 experts (70%) had more than 11 years of experience with MILR, and over 80% of experts had performed over 100 open resections and MILRs each. Regarding the methods used for laparoscopic or robotic anatomic resection, the Glissonean approach (GA) was a more frequent procedure than the hilar approach (HA). Although hepatic veins were considered essential landmarks, the exposure methods varied. The top three techniques that the experts recommended for identifying IPs were creating a demarcation line, indocyanine green negative staining method, and intraoperative ultrasound.Minimally invasive anatomic liver resection remains a challenging procedure; however, a certain degree of consensus exists among expert liver surgeons.

Background: The association between intraoperative estimated blood loss and outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy has, thus far, been rarely explored. Methods: In total, 7,706 pancreatoduodenectomies performed at 18 international institutions composing the Pancreas Fistula Study Group were examined (2003-2020). High estimated blood loss (>700 mL) was defined as twice the median. Propensity score matching (1:1 exact-match) was employed to adjust for variables associated with high estimated blood loss and clinically relevant pancreatic fistula occurrence. The study was powered to detect a 33% clinically relevant pancreatic fistula increase in the high estimated blood loss group, with a = 0.05 and b = 0.2. Results: The propensity score model included 966 patients with high estimated blood loss and 966 patients with lower estimated blood loss; all covariate imbalantces were solved. Patients with high estimated blood loss patients experienced higher clinically relevant pancreatic fistula rates (19.4 vs 12.6%, odds ratio 1.66; P < .001), as well as higher severe complication rates (27.8 vs 15.6%), transfusions (50.1 vs 14.3%), reoperations (9.2 vs 4.0%), intensive care unit transfers (9.9 vs 4.8%) and 90-day mortality (4.7 vs 2.0%, all P < .001). High estimated blood loss was an independent predictor for clinically relevant pancreatic fistula (odds ratio 1.78, 95% confidence interval 1.37-2.32), as were prophylactic Octreotide administration (odds ratio 1.95, 95% confidence interval 1.46-2.61) and soft pancreatic texture (odds ratio 5.32, 95% confidence interval 3.74-5.57; all P < .001). Moreover, a second model including 1,126 pancreatoduodenectomies was derived including vascular resections as additional confounder (14.0% vascular resections performed in each group). On multivariable regression, high estimated blood loss was confirmed an independent predictor for clinically relevant pancreatic fistula reduction (odds ratio 1.80, 95% confidence interval 1.32-2.4 4; P < .001), whereas vascular resection was not (odds ratio 0.64, 95% confidence interval 0.34-1.88; P 1/4 .156). Conclusion: This study better establishes the relationship between estimated blood loss and outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy. Despite inherent contributions to blood loss, its minimization is an actionable opportunity for clinically relevant pancreatic fistula reduction and performance optimization in pancreatoduodenectomy. Accordingly, practical insights are offered to achieve this goal. (c) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Objective: The aim of this work is to formulate recommendations based on global expert consensus to guide the surgical community on the safe resumption of surgical and endoscopic activities. Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused marked disruptions in the delivery of surgical care worldwide. A thoughtful, structured approach to resuming surgical services is necessary as the impact of COVID-19 becomes better controlled. The Coronavirus Global Surgical Collaborative sought to formulate, through rigorous scientific methodology, consensus-based recommendations in collaboration with a multidisciplinary group of international experts and policymakers. Methods: Recommendations were developed following a Delphi process. Domain topics were formulated and subsequently subdivided into questions pertinent to different aspects of surgical care in the COVID-19 crisis. Forty-four experts from 15 countries across 4 continents drafted statements based on the specific questions. Anonymous Delphi voting on the statements was performed in 2 rounds, as well as in a telepresence meeting. Results: One hundred statements were formulated across 10 domains. The statements addressed terminology, impact on procedural services, patient/staff safety, managing a backlog of surgeries, methods to restart and sustain surgical services, education, and research. Eighty-three of the statements were approved during the first round of Delphi voting, and 11 during the second round. A final telepresence meeting and discussion yielded acceptance of 5 other statements. Conclusions: The Delphi process resulted in 99 recommendations. These consensus statements provide expert guidance, based on scientific methodology, for the safe resumption of surgical activities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Previous reports suggest that structured training in minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS) can ensure a safe implementation into standard practice. Although some training programs have been constructed, worldwide consensus on fundamental items of these training programs is lacking. This study aimed to determine items for a structured MIPS training program using the Delphi consensus methodology. STUDY DESIGN: The study process consisted of 2 Delphi rounds among international experts in MIPS, identified by a literature review. The study committee developed a list of items for 3 key domains of MIPS training: (1) framework, (2) centers and surgeons eligible for training, and (3) surgeons eligible as proctor. The experts rated these items on a scale from 1 (not important) to 5 (very important). A Cronbach's α of 0.70 or greater was defined as the cut-off value to achieve consensus. Each item that achieved 80% or greater of expert votes was considered as fundamental for a training program in MIPS. RESULTS: Both Delphi study rounds were completed by all invited experts in MIPS, with a median experience of 20 years in MIPS. Experts included surgeons from 31 cities in 13 countries across 4 continents. Consensus was reached on 38 fundamental items for the framework of training (16 of 35 items, Cronbach's α = 0.72), centers and surgeons eligible for training (19 of 30 items, Cronbach's α = 0.87), and surgeons eligible as proctor (3 of 10 items, Cronbach's α = 0.89). Center eligibility for MIPS included a minimum annual volume of 10 distal pancreatectomies and 50 pancreatoduodenectomies. CONCLUSION: Consensus among worldwide experts in MIPS was reached on fundamental items for the framework of training and criteria for participating surgeons and centers. These items act as a guideline and intend to improve training, proctoring, and safe worldwide dissemination of MIPS.

