Search

BACKGROUND: The European registry for minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (E-MIPS) collects data on laparoscopic and robotic MIPS in low- and high-volume centers across Europe.METHODS: Analysis of the first year (2019) of the E-MIPS registry, including minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) and minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD). Primary outcome was 90-day mortality.RESULTS: Overall, 959 patients from 54 centers in 15 countries were included, 558 patients underwent MIDP and 401 patients MIPD. Median volume of MIDP was 10 (7-20) and 9 (2-20) for MIPD. Median use of MIDP was 56.0% (IQR 39.0-77.3%) and median use of MIPD 27.7% (IQR 9.7-45.3%). MIDP was mostly performed laparoscopic (401/558, 71.9%) and MIPD mostly robotic (234/401, 58.3%). MIPD was performed in 50/54 (89.3%) centers, of which 15/50 (30.0%) performed ≥20 MIPD annually. This was 30/54 (55.6%) centers and 13/30 (43%) centers for MIPD respectively. Conversion rate was 10.9% for MIDP and 8.4% for MIPD. Overall 90 day mortality was 1.1% (n = 6) for MIDP and 3.7% (n = 15) for MIPD.CONCLUSION: Within the E-MIPS registry, MIDP is performed in about half of all patients, mostly using laparoscopy. MIPD is performed in about a quarter of patients, slightly more often using the robotic approach. A minority of centers met the Miami guideline volume criteria for MIPD.

Background The causal pathway between complications after pancreatic cancer resection and impaired long-term survival remains unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of complications after pancreatic cancer resection on disease-free interval and overall survival, with adjuvant chemotherapy as a mediator. Methods This observational study included all patients undergoing pancreatic cancer resection in the Netherlands (2014–2017). Clinical data were extracted from the prospective Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. Recurrence and survival data were collected additionally. In causal mediation analysis, direct and indirect effect estimates via adjuvant chemotherapy were calculated. Results In total, 1071 patients were included. Major complications (hazards ratio 1.22 (95 per cent c.i. 1.04 to 1.43); P = 0.015 and hazards ratio 1.25 (95 per cent c.i. 1.08 to 1.46); P = 0.003) and organ failure (hazards ratio 1.86 (95 per cent c.i. 1.32 to 2.62); P < 0.001 and hazards ratio 1.89 (95 per cent c.i. 1.36 to 2.63); P < 0.001) were associated with shorter disease-free interval and overall survival respectively. The effects of major complications and organ failure on disease-free interval (−1.71 (95 per cent c.i. −2.27 to −1.05) and −3.05 (95 per cent c.i. −4.03 to −1.80) respectively) and overall survival (−1.92 (95 per cent c.i. −2.60 to −1.16) and −3.49 (95 per cent c.i. −4.84 to −2.03) respectively) were mediated by adjuvant chemotherapy. Additionally, organ failure directly affected disease-free interval (−5.38 (95 per cent c.i. −9.27 to −1.94)) and overall survival (−6.32 (95 per cent c.i. −10.43 to −1.99)). In subgroup analyses, the association was found in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy, but not in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy. Conclusion Major complications, including organ failure, negatively impact survival in patients after pancreatic cancer resection, largely mediated by adjuvant chemotherapy. Prevention or adequate treatment of complications and use of neoadjuvant treatment may improve oncological outcomes.