Background Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) has become the preferred approach for surgical management of left sided pancreas pathology. Our institution previously published its experience with distal pancreatectomies using a clockwise technique with good outcomes. We now reexamine our outcomes across a longer time interval. Methods From August 2008 to November 2020, 364 patients underwent LDP by hepatobiliary surgeons (HA and JS). All procedures were performed using the same clockwise approach, which includes the stepwise slow compression technique. Retrospective descriptive analysis of patient demographic, clinical, operative, and pathologic data was conducted. Results Of the 364 patients who underwent LDP using this technique, clinically significant postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) was noted in 26 (7.1%) patients, while major morbidity and mortality were reported in 9.9% and 0.3%, respectively. Hand-assisted method was required for 18 (4.9%) patients and unplanned conversion in 20 (5.5%) patients. In a subset analysis of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (n = 90), POPF was noted in 13 (14.4%), with minor complications occurring in 34.4% and major morbidity in 14.4%. Conclusion LDP with a clockwise approach for dissection, combined with the stepwise slow compression technique results in excellent outcomes, with even lower POPF rates than originally reported. Subset analysis of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma shows acceptable perioperative outcomes with this technique.

BACKGROUND The Glissonean approach has been widely validated for both open and minimally invasive anatomic liver resection (MIALR). However, the possible advantages compared to the conventional hilar approach are still under debate. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the application of the Glissonean approach in MIALR. METHODS A systematic review of the literature was conducted on PubMed and Ichushi databases. Articles written in English or Japanese were included. From 2,390 English manuscripts evaluated by title and abstract, 43 were included. Additionally, 23 out of 463 Japanese manuscripts were selected. Duplicates were removed, including the most recent manuscript. RESULTS The Glissonean approach is reported for both major and minor MIALR. The 1st, 2nd and 3rd order divisions of both right and left portal pedicles can be reached following defined anatomical landmarks. Compared to the conventional hilar approach, the Glissonean approach is associated with shorter operative time, lower blood loss, and better peri-operative outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Glissonean approach is safe and feasible for MIALR with several reported advantages compared to the conventional hilar approach. Clear knowledge of Laennec's capsule anatomy is necessary and serves as a guide for the dissection. However, the best surgical approach to be performed depends on surgeon experience and patients' characteristics. Standardization of the Glissonean approach for MIALR is important.

Purpose In this systematic review, we aimed to clarify the useful anatomic structures and assess available surgical techniques and strategies required to safely perform minimally invasive anatomic liver resection (MIALR), with a particular focus on the hepatic veins (HVs). Methods A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE/PubMed for English articles and Ichushi databases for Japanese articles through September 2020. The quality assessment of the articles was performed in accordance with the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). Results A total of 3,372 studies were obtained, and 59 were selected and reviewed. Due to the limited number of published comparative studies and case series, the degree of evidence from our review was low. Thirty-two articles examined the anatomic landmarks and crucial structures for approaching HVs. Regarding the direction of HV exposure, 32 articles focused on the techniques and advantages of exposing HVs from either the root or the periphery. Ten articles focused on the techniques to perform a segmentectomy 8 in particularly difficult cases of MIALR. In seven articles, bleeding control from HVs was also discussed. Conclusions This review may help experts reach a consensus regarding the best approach to the management of hepatic veins during MIALR.

Background Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) has recently been safely performed by experts, and various methods for resection have been reported. This review summarizes the literature describing surgical approaches for MIPD. Methods A systematic literature search of PubMed (MEDLINE) was conducted for studies reporting robotic and laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy; the reference lists of review articles were searched. Of 444 articles yielded, 23 manuscripts describing the surgical approach to dissect around the superior mesenteric artery (SMA), including hand-searched articles, were assessed. Results Various approaches to dissect around the SMA have been reported. These approaches were categorized according to the direction toward the SMA when initiating dissection around the SMA: anterior approach (two articles), posterior approach (four articles), right approach (16 articles), and left approach (three articles). Thus, many reports used the right approach. Most articles provided a technical description. Some articles showed the advantage of their method in a comparison study. However, these were single-center retrospective studies with a small sample size. Conclusions Various approaches for MIPD have been reported; however, few authors have reported the advantage of their methods compared to other methods. Further discussion is needed to clarify the appropriate surgical approach to the SMA during MIPD.

To investigate the role of intraoperative estimated blood loss (EBL) on development of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD).Minimizing EBL has been shown to decrease transfusions and provide better perioperative outcomes in PD. EBL is also felt to be influential on CR-POPF development.This study consists of 5534 PDs from a 17-institution collaborative (2003-2018). EBL was progressively categorized (≤150mL; 151-400mL; 401-1,000 mL;1,000 mL). Impact of additive EBL was assessed using 20 3- factor fistula risk score (FRS) scenarios reflective of endogenous CR-POPF risk.CR-POPF developed in 13.6% of patients (N = 753) and median EBL was 400 mL (interquartile range 250-600 mL). CR-POPF and Grade C POPF were associated with elevated EBL (median 350 vs 400 mL, P = 0.002; 372 vs 500 mL, P0.001, respectively). Progressive EBL cohorts displayed incremental CR-POPF rates (8.5%, 13.4%, 15.2%, 16.9%; P0.001). EBL400mL was associated with increased CR-POPF occurrence in 13/20 endogenous risk scenarios. Moreover, 8 of 10 scenarios predicated on a soft gland demonstrated increased CR-POPF incidence. Hypothetical projections demonstrate significant reductions in CR-POPF can be obtained with 1-, 2-, and 3-point decreases in FRS points attributed to EBL risk (12.2%, 17.4%, and 20.0%; P0.001). This is especially pronounced in high-risk (FRS7-10) patients, who demonstrate up to a 31% reduction (P0.001). Surgeons in the lowest-quartile of median EBL demonstrated CR-POPF rates less than half those in the upper-quartile (7.9% vs 18.8%; P0.001).EBL independently contributes significant biological risk to CR-POPF. Substantial reductions in CR-POPF occurrence are projected and obtainable by minimizing EBL. Decreased individual surgeon EBL is associated with improvements in CR-POPF.

Background Optimal treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma of the neck, body and tail (PDAC-NBT) necessitates R0 surgical resection. Preoperative radiographic identification of patients likely to achieve successful oncologic resection remains difficult. This study seeks to identify preoperative imaging characteristics predictive of non-R0 resections or impaired survival for PDAC-NBT. Methods Patients at five high-volume centers who underwent resection for PDAC-NBT were retrospectively analyzed. The most immediate preoperative cross-sectional scan was assessed along with outcome measures of overall survival and margin status. Results 330 patients were treated between 2001 and 2016. Margin status included 247 R0 (78.2%), 67 R1 (21.2%), and 2 R2 (0.6%). A non-R0 resection predicted worse survival (p = 0.0002). On preoperative imaging, patients with tumors greater than 20 mm, tumor attenuation greater than 70 Hounsfield units, or who demonstrated pancreatic atrophy and/or calcifications also had worse survival (p = 0.010, p = 0.036, p = 0.025 respectively). Patients with tumors interfacing with the splenic artery or vein or extending posteriorly achieved fewer R0 resections (p = 0.0006, p = 0.0004, p = 0.001, respectively). Conclusion Preoperative cross-sectional imaging can identify tumor characteristics associated with poor survival and non-R0 resection. Further investigation is needed to identify the appropriate surgical and treatment modifications necessary to clinically benefit this subset of patients.

Background: Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) has proven advantages over its open counterpart and is becoming more frequently performed around the world. It still remains a difficult operation due to the retroperitoneal location of the pancreas and limited experience and training with the procedure. In addition, complications such as bleeding or postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remain a problem. A standardized approach to LDP with stepwise graded compression technique for pancreatic transection has been utilized at a single center, and we sought to describe the technique and determine the outcomes. Methods: A review of all patients undergoing LDP by a clockwise approach including the graded compression technique from August 1, 2008 to December 31, 2017 was performed. An external audit was performed by the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group. Results: Overall, 260 patients with a mean age and a BMI of 62.3 and 28, respectively, underwent LDP using this technique. Mean operative time and blood loss were 183 min and 248 mL, respectively,. Hand-assisted method and conversion to open were both 5%. Major morbidity and mortality were 9.2% and 0.4%, respectively,. POPF was noted in 8.1%. The technical steps include (1) mobilization of the splenic flexure of the colon and exposure of the pancreas, (2) dissection along the inferior edge of the pancreas and choosing the site for pancreatic division, (3) pancreatic parenchymal division using a progressive stepwise compression technique with staple line reinforcement, (4) ligation of the splenic vein and artery, (5) dissection along the superior edge of the pancreas and residual posterior attachments, and (6) mobilization of the spleen and specimen removal. Conclusion: LDP with a clockwise approach for dissection, combined with the progressive stepwise compression technique for pancreatic transection, resulted in excellent outcomes including a very low POPF rate.

Background Surgical views with high resolution and magnification have enabled us to recognize the precise anatomical structures that can be used as landmarks during minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP). This study aimed to validate the usefulness of anatomy-based approaches for MIDP before and during the Expert Consensus Meeting: Precision Anatomy for Minimally Invasive HBP Surgery (February 24, 2021). Methods Twenty-five international MIDP experts developed clinical questions regarding surgical anatomy and approaches for MIDP. Studies identified via a comprehensive literature search were classified using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology. Online Delphi voting was conducted after experts had drafted the recommendations, with the goal of obtaining >75% consensus. Experts discussed the revised recommendations in front of the validation committee and an international audience of 384 attendees. Finalized recommendations were made after a second round of online Delphi voting. Results Four clinical questions were addressed, resulting in 10 recommendations. All recommendations reached at least a 75% consensus among experts. Conclusions The expert consensus on precision anatomy for MIDP has been presented as a set of recommendations based on available evidence and expert opinions. These recommendations should guide experts and trainees in performing safe MIDP and foster its appropriate dissemination worldwide.

This study aims to present a full spectrum of individual patient presentations of pancreatic fistula risk, and to define the utility of mitigation strategies amongst some of the most prevalent, and vulnerable scenarios surgeons encounter.The FRS has been utilized to identify technical strategies associated with reduced CR-POPF incidence across various risk strata. However, risk-stratification using the FRS has never been investigated with greater granularity. By deriving all possible combinations of FRS elements, individualized risk assessment could be utilized for precision medicine purposes.FRS profiles and outcomes of 5533 PDs were accrued from 17 international institutions (2003-2019). The FRS was used to derive 80 unique combinations of patient "scenarios." Risk-matched analyses were conducted using a Bonferroni adjustment to identify scenarios with increased vulnerability for CR-POPF occurrence. Subsequently, these scenarios were analyzed using multivariable regression to explore optimal mitigation approaches.The overall CR-POPF rate was 13.6%. All 80 possible scenarios were encountered, with the most frequent being scenario #1 (8.1%) - the only negligible-risk scenario (CR-POPF rate = 0.7%). The moderate-risk zone had the most scenarios (50), patients (N = 3246), CR-POPFs (65.2%), and greatest non-zero discrepancy in CR-POPF rates between scenarios (18-fold). In the risk-matched analysis, 2 scenarios (#59 and 60) displayed increased vulnerability for CR-POPF relative to the moderate-risk zone (both P0.001). Multivariable analysis revealed factors associated with CR-POPF in these scenarios: pancreaticogastrostomy reconstruction [odds ratio (OR) 4.67], omission of drain placement (OR 5.51), and prophylactic octreotide (OR 3.09). When comparing the utilization of best practice strategies to patients who did not have these conjointly utilized, there was a significant decrease in CR-POPF (10.7% vs 35.5%, P0.001; OR 0.20, 95% confidence interval 0.12-0.33).Through this data, a comprehensive fistula risk catalog has been created and the most clinically-impactful scenarios have been discerned. Focusing on individual scenarios provides a practical way to approach precision medicine, allowing for more directed and efficient management of CR-POPF.