Contains fulltext : 251531.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) OBJECTIVE: To quantify the impact of individual complications on mortality, organ failure, hospital stay, and readmission after pancreatoduodenectomy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: An initial complication may provoke a sequence of adverse events potentially leading to mortality after pancreatoduodenectomy. This study was conducted to aid prioritization of quality improvement initiatives. METHODS: Data from consecutive patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy (2014-2017) were extracted from the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. Population attributable fractions (PAF) were calculated for the association of each complication (ie, postoperative pancreatic fistula, postpancreatectomy hemorrhage, bile leakage, delayed gastric emptying, wound infection, and pneumonia) with each unfavorable outcome [ie, in-hospital mortality, organ failure, prolonged hospital stay (>75th percentile), and unplanned readmission), whereas adjusting for confounders and other complications. The PAF represents the proportion of an outcome that could be prevented if a complication would be eliminated completely. RESULTS: Overall, 2620 patients were analyzed. In-hospital mortality occurred in 95 patients (3.6%), organ failure in 198 patients (7.6%), and readmission in 427 patients (16.2%). Postoperative pancreatic fistula and postpancreatectomy hemorrhage had the greatest independent impact on mortality [PAF 25.7% (95% CI 13.4-37.9) and 32.8% (21.9-43.8), respectively] and organ failure [PAF 21.8% (95% CI 12.9-30.6) and 22.1% (15.0-29.1), respectively]. Delayed gastric emptying had the greatest independent impact on prolonged hospital stay [PAF 27.6% (95% CI 23.5-31.8)]. The impact of individual complications on unplanned readmission was smaller than 11%. CONCLUSION: Interventions focusing on postoperative pancreatic fistula and postpancreatectomy hemorrhage may have the greatest impact on in-hospital mortality and organ failure. To prevent prolonged hospital stay, initiatives should in addition focus on delayed gastric emptying.

BACKGROUND: The necessity of the staging laparoscopy in patients with pancreatic cancer is still debated. The objective of this study was to assess the yield of staging laparoscopy for detecting occult metastases in patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.METHOD: This was a post-hoc analysis of the randomized controlled PREOPANC trial in which patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer were randomized between preoperative chemoradiotherapy or immediate surgery. Patients assigned to preoperative treatment underwent a staging laparoscopy prior to preoperative treatment according to protocol, to avoid unnecessary chemoradiotherapy in patients with occult metastatic disease.RESULTS: Of the 246 included patients, 7 did not undergo surgery. A staging laparoscopy was performed in 133 patients (55.6%) and explorative laparotomy in 106 patients (44.4%). At staging laparoscopy, occult metastases were detected in 13 patients (9.8%); 12 liver metastases and 1 peritoneal metastasis. At direct explorative laparotomy, occult metastases were found in 9 patients (8.5%); 6 with liver metastases, 1 with peritoneal metastases, and 2 with metastases at multiple sites. One patient had peritoneal metastases at exploration after a negative staging laparoscopy. Patients with occult metastases were more likely to receive palliative chemotherapy if found with staging laparoscopy compared to laparotomy (76.9% vs. 30.0%, p = 0.040).CONCLUSIONS: Staging laparoscopy detected occult metastases in about 10% of patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. These patients were more likely to receive palliative systemic chemotherapy compared to patients in whom occult metastases were detected with laparotomy. A staging laparoscopy is recommended before planned resection.

Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) for pancreatic cancer is a challenging procedure. Aberrant vasculature may increase the technical difficulty. Several studies have described the safety of RPD in case of a replaced or aberrant right hepatic artery, but detailed video descriptions of the approach are lacking. This case report describes a step--by--step technical video in case of a replaced right hepatic artery. A 58-year-old woman presented with an incidental finding of a 1.7 cm pancreatic head mass. RPD was performed using the da Vinci Xi system and involves a robotic-assisted pancreatico- and hepatico-jejunostomy and open gastro-jejunostomy at the specimen extraction site. The operation time was 410 min with 220 mL of blood loss. The patient had an uncomplicated postoperative course and was discharged after 5 days. Pathology revealed a pancreatic head cancer. RPD is a feasible and safe procedure in case of a replaced hepatic artery when performed in selected patients in high-volume centers by experienced surgeons.