Objective: to reach global expert consensus on the definition of TOLS in minimally invasive and open liver resection among renowned international expert liver surgeons using a modified Delphi method.Summary background data: textbook outcome is a novel composite measure combining the most desirable postoperative outcomes into one single measure and representing the ideal postoperative course. Despite a recently developed international definition of Textbook Outcome in Liver Surgery (TOLS), a standardized and expert consensus-based definition is lacking.Methods: this international, consensus-based, qualitative study used a Delphi process to achieve consensus on the definition of TOLS. The survey comprised 6 surgical domains with a total of 26 questions on individual surgical outcome variables. The process included 4 rounds of online questionnaires. Consensus was achieved when a threshold of at least 80% agreement was reached. Results from the Delphi rounds were used to establish an international definition of TOLS.Results: in total, 44 expert liver surgeons from 22 countries and all three major international hepato-pancreato-biliary associations completed round 1. Forty-two (96%), 41 (98%) and 41 (98%) of the experts participated in round 2, 3 and 4, respectively. The TOLS definition derived from the consensus process included the absence of intraoperative grade ≥2 incidents, postoperative bile leakage grade B/C, postoperative liver failure grade B/C, 90-day major postoperative complications, 90-day readmission due to surgery-related major complications, 90-day/in-hospital mortality and the presence of R0 resection margin.Conclusions: this is the first study providing an international expert consensus-based definition of TOLS for minimally invasive and open liver resections by use of a formal Delphi consensus approach. TOLS may be useful in assessing patient-level hospital performance and carrying out international comparisons between centers with different clinical practices to further improve patient outcomes.

Background: /Objectives Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains the most common complication after distal pancreatectomy (DP). Traditionally, surgical drains are placed routinely after DP, but some question its efficacy and postulate that the use of drains may convert a self-limiting postoperative collection into a POPF. This study aimed to compare outcomes between three institutions with varying drainage strategies. Methods: The study is a retrospective propensity score-matched analysis of intraoperative prophylactic drain placement during DP (2010–2019). The primary outcome is major morbidity. Propensity score matching was used to obtain comparable groups. Results: Overall, 963 patients after DP were included. One center did not place a surgical drain routinely, but decided to place a drain when unsatisfactory pancreatic closure occurred. Prophylactic abdominal drains were placed in 805 patients (84%) of which 74 could be matched to 74 patients without a drain. The rate of major morbidity (8% vs 19%, p = 0.054) and radiological interventions (5% vs 12%, p = 0.147) were non-significantly lower in the no-drain group as compared to the prophylactic drain group, respectively. The rates of POPF (4% vs 16%, p = 0.014) were lower in the no-drain group. Conclusion: In this international retrospective multicenter study, a selective no-drain strategy after DP was not associated with higher rates major morbidity or radiological interventions as compared to routine prophylactic abdominal drainage. Although the rate of POPF was lower in the no-drain group, randomized trials should confirm the safety and outcome of a no-drain strategy after DP.

The Brisbane 2000 Terminology for Liver Anatomy and Resections, based on Couinaud's segments, did not address how to identify segmental borders and anatomic territories of less than one segment. Smaller anatomic resections including segmentectomies and subsegmentectomies, have not been well defined. The advent of minimally invasive liver resection has enhanced the possibilities of more precise resection due to a magnified view and reduced bleeding, and minimally invasive anatomic liver resection (MIALR) is becoming popular gradually. Therefore, there is a need for updating the Brisbane 2000 system, including anatomic segmentectomy or less. An online "Expert Consensus Meeting: Precision Anatomy for Minimally Invasive HBP Surgery (PAM-HBP Surgery Consensus)" was hosted on February 23, 2021.The Steering Committee invited 34 international experts from around the world. The Expert Committee (EC) selected 12 questions and two future research topics in the terminology session. The EC created seven tentative definitions and five recommendations based on the experts' opinions and the literature review performed by the Research Committee. Two Delphi Rounds finalized those definitions and recommendations.This paper presents seven definitions and five recommendations regarding anatomic segmentectomy or less. In addition, two future research topics are discussed.The PAM-HBP Surgery Consensus has presented the Tokyo 2020 Terminology for Liver Anatomy and Resections. The terminology has added definitions of liver anatomy and resections that were not defined in the Brisbane 2000 system.

Background The concept of Minimally invasive anatomic liver resection (MIALR) is gaining popularity. However, specific technical skills need to be acquired to safely perform MIALR. The "Expert Consensus Meeting: Precision Anatomy for Minimally Invasive HBP Surgery (PAM-HBP Surgery Consensus)" was developed as a special program during the 32nd meeting of the Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery (JSHBPS). Methods Thirty-four international experts gathered online for the consensus. A Research Committee performed a comprehensive literature review, classifying studies according to the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) method. Based on the literature review and experts' opinions, tentative recommendations were drafted and circulated among experts using online Delphi Rounds. Finally, formulated recommendations were presented online in the Expert Consensus Meeting of the JSHBPS on February 23rd, 2021. The final recommendations were validated and finalized by the 2nd Delphi Round in May 2021. Results Seven Clinical Questions (CQs) were selected, and 22 recommendations were formulated. All recommendations reached more than 85% consensus among experts at the final Delphi Round. Conclusions The Expert Consensus Meeting for safely performing MIALR has presented a set of clinical guidelines based on available literature and experts' opinions. We expect these guidelines to have a favorable effect on the safe implementation and development of MIALR.

In pancreatic cancer, resection combined with neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant therapy remains the only chance for cure and/or prolonged survival. A minimally invasive approach to pancreatic cancer has gained increased acceptance and popularity. The aim of minimally invasive surgery of the pancreas includes limiting trauma, decreasing length of hospitalization, lessening cost, decreasing blood loss, and allowing for a more meticulous oncologic dissection. New advances and routine use in practice have helped progress the field making the minimally invasive approach more feasible. In this article, the minimally invasive surgical approaches to proximal, central, and distal pancreatic cancer are described and literature reviewed.

Background: Pancreatoduodenectomies at high risk for clinically relevant pancreatic fistula are uncommon, yet intimidating, situations. In such scenarios, the impact of individual surgeon experience on outcomes is poorly understood.Methods: The fistula risk score was applied to identify high-risk patients (fistula risk score 7-10) from 7,706 pancreatoduodenectomies performed at 18 international institutions (2003-2020). For each case, surgeon pancreatoduodenectomy career volume and years of practice were linked to intraoperative fistula mitigation strategy adoption and outcomes. Consequently, best operative approaches for clinically relevant pancreatic fistula prevention and best performer profiles were identified through multivariable analysis models.Results: Eight hundred and thirty high-risk pancreatoduodenectomies, performed by 64 surgeons, displayed an overall clinically relevant pancreatic fistula rate of 33.7%. Clinically relevant pancreatic fistula rates decreased with escalating surgeon career pancreatoduodenectomy (-49.7%) and career length (-41.2%; both P < .001), as did transfusion and reoperation rates, postoperative morbidity index, and duration of stay. Great experience (>400 pancreatoduodenectomies performed or >21-year-long career) was a significant predictor of clinically relevant pancreatic fistula prevention (odds ratio 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.35-0.76) and was more often associated with pancreatojejunostomy reconstruc-tion and prophylactic octreotide omission, which were both independently associated with clinically relevant pancreatic fistula reduction. A risk-adjusted performance analysis also correlated with experi-ence. Moreover, minimizing blood loss (

Background The anatomical structure around the pancreatic head is very complex, and it is important to understand its precise anatomy and corresponding anatomical approach to safely perform minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD). This consensus statement aimed to develop recommendations for elucidating the anatomy and surgical approaches to MIPD. Methods Studies identified via a comprehensive literature search were classified using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network method. Delphi voting was conducted after experts had drafted recommendations, with a goal of obtaining >75% consensus. Experts discussed the revised recommendations with the validation committee and an international audience of 384 attendees. Finalized recommendations were made after a second round of online Delphi voting. Results Three clinical questions were addressed, providing six recommendations. All recommendations reached at least a consensus of 75%. Preoperatively evaluating the presence of anatomical variations and superior mesenteric artery (SMA) and superior mesenteric vein (SMV) branching patterns was recommended. Moreover, it was recommended to fully understand the anatomical approach to SMA and intraoperatively confirm the SMA course based on each anatomical landmark before initiating dissection. Conclusions MIPD experts suggest to surgical trainees to perform resection based on precise anatomical landmarks for safe and reliable MIPD.

Purpose The reported conversion rates for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) range widely from 2 to 38%. The identification of risk factors for conversion may help surgeons during preoperative planning and patient counseling. Moreover, the impact of conversion on outcomes of MIDP is unknown. Methods A systematic review was conducted as part of the 2019 Miami International Evidence-Based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR). The PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched for studies concerning conversion to open surgery in MIDP. Results Of the 828 studies screened, eight met the eligibility criteria, resulting in a combined dataset including 2592 patients after MIDP. The overall conversion rate was 17.1% (range 13.0–32.7%) with heterogeneity between studies associated with the definition of conversion adopted. Only one study divided conversion into elective and emergency conversion. The main indications for conversion were vascular involvement (23.7%), concern for oncological radicality (21.9%), and bleeding (18.9%). The reported risk factors for conversion included a malignancy as an indication for surgery, the proximity of the tumor to vascular structures in preoperative imaging, higher BMI or visceral fat, and multi-organ resection or extended resection. Contrasting results were seen in terms of blood loss and length of stay in comparing converted MIDP and completed MIDP patients. Conclusion The identified risk factors for conversion from this study can be used for patient selection and counseling. Surgeon experience should be considered when contemplating MIDP for a complex patient. Future studies should divide conversion into elective and emergency conversion.

Background/objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of older age (≥70 years) and obesity (BMI ≥30) on surgical outcomes of minimally invasive pancreatic resections (MIPR). Subsequently, open pancreatic resections or MIPR were compared for elderly and/or obese patients. Methods: A systematic review was conducted as part of the 2019 Miami International Evidence-Based Guidelines on MIPR (IG-MIPR). Study quality assessment was according to The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). A meta-analysis was performed to assess the impact of MIPR or open pancreatic resections in elderly patients. Results: After screening 682 studies, 13 observational studies with 4629 patients were included. Elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) had less blood loss (117 mL, p < 0.001) and a shorter hospital stay (3.5 days p < 0.001) than elderly patients undergoing open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) B/C, major complication and reoperation rate were not significantly different in elderly patients undergoing either laparoscopic or open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD). One study compared robot PD with OPD in obese patients, indicating that patients with robotic surgery had less blood loss (mean 250 ml vs 500 ml, p = 0.001), shorter operative time (mean 381 min vs 428 min, p = 0.003), and lower rate of POPF B/C (13% vs 28%, p = 0.039). Conclusion: The current available limited evidence does not suggest that MIPR is contraindicated in elderly or obese patients. Additionally, outcomes in MIPR are equal or more beneficial compared to the open approach when applied in these patient groups.

Objective: The aim of this study was to develop and externally validate the first evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreas resection (MIPR) before and during the International Evidence-based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR) meeting in Miami (March 2019).Summary Background Data: MIPR has seen rapid development in the past decade. Promising outcomes have been reported by early adopters from high-volume centers. Subsequently, multicenter series as well as randomized controlled trials were reported; however, guidelines for clinical practice were lacking. Methods: The Scottisch Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology was used, incorporating these 4 items: systematic reviews using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to answer clinical questions, whenever possible in PICO style, the GRADE approach for assessment of the quality of evidence, the Delphi method for establishing consensus on the developed recommendations, and the AGREE-II instrument for the assessment of guideline quality and external validation. The current guidelines are cosponsored by the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Asian-Pacific Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery, Pancreas Club, the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgery, the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, and the Society of Surgical Oncology. Results: After screening 16,069 titles, 694 studies were reviewed, and 291 were included. The final 28 recommendations covered 6 topics; laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy, central pancreatectomy, pancreatoduodenectomy, as well as patient selection, training, learning curve, and minimal annual center volume required to obtain optimal outcomes and patient safety.Conclusion: The IG-MIPR using SIGN methodology give guidance to surgeons, hospital administrators, patients, and medical societies on the use and outcome of MIPR as well as the approach to be taken regarding this challenging type of surgery.

Objectives No standard classification exists for post-splenectomy thrombosis of splenic, mesenteric, and portal vein (PST-SMPv). The goal of this study was to review our institution's experience with PST-SMPv and to perform a systematic literature review. Methods A retrospective review of all patients undergoing splenectomy from 1995-2016 at our institution was performed. Additionally, six databases and four grey literature websites were systematically searched. Splenectomy for pediatric patients or for trauma or portal hypertension related reasons were excluded. Results Between 1995 and 2016, 229 patients (113; 49.3% males) underwent splenectomy for spleen related diseases at our institution. From 1895 to 2016, 1645 unique literature citations were identified. Twenty citations met our inclusion criteria. Data on 1745 splenectomized patients was compiled; PST-SMPv occurred in 141 (8.1%). Conclusions In our series, PST-SMPv developed in 6.6% of patients and the incidence of PST-SMPv after splenectomy in the literature ranges from 0.8 – 53.0%. A call for standardized reporting through a proposed classification is made.