Background Early recognition and management of postoperative complications, before they become clinically relevant, can improve postoperative outcomes for patients, especially for high-risk procedures such as pancreatic resection. Methods We did an open-label, nationwide, stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial that included all patients having pancreatic resection during a 22-month period in the Netherlands. In this trial design, all 17 centres that did pancreatic surgery were randomly allocated for the timing of the crossover from usual care (the control group) to treatment given in accordance with a multimodal, multidisciplinary algorithm for the early recognition and minimally invasive management of postoperative complications (the intervention group). Randomisation was done by an independent statistician using a computer-generated scheme, stratified to ensure that low-medium-volume centres alternated with high-volume centres. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment. A smartphone app was designed that incorporated the algorithm and included the daily evaluation of clinical and biochemical markers. The algorithm determined when to do abdominal CT, radiological drainage, start antibiotic treatment, and remove abdominal drains. After crossover, clinicians were trained in how to use the algorithm during a 4-week wash-in period; analyses comparing outcomes between the control group and the intervention group included all patients other than those having pancreatic resection during this wash-in period. The primary outcome was a composite of bleeding that required invasive intervention, organ failure, and 90-day mortality, and was assessed by a masked adjudication committee. This trial was registered in the Netherlands Trial Register, NL6671. Findings From Jan 8, 2018, to Nov 9, 2019, all 1805 patients who had pancreatic resection in the Netherlands were eligible for and included in this study. 57 patients who underwent resection during the wash-in phase were excluded from the primary analysis. 1748 patients (885 receiving usual care and 863 receiving algorithm-centred care) were included. The primary outcome occurred in fewer patients in the algorithm-centred care group than in the usual care group (73 [8%] of 863 patients vs 124 [14%] of 885 patients; adjusted risk ratio [RR] 0middot48, 95% CI 0middot38-0middot61; p

Background: Surgical outcome after pancreatoduodenectomy for duodenal adenocarcinoma could differ from pancreatoduodenectomy for other cancers, but large multicenter series are lacking. This study aimed to determine surgical outcome in patients after pancreatoduodenectomy for duodenal adenocarcinoma, compared with other periampullary cancers, in a nationwide multicenter cohort. Methods: After pancreatoduodenectomy for cancer between 2014 and 2019, consecutive patients were included from the nationwide, mandatory Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. Patients were stratified by diagnosis. Baseline, treatment characteristics, and postoperative outcome were compared between groups. The association between diagnosis and major complications (Clavien–Dindo grade III or higher) was assessed via multivariable regression analysis. Results: Overall, 3113 patients, after pancreatoduodenectomy for cancer, were included in this study: 264 (8.5%) patients with duodenal adenocarcinomas and 2849 (91.5%) with other cancers. After pancreatoduodenectomy for duodenal adenocarcinoma, patients had higher rates of major complications (42.8% vs. 28.6%; p

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether detection of recurrent pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in an early, asymptomatic stage increases the number of patients receiving additional treatment, subsequently improving survival.SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: International guidelines disagree on the value of standardized postoperative surveillance for early detection and treatment of PDAC recurrence.METHODS: A nationwide, observational cohort study was performed including all patients who underwent PDAC resection (2014-2016). Prospective baseline and perioperative data were retrieved from the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. Data on follow-up, treatment, and survival were collected retrospectively. Overall survival (OS) was evaluated using multivariable Cox regression analysis, before and after propensity-score matching, stratified for patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic recurrence.RESULTS: Eight hundred thirty-six patients with a median follow-up of 37 months (interquartile range 30-48) were analyzed. Of those, 670 patients (80%) developed PDAC recurrence after a median follow-up of 10 months (interquartile range 5-17). Additional treatment was performed in 159/511 patients (31%) with symptomatic recurrence versus 77/159 (48%) asymptomatic patients (P < 0.001). After propensity-score matching on lymph node ratio, adjuvant therapy, disease-free survival, and recurrence site, additional treatment was independently associated with improved OS for both symptomatic patients [hazard ratio 0.53 (95% confidence interval 0.42-0.67); P < 0.001] and asymptomatic patients [hazard ratio 0.45 (95% confidence interval 0.29-0.70); P < 0.001].CONCLUSIONS: Additional treatment of PDAC recurrence was independently associated with improved OS, with asymptomatic patients having a higher probability to receive recurrence treatment. Therefore, standardized postoperative surveillance aiming to detect PDAC recurrence before the onset of symptoms has the potential to improve survival. This provides a rationale for prospective studies on standardized surveillance after PDAC resection.

Central pancreatectomy is a parenchyma-sparing alternative to distal pancreatectomy in patients with a benign or low-grade malignant tumor in the body of the pancreas. The aim of central pancreatectomy is to prevent postoperative life-long endocrine and exocrine insufficiency. The downside of central pancreatectomy is the high rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula, which is the main reason that many surgeons do not routinely use central pancreatectomy in eligible patients. Most studies report open or laparoscopic central pancreatectomy with a pancreatico-gastrostomy anastomosis in adults. This is the first description of a standardized approach to robotic central pancreatectomy with Roux-en-Y pancreaticojejunostomy reconstruction in an adolescent (16-year-old boy) with a pseudopapillary tumor in the body of the pancreas. The operation time was 248 min with 20 mL of blood loss. The postoperative course was uneventful except for the short-term medical treatment for a grade B pancreatic fistula. Robotic central pancreatectomy can be safely applied in selected patients in experienced centers.

Contains fulltext : 239076.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) OBJECTIVE: This study compared median OS after resection of LAPC after upfront FOLFIRINOX versus a propensity-score matched cohort of LAPC patients treated with FOLFIRINOX-only (ie, without resection). BACKGROUND: Because the introduction of FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy, increased resection rates in LAPC patients have been reported, with improved OS. Some studies have also reported promising OS with FOLFIRINOX-only treatment in LAPC. Multicenter studies assessing the survival benefit associated with resection of LAPC versus patients treated with FOLFIRINOX-only are lacking. METHODS: Patients with non-progressive LAPC after 4 cycles of FOLFIRINOX treatment, both with and without resection, were included from a prospective multicenter cohort in 16 centers (April 2015-December 2019). Cox regression analysis identified predictors for OS. One-to-one propensity score matching (PSM) was used to obtain a matched cohort of patients with and without resection. These patients were compared for OS. RESULTS: Overall, 293 patients with LAPC were included, of whom 89 underwent a resection. Resection was associated with improved OS (24 vs 15 months, P < 0.01), as compared to patients without resection. Before PSM, resection, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) response were predictors for OS. After PSM, resection remained associated with improved OS [Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.344, 95% confidence interval (0.222-0.534), P < 0.01], with an OS of 24 versus 15 months, as compared to patients without resection. Resection of LAPC was associated with improved 3-year OS (31% vs 11%, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Resection of LAPC after FOLFIRINOX was associated with increased OS and 3-year survival, as compared to propensity-score matched patients treated with FOLFIRINOX-only.

Contains fulltext : 239059.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) are increasingly treated with FOLFIRINOX, resulting in improved survival and resection of tumors that were initially unresectable. It remains unclear, however, which specific patients benefit from FOLFIRINOX. Two nomograms were developed predicting overall survival (OS) and resection at the start of FOLFIRINOX for LAPC. METHODS: From our multicenter, prospective LAPC registry in 14 Dutch hospitals, LAPC patients starting first-line FOLFIRINOX (April 2015-December 2017) were included. Stepwise backward selection according to the Akaike Information Criterion was used to identify independent baseline predictors for OS and resection. Two prognostic nomograms were generated. RESULTS: A total of 252 patients were included, with a median OS of 14 months. Thirty-two patients (13%) underwent resection, with a median OS of 23 months. Older age, female sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index ≤1, and CA 19.9 1, involvement of the superior mesenteric artery, celiac trunk, and superior mesenteric vein ≥ 270° were independent factors decreasing the probability of resection (c-index: 0.79). CONCLUSIONS: Two nomograms were developed to predict OS and resection in patients with LAPC before starting treatment with FOLFIRINOX. These nomograms could be beneficial in the shared decision-making process and counseling of these patients.

Drain Amylase level are routinely determined to diagnose pancreatic fistula after Pancreatocoduodenectomy. Consensus is lacking regarding the cut-off value of amylase to diagnosis clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistulae (POPF). The present study proposes a model based on Amylase Value in the Drain (AVD) measured in the first three postoperative days to predict a POPF. Amylase cut-offs were selected from a previous published systematic review and the accuracy were validated in a multicentre database from 12 centres in 2 countries. The present study defined POPF the 2016 ISGPS criteria (3 times the upper limit of normal serum amylase). A learning machine method was used to correlate AVD with the diagnosis of POPF. Overall, 454 (27%) of 1638 patients developed POPF. Machine learning excluded a clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistulae with an AUC of 0.962 (95% CI 0.940–0.984) in the first five postoperative days. An AVD at a cut-off of 270 U/L in 2 days in the first three postoperative days excluded a POPF with an AUC of 0.869 (CI 0.81–0.90, p < 0.0001). A single AVD in the first three postoperative days may not exclude POPF after pancreatoduodenectomy. The levels should be monitored until day 3 and have two negative values before removing the drain. In the group with a positive level, the drain should be kept in and AVD monitored until postoperative day five.