Hepatic angiosarcoma is a rare primary liver tumor. The aim of this current study was to evaluate the presentation and treatment outcomes in a modern cohort.This was a retrospective, multi-institutional, observational study of patients with histopathologic diagnoses of primary hepatic angiosarcoma from four institutions. Clinicopathologic characteristics, treatments, and patient outcomes were examined.Forty-four patients with hepatic angiosarcoma were identified. Patients were predominantly Caucasian and presented at a median age of 63.7 years; 81.4% of patients had bilobar disease and 37.2% had metastatic disease at the time of presentation. Only 10 patients underwent surgical resection. Median overall survival for the entire cohort was 5.8 months (interquartile range 1.9-16.4), and 1-, 3-, and 5-year actual survival was 30.0%, 8.1%, and 5.6%, respectively. There were only two 5-year survivors, both of whom presented with localized disease and underwent curative resection.The prognosis for hepatic angiosarcoma remains quite poor. Surgical resection for localized disease results in the best outcomes. Unfortunately, current imaging modalities are often non- diagnostic, and most patients are unresectable at the time of presentation.

Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) requires sufficient laparoscopic training for optimal outcomes. Our aim is to determine the learning curve and investigate the factors influencing surgical outcomes during the learning curve.We analyzed surgical results of 150 consecutive cases of LPD performed by three hepatopancreatobiliary surgeons during their 50 first cases. Learning curves were constructed by cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis. Preoperative factors influencing resection time and blood loss were investigated in the introductory and stable periods. RESULTS : The learning curve could be divided into three phases: initial (1-20 cases), plateau (21-30), and stable (31-50). Resection time with lymph node dissection was significantly longer during the introductory period (initial and plateau periods) (P0.01) but not the stable phase (P = 0.51). Multivariate analysis revealed that patients with pancreatitis had longer resection times and massive blood loss in both the introductory and stable periods (stable phase). High visceral fat area was also significantly related to massive blood loss in the introductory period (P = 0.04).Hepatopancreatobiliary surgeons need more than 30 cases until LPD becomes stable. Lymph node dissection and patients with high visceral fat area and concomitant pancreatitis should be avoided during the introductory period of the learning curve.

Sporadic nonampullary duodenal neoplasms (SNADN) can have malignant potential for which endoscopic and surgical resections are offered. We report combined gastroenterologic and surgical experience for treatment of SNADN, including endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and pancreas-preserving partial duodenectomy (PPPD).We retrospectively reviewed 121 consecutive patients, who underwent 30 PPPDs and 91 EMRs for mucosal and submucosal SNADN. Decision to undergo EMR or surgical resection was based on expert endoscopist and surgeon discretion including multidisciplinary tumor board review. Main outcomes were recurrence rate of neoplasia and adverse events requiring hospital admission or prolonged care. EMRs were performed with submucosal lifting followed by snare resection. PPPD included total duodenectomy, supra-ampullary PPPD for neoplasms proximal to the ampulla, and infra-ampullary PPPD for lesions distal to the ampulla. Follow-up data were available for 65% of EMR and 73% of surgical patients.Surgically resected neoplasia was larger with more advanced neoplasia and submucosal lesions. En bloc resection was achieved in all surgical resections and in 53% of EMRs. Post-EMR, mucosal and submucosal neoplasia recurred in 32 and 0%, respectively, including five neoplasms (26%) after an initial negative esophagogastroduodenoscopy. All recurrences were treated endoscopically. Complications occurred in 14 endoscopically and eight surgically treated patients, none requiring surgical intervention.Post-EMR patients had higher recurrence of mucosal neoplasia, whereas submucosal neoplasms, mainly carcinoid, did not recur. Polyp size and positive resection margin were not associated with neoplasia recurrence. Patients with SNADN could benefit from a multidisciplinary approach to stratify the optimal treatment based on local expertise.

There are a few entities that account for most solid and cystic masses of the pancreas. The pancreas harbors a wide array of diseases, including adenocarcinoma, and its variants, such as anaplastic and adenosquamous carcinoma. Other neoplasms include acinar cell carcinoma, solid pseudopapillary tumor, and sarcomas. Benign lesions include hamartomas, hemangiomas, lymphangioma, and plasmacytoma. Isolated metastases include renal cell carcinoma, melanoma, and other carcinomas. Benign inflammatory conditions, such as autoimmune pancreatitis and groove pancreatitis can also mimic solid neoplasms of the pancreas.

OBJECTIVE: The European Guidelines Meeting on Laparoscopic Liver Surgery was held in Southampton on February 10 and 11, 2017 with the aim of presenting and validating clinical practice guidelines for laparoscopic liver surgery.BACKGROUND: The exponential growth of laparoscopic liver surgery in recent years mandates the development of clinical practice guidelines to direct the speciality's continued safe progression and dissemination.METHODS: A unique approach to the development of clinical guidelines was adopted. Three well-validated methods were integrated: the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology for the assessment of evidence and development of guideline statements; the Delphi method of establishing expert consensus, and the AGREE II-GRS Instrument for the assessment of the methodological quality and external validation of the final statements.RESULTS: Along with the committee chairman, 22 European experts; 7 junior experts and an independent validation committee of 11 international surgeons produced 67 guideline statements for the safe progression and dissemination of laparoscopic liver surgery. Each of the statements reached at least a 95% consensus among the experts and were endorsed by the independent validation committee.CONCLUSION: The European Guidelines Meeting for Laparoscopic Liver Surgery has produced a set of clinical practice guidelines that have been independently validated for the safe development and progression of laparoscopic liver surgery. The Southampton Guidelines have amalgamated the available evidence and a wealth of experts' knowledge taking in consideration the relevant stakeholders' opinions and complying with the international methodology standards.

The initial management of patients with suspected acute biliary infection starts with the measurement of vital signs to assess whether or not the situation is urgent. If the case is judged to be urgent, initial medical treatment should be started immediately including respiratory/circulatory management if required, without waiting for a definitive diagnosis. The patient's medical history is then taken; an abdominal examination is performed; blood tests, urinalysis, and diagnostic imaging are carried out; and a diagnosis is made using the diagnostic criteria for cholangitis/cholecystitis. Once the diagnosis has been confirmed, initial medical treatment should be started immediately, severity should be assessed according to the severity grading criteria for acute cholangitis/cholecystitis, and the patient's general status should be evaluated. For mild acute cholangitis, in most cases initial treatment including antibiotics is sufficient, and most patients do not require biliary drainage. However, biliary drainage should be considered if a patient does not respond to initial treatment. For moderate acute cholangitis, early endoscopic or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage is indicated. If the underlying etiology requires treatment, this should be provided after the patient's general condition has improved; endoscopic sphincterotomy and subsequent choledocholithotomy may be performed together with biliary drainage. For severe acute cholangitis, appropriate respiratory/circulatory management is required. Biliary drainage should be performed as soon as possible after the patient's general condition has been improved by initial treatment and respiratory/circulatory management. Free full articles and mobile app of TG18 are available at: http://www.jshbps.jp/modules/en/index.php?content_id=47. Related clinical questions and references are also included.

In some cases, laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) may be difficult to perform in patients with acute cholecystitis (AC) with severe inflammation and fibrosis. The Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG18) expand the indications for LC under difficult conditions for each level of severity of AC. As a result of expanding the indications for LC to treat AC, it is absolutely necessary to avoid any increase in bile duct injury (BDI), particularly vasculo-biliary injury (VBI), which is known to occur at a certain rate in LC. Since the Tokyo Guidelines 2013 (TG13), an attempt has been made to assess intraoperative findings as objective indicators of surgical difficulty; based on expert consensus on these difficulty indicators, bail-out procedures (including conversion to open cholecystectomy) have been indicated for cases in which LC for AC is difficult to perform. A bail-out procedure should be chosen if, when the Calot's triangle is appropriately retracted and used as a landmark, a critical view of safety (CVS) cannot be achieved because of the presence of nondissectable scarring or severe fibrosis. We propose standardized safe steps for LC to treat AC. To achieve a CVS, it is vital to dissect at a location above (on the ventral side of) the imaginary line connecting the base of the left medial section (Segment 4) and the roof of Rouviere's sulcus and to fulfill the three criteria of CVS before dividing any structures. Achieving a CVS prevents the misidentification of the cystic duct and the common bile duct, which are most commonly confused. Free full articles and mobile app of TG18 are available at: http://www.jshbps.jp/modules/en/index.php?content_id=47. Related clinical questions and references are also included.

Since the publication of the Tokyo Guidelines in 2007 and their revision in 2013, appropriate management for acute cholecystitis has been more clearly established. Since the last revision, several manuscripts, especially for alternative endoscopic techniques, have been reported; therefore, additional evaluation and refinement of the 2013 Guidelines is required. We describe a standard drainage method for surgically high-risk patients with acute cholecystitis and the latest developed endoscopic gallbladder drainage techniques described in the updated Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG18). Our study confirmed that percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage should be considered the first alternative to surgical intervention in surgically high-risk patients with acute cholecystitis. Also, endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage or endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage can be considered in high-volume institutes by skilled endoscopists. In the endoscopic transpapillary approach, either endoscopic naso-gallbladder drainage or gallbladder stenting can be considered for gallbladder drainage. We also introduce special techniques and the latest outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage studies. Free full articles and mobile app of TG18 are available at: http://www.jshbps.jp/modules/en/index.php?content_id=47. Related clinical questions and references are also included.

Background In the past two decades, pancreas surgery (PS) has undergone significant advances in operative techniques and with a focus on multidisciplinary high-volume practices. Methods A review of patients undergoing PS from 3/1995-2/2015 was conducted; dividing patients into group A (1995–2005) and group B (2005–2015) for a detailed comparison. Effect of surgeon volume in group B was determined. Results A total of 1001 patients underwent PS (group A: 259; group B: 742). The mean age was 62.7 years and 52.8% were female. Group B patients were associated with a higher rate of pylorus preservation and minimally invasive resection and a lower rate of morbidity, pancreas fistula (PF), and delayed gastric emptying (DGE) than group A. High-volume surgeons (HVS) had lower operative blood loss (300 mL vs 600 mL), transfusion requirements, PF (14% vs 20%), DGE, surgical site infections, reoperations, and major morbidity rate (15.5 vs 39%) than low-volume surgeons. Conclusions This study demonstrates improved patient outcomes and hospital resource utilization over the past 20 years. Concentration of PS to HVS results in superior results.

Background The first International conference on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection was arranged in conjunction with the annual meeting of the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (IHPBA), in Sao Paulo, Brazil on April 19th 2016. The presented evidence and outcomes resulting from the session for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is summarized and addressed perioperative outcome, the outcome for cancer and patient selection for the procedure. Methods A literature search was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to compare MIDP and open distal pancreatectomy. Patient selection was discussed based on plenary talks, panel discussions and a worldwide survey on MIDP. Results Of 582 studies, 52 (40 observational and 12 case-matched) were included in the assessment for outcome for LDP (n = 5023) vs. ODP (n = 16,306) whereas 16 observational comparative studies were identified for cancer outcome. No randomized trials were identified. MIDP resulted in similar outcome to ODP with a tendency for lower blood loss and shorter hospital stay in the MIDP group. Discussion Available evidence for comparison of MIDP to ODP is weak, although the number of studies is high. Observed outcomes of MIDP are promising. In the absence of randomized control trials, an international registry should be established.