BACKGROUND: Nearly a quarter of patients with locally advanced (T4 stage) or perforated colon cancer are at risk of developing peritoneal metastases, often without curative treatment options. We aimed to determine the efficacy of adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in patients with locally advanced colon cancer.METHODS: This multicentre, open-label trial was done in nine hospitals that specialised in HIPEC in the Netherlands. Patients with clinical or pathological T4N0-2M0-stage tumours or perforated colon cancer were randomly assigned (1:1), with a web-based randomisation application, before resection of the primary tumour, to adjuvant HIPEC followed by routine adjuvant systemic chemotherapy (experimental group) or to adjuvant systemic chemotherapy alone (control group). Patients were stratified by tumour characteristic (T4 or perforation), age (FINDINGS: Between April 1, 2015, and Feb 20, 2017, 204 patients were randomly assigned to treatment (102 in each group). In the HIPEC group, two patients withdrew consent after randomisation. In this group, 19 (19%) of 100 patients were diagnosed with peritoneal metastases: nine (47%) during surgical exploration preceding intentional adjuvant HIPEC, eight (42%) during routine follow-up, and two (11%) during diagnostic laparoscopy at 18-months. In the control group, 23 (23%) of 102 patients were diagnosed with peritoneal metastases, of whom seven (30%) were diagnosed by laparoscopy at 18-months and 16 during regular follow-up (therefore making them ineligible for diagnostic laparoscopy). In the intention-to-treat analysis (n=202), there was no difference in peritoneal-free survival at 18-months (80·9% [95% CI 73·3-88·5] for the experimental group vs 76·2% [68·0-84·4] for the control group, log-rank one-sided p=0·28). 12 (14%) of 87 patients who received adjuvant HIPEC developed postoperative complications and one (1%) encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis.INTERPRETATION: In patients with T4 or perforated colon cancer, treatment with adjuvant HIPEC with oxaliplatin did not improve peritoneal metastasis-free survival at 18 months. Routine use of adjuvant HIPEC is not advocated on the basis of this trial.FUNDING: Organization for Health Research and Development and the Dutch Cancer Society.

Background: Abdominal drainage and the timing of drain removal in patients undergoing pancreatic resection are under debate. Early drain removal after pancreatic resection has been reported to be safe with a low risk for clinical relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) when drain amylase on POD1 is Methods: Patients registered in the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (2014-2016) who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy, distal pancreatectomy or enucleation were analysed. Data on post-operative drain amylase levels, drain removal, postoperative pancreatic fistulae were collected. Univariate and multivariate analysis using a logistic regression model were performed. The primary outcome measure was grade B/C pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF).Results: Among 1402 included patients, 433 patients with a drain fluid amylase level of 5000U/L the CR-POPF rate was 28%. When using a cut-off point of 2000U/L or 1000U/L during POD1-3, the CR-POPF rates were 6% and 5% respectively. For patients with an amylase level of >2000U/L and >1000UL during POD 1-3 the CR-POPF rates were 26% and 22% respectively (n = 223). Drain removal on POD4 or thereafter was associated with more complications (p = 0.004). Drain amylase level was shown to be the most statistically significant predicting factor for CR-POPF (Wald = 49.7; p Conclusion: Our data support early drain removal after pancreatic resection. However, a cut-off of 5000U/L drain amylase on POD1 was associated with a relatively high CR-POPF rate of 7%. A cut-off point of 1000U/L during POD1-3 resulted in 5% CR-POPF and might be a safer alternative. (C) 2019 IAP and EPC. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