Background In 2005, the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula developed a definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula that has been accepted universally. Eleven years later, because postoperative pancreatic fistula remains one of the most relevant and harmful complications of pancreatic operation, the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula classification has become the gold standard in defining postoperative pancreatic fistula in clinical practice. The aim of the present report is to verify the value of the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula and to update the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula classification in light of recent evidence that has emerged, as well as to address the lingering controversies about the original definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula. Methods The International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula reconvened as the International Study Group in Pancreatic Surgery in order to perform a review of the recent literature and consequently to update and revise the grading system of postoperative pancreatic fistula. Results Based on the literature since 2005 investigating the validity and clinical use of the original International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula classification, a clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula is now redefined as a drain output of any measurable volume of fluid with an amylase level >3 times the upper limit of institutional normal serum amylase activity, associated with a clinically relevant development/condition related directly to the postoperative pancreatic fistula. Consequently, the former “grade A postoperative pancreatic fistula” is now redefined and called a “biochemical leak,” because it has no clinical importance and is no longer referred to a true pancreatic fistula. Postoperative pancreatic fistula grades B and C are confirmed but defined more strictly. In particular, grade B requires a change in the postoperative management; drains are either left in place >3 weeks or repositioned through endoscopic or percutaneous procedures. Grade C postoperative pancreatic fistula refers to those postoperative pancreatic fistula that require reoperation or lead to single or multiple organ failure and/or mortality attributable to the pancreatic fistula. Conclusion This new definition and grading system of postoperative pancreatic fistula should lead to a more universally consistent evaluation of operative outcomes after pancreatic operation and will allow for a better comparison of techniques used to mitigate the rate and clinical impact of a pancreatic fistula. Use of this updated classification will also allow for more precise comparisons of surgical quality between surgeons and units who perform pancreatic surgery.

Background Increased incorporation of minimally invasive pancreatic resections (MIPR) has emerged into hepato-pancreato-biliary practice, however, no standardization exists for its safe adoption. Novel strategies are presented for dissemination of safe MIPR. Methods An international State-of-the-Art conference evaluating multiple aspects of MIPR was conducted by a panel of pancreas experts in Sao Paulo, Brazil on April 20, 2016. Training and education issues were discussed regarding the introduction of novel strategies for safe dissemination of MIPR. Results The low volume of pancreatic resections per institution poses a challenge for surgeons to overcome their MIPR learning curve without deliberate training. A mastery-based simulation and biotissue curriculum can improve technical proficiency and allow for training of surgeons before the operating room. Video-based platforms allow for performance reporting and feedback necessary for coaching and surgical quality improvement. Centers of excellence with training involving a standardized approach and proctorship are important concepts that can be utilized in various formats internationally. Discussion Surgical volume is not sufficient to ensure quality and patient safety in MIPR. Safe adoption of these complex procedures should consider innovative mastery-based training outside of the operating room, novel video based coaching techniques and prospective reporting of patient data and outcomes using standardized definitions.

Background Recent literature suggests that chyle leak may complicate up to 10% of pancreatic resections. Treatment depends on its severity, which may include chylous ascites. No international consensus definition or grading system of chyle leak currently is available. Methods The International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery, an international panel of pancreatic surgeons working in well-known, high-volume centers, reviewed the literature and worked together to establish a consensus on the definition and classification of chyle leak after pancreatic operation. Results Chyle leak was defined as output of milky-colored fluid from a drain, drain site, or wound on or after postoperative day 3, with a triglyceride content ≥110 mg/dL (≥1.2 mmol/L). Three different grades of severity were defined according to the management needed: grade A, no specific intervention other than oral dietary restrictions; grade B, prolongation of hospital stay, nasoenteral nutrition with dietary restriction, total parenteral nutrition, octreotide, maintenance of surgical drains, or placement of new percutaneous drains; and grade C, need for other more invasive in-hospital treatment, intensive care unit admission, or mortality. Conclusion This classification and grading system for chyle leak after pancreatic resection allows for comparison of outcomes between series. As with the other the International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery consensus statements, this classification should facilitate communication and evaluation of different approaches to the prevention and treatment of this complication.

Background The number of minimally invasive pancreatic resections (MIPR) performed for benign or malignant disease, have increased in recent years. However, there is limited information regarding cost/value implications. Methods An international conference evaluating MIPR was held during the 12th Bi-Annual International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (IHPBA) World Congress in Sao Paulo, Brazil, on April 20th, 2016. This manuscript summarizes the presentations that reviewed current topics in cost and value as they pertain to MIPR. Results Compared to the open approach, MIPR's are associated with higher operative costs but lower postoperative costs. However, measurements of patient value (defined as improvement in both quantity and quality of life) and financial value (using incremental cost-effectiveness ratio) are required to determine the true value at societal level. Conclusion Challenges remain as to how the potential benefits, both to the patient and the healthcare system as a whole, are measured. Research comparing MIPR versus other techniques for pancreatectomy will require appropriate and valid measurement tools, some of which are yet to be refined. Nonetheless, the experience to date would support the continued development of MIPR by experienced surgeons in high-volume pancreatic centers, married with appropriate review and recalibration.

BACKGROUND: Bile duct injury (BDI) during laparoscopic cholecystectomy remains a serious iatrogenic surgical complication. BDI most often occurs as a result of misidentification of the anatomy; however, clinical evidence on its precise mechanism and surgeons' perceptions is scarce.METHODS: Surgeons from Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and the U.S., etc. (n = 614) participated in a questionnaire regarding their BDI experience and near-misses; and perceptions on landmarks, intraoperative findings, and surgical techniques. Respondents voted for a Delphi process and graded each item on a five-point scale. The consensus was built when ≥80% of overall responses were 4 or 5.RESULTS: Response rates for the first- and the second-round Delphi were 60.6% and 74.9%, respectively. Misidentification of local anatomy accounted for 76.2% of BDI. Final consensus was reached on: 1) Effective retraction of the gallbladder, 2) Always obtaining critical view of safety, and 3) Avoiding excessive use of electrocautery/clipping as vital procedures; and 4) Calot's triangle area and 5) Critical view of safety as important landmarks. For 6) Impacted gallstone and 7) Severe fibrosis/scarring in Calot's triangle, bail-out procedures may be indicated.CONCLUSIONS: A consensus was reached among expert surgeons on relevant landmarks and intraoperative findings and appropriate surgical techniques to avoid BDI. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.