The aim of the study was to assess feasibility and outcomes of a multicenter training program in laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD). Whereas expert centers have reported promising outcomes of LPD, nationwide analyses have raised concerns on its safety, especially during the learning curve. Multicenter, structured LPD training programs reporting outcomes including the first procedures are lacking. No LPD had been performed in the Netherlands before this study. During 2014-2016, 8 surgeons from 4 high-volume centers completed the Longitudinal Assessment and Realization of Laparoscopic Pancreatic Surgery (LAELAPS-2) training program in LPD, including detailed technique description, video training, and proctoring. In all centers, LPD was performed by 2 surgeons with extensive experience in pancreatic and laparoscopic surgery. Outcomes of all LPDs were prospectively collected. In total, 114 patients underwent LPD. Median pancreatic duct diameter was 3 mm [interquartile range (IQR = 2-4)] and pancreatic texture was soft in 74% of patients. The conversion rate was 11% (n = 12), median blood loss 350 mL (IQR = 200-700), and operative time 375 minutes (IQR = 320-431). Grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula occurred in 34% of patients, requiring catheter drainage in 22% and re-operation in 2%. A Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III complication occurred in 43% of patients. Median length of hospital stay was 15 days (IQR = 9-25). Overall, 30-day and 90-day mortality were both 3.5%. Outcomes were similar for the first and second part of procedures. This LPD training program was feasible and ensured acceptable outcomes during the learning curve in all centers. Future studies should determine whether such a training program is applicable in other settings and assess the added value of LPD

Background: Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy with open reconstruction (LPD-OR) has been suggested to lower the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula reported after laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy with laparoscopic reconstruction (LPD). Propensity score matched studies are, lacking. Methods: This is a multicenter prospective cohort study including patients from 7 Dutch centers between 2014–2018. Patients undergoing LPD-OR were matched LPD patients in a 1:1 ratio based on propensity scores. Main outcomes were postoperative pancreatic fistulas (POPF) grade B/C and Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications. Results: A total of 172 patients were included, involving the first procedure for all centers. All 56 patients after LPD-OR could be matched to a patient undergoing LPD. With LPD-OR, the unplanned conversion rate was 21% vs. 9% with LPD (P < 0.001). Median blood loss (300 vs. 400 mL, P = 0.85), operative time (401 vs. 378 min, P = 0.62) and hospital stay (10 vs. 12 days, P = 0.31) were comparable for LPD-OR vs. LPD, as were Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications (38% vs. 52%, P = 0.13), POPF grade B/C (23% vs. 21%, P = 0.82), and 90-day mortality (4% vs. 4%, P > 0.99). Conclusion: In this propensity matched cohort performed early in the learning curve, no benefit was found for LPD-OR, as compared to LPD.

Background Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) is increasingly being performed because of perceived patient benefits. Whether conversion of MIPD to open pancreatoduodenectomy worsens outcome, and which risk factors are associated with conversion, is unclear. Methods This was a post hoc analysis of a European multicentre retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing MIPD (2012–2017) in ten medium-volume (10–19 MIPDs annually) and four high-volume (at least 20 MIPDs annually) centres. Propensity score matching (1 : 1) was used to compare outcomes of converted and non-converted MIPD procedures. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for conversion, with results presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95 per cent confidence intervals (c.i). Results Overall, 65 of 709 MIPDs were converted (9.2 per cent) and the overall 30-day mortality rate was 3.8 per cent. Risk factors for conversion were tumour size larger than 40 mm (OR 2.7, 95 per cent c.i.1.0 to 6.8; P = 0.041), pancreatobiliary tumours (OR 2.2, 1.0 to 4.8; P = 0.039), age at least 75 years (OR 2.0, 1.0 to 4.1; P = 0.043), and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (OR 5.2, 2.5 to 10.7; P Conclusion Risk factors for conversion during MIPD include age, large tumour size, tumour location, laparoscopic approach, and surgery in medium-volume centres. Although conversion during MIPD itself was not associated with worse outcomes, the outcome in these patients was poor in general which should be taken into account during patient selection for MIPD.

This prospective nationwide cohort study examined the feasibility of a watchful-waiting protocol for non-functional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (NF-pNET) of 2 cm or smaller. In total, 8 of 76 patients (11 per cent) with a NF-pNET no larger than 2 cm showed significant tumour progression (more than 0.5 cm/year) during 17 months of follow-up, of whom two opted for resection. No patient developed metastases. Quality of life was poorer than in the reference population. Watchful waiting seems a safe alternative to upfront surgery in patients with a NF-pNET no larger than 2 cm, although longer follow-up is necessary.

Introduction: Since current studies on locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) mainly report from single, high-volume centers, it is unclear if outcomes can be translated to daily clinical practice. This study provides treatment strategies and clinical outcomes within a multicenter cohort of unselected patients with LAPC.Materials and methods: Consecutive patients with LAPC according to Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group criteria, were prospectively included in 14 centers from April 2015 until December 2017. A centralized expert panel reviewed response according to RECIST v1.1 and potential surgical resectability. Primary outcome was median overall survival (mOS), stratified for primary treatment strategy.Results: Overall, 422 patients were included, of whom 77% (n = 326) received chemotherapy. The majority started with FOLFIRINOX (77%, 252/326) with a median of six cycles (IQR 4-10). Gemcitabine monotherapy was given to 13% (41/326) of patients and nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine to 10% (33/326), with a median of two (IQR 3-5) and three (IQR 3-5) cycles respectively. The mOS of the entire cohort was 10 months (95%CI 9-11). In patients treated with FOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine monotherapy, or nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine, mOS was 14 (95%CI 13-15), 9 (95%CI 8-10), and 9 months (95%CI 8-10), respectively. A resection was performed in 13% (32/252) of patients after FOLFIRINOX, resulting in a mOS of 23 months (95%CI 12-34).Conclusion: This multicenter unselected cohort of patients with LAPC resulted in a 14 month mOS and a 13% resection rate after FOLFIRINOX. These data put previous results in perspective, enable us to inform patients with more accurate survival numbers and will support decision-making in clinical practice. (C) 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Contains fulltext : 239089.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) BACKGROUND: The treatment options for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) have improved in recent years and consequently survival has increased. It is unknown, however, if elderly patients benefit from these improvements in therapy. With the ongoing aging of the patient population and an increasing incidence of pancreatic cancer, this patient group becomes more relevant. This study aims to clarify the association between increasing age, treatment and overall survival in patients with LAPC. METHODS: Post-hoc analysis of a multicenter registry including consecutive patients with LAPC, who were registered in 14 centers of the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group (April 2015-December 2017). Patients were divided in three groups according to age (

Background Approximately 80% of patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) are treated with chemotherapy, of whom approximately 10% undergo a resection. Cohort studies investigating local tumor ablation with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) have reported a promising overall survival of 26–34 months when given in a multimodal setting. However, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effect of RFA in combination with chemotherapy in patients with LAPC are lacking. Methods The “Pancreatic Locally Advanced Unresectable Cancer Ablation” (PELICAN) trial is an international multicenter superiority RCT, initiated by the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group (DPCG). All patients with LAPC according to DPCG criteria, who start with FOLFIRINOX or (nab-paclitaxel/)gemcitabine, are screened for eligibility. Restaging is performed after completion of four cycles of FOLFIRINOX or two cycles of (nab-paclitaxel/)gemcitabine (i.e., 2 months of treatment), and the results are assessed within a nationwide online expert panel. Eligible patients with RECIST stable disease or objective response, in whom resection is not feasible, are randomized to RFA followed by chemotherapy or chemotherapy alone. In total, 228 patients will be included in 16 centers in The Netherlands and four other European centers. The primary endpoint is overall survival. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, RECIST response, CA 19.9 and CEA response, toxicity, quality of life, pain, costs, and immunomodulatory effects of RFA. Discussion The PELICAN RCT aims to assess whether the combination of chemotherapy and RFA improves the overall survival when compared to chemotherapy alone, in patients with LAPC with no progression of disease following 2 months of systemic treatment. Trial registration Dutch Trial RegistryNL4997. Registered on December 29, 2015. ClinicalTrials.govNCT03690323. Retrospectively registered on October 1, 2018

Background: Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) has been suggested to reduce postoperative outcomes as compared to open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). Recently, the first randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing MIDP to ODP were published. This individual patient data meta-analysis compared outcomes after MIDP versus ODP combining data from both RCTs. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed to identify RCTs on MIDP vs. ODP, and individual patient data were harmonized. Primary endpoint was the rate of major (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III) complications. Sensitivity analyses were performed in high-risk subgroups. Results: A total of 166 patients from the LEOPARD and LAPOP RCTs were included. The rate of major complications was 21% after MIDP vs. 35% after ODP (adjusted odds ratio 0.54; p = 0.148). MIDP significantly reduced length of hospital stay (6 vs. 8 days, p = 0.036), and delayed gastric emptying (4% vs. 16%, p = 0.049), as compared to ODP. A trend towards higher rates of postoperative pancreatic fistula was observed after MIDP (36% vs. 28%, p = 0.067). Outcomes were comparable in high-risk subgroups. Conclusion: This individual patient data meta-analysis showed that MIDP, when performed by trained surgeons, may be regarded as the preferred approach for distal pancreatectomy. Outcomes are improved after MIDP as compared to ODP, without obvious downsides in high-risk subgroups.

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

Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is increasingly performed in high-volume centers, which may compromise waiting times. The aim of this study was to evaluate patient flow and outcome of PD within a regional oncology network of two high-volume centers. A post hoc analysis of a partially retrospective and prospective database was performed of all patients who underwent PD for pancreatic or periampullary neoplasms in both centers of the Gastrointestinal Oncology Center Amsterdam, a collaboration between an academic center and affiliated general teaching hospital, from 2010 to 2014. Outcomes included waiting time to surgery and postoperative morbidity and mortality. A total of 525 PDs were performed, 329 in the academic center (annual volume 66) and 196 in the teaching hospital (annual volume 39). Neoadjuvant treatment was more often used in the academic center, other baseline characteristics were similar. Overall time to surgery was 26 days, which was significantly less in the teaching hospital. The major postoperative morbidity rate was 38.3% (n = 201), and the 30- and 90-day mortality was 2.3% and 3.6%. A regional oncology network between an academic center and a general teaching hospital for PD can be an attractive option to safeguard waiting times in selected patients, without compromising outcome.

Background Intraoperative tumor manipulation may induce the dissemination of occult peritoneal tumor cells (OPTC) into the peritoneal cavity. Methods A systematic review was performed in the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases from inception to March 15, 2017. Eligible were studies that analyzed the presence of OPTC in peritoneal fluid, by any method, both before and after resection in adults who underwent intentionally curative pancreatic resection for histopathologically confirmed pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in absence of macroscopic peritoneal metastases. Results Four studies with 138 patients met the inclusion criteria. The pooled rate of OPTC prior to tumor manipulation was 8% (95% CI 2%–24%). The pooled detection rate of OPTC in patients in whom OPTC became detectable only after tumor manipulation was 33% (95% CI 15–58%). Only one study (28 patients) reported on survival, which was worse in patients with OPTC (median 11.1 months versus 30.3 months; p = 0.030). Conclusion This systematic review suggests that tumor manipulation induces OPTC in one third of patients with pancreatic cancer. Since data on survival are lacking, future studies should determine the prognostic consequences of tumor manipulation, including the potential therapeutic effect of ‘no-touch’ and minimally invasive resection strategies.

Contains fulltext : 245466.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) shortens time to functional recovery and improves 30-day quality of life (QoL), as compared with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) for nonmalignant disease. The impact of MIDP on QoL, cosmetic satisfaction, and overall major complications beyond 1-year follow-up is currently unknown. STUDY DESIGN: The Minimally Invasive Versus Open Distal Pancreatectomy (LEOPARD) trial randomized 108 patients to MIDP (laparoscopic or robotic) or ODP in 14 Dutch centers (April 2015 to March 2017). The primary outcome measure of this study was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), as assessed with the EQ-5D. QoL was assessed using subscales of the EORTC QLQ-C30, PAN-26, and a body image questionnaire. The latter included a cosmetic satisfaction score (range 3-24), and a body image score (range 5-20). Differences between MIDP and ODP for QALYs, generic, and disease-specific QoL and body image were analyzed. Missing QoL data were imputed using multiple imputation. RESULTS: In total, 84 patients were alive, with a median follow-up of 44 months; 62 of these patients (74%) completed the questionnaires (27 MIDP, 35 ODP). There was no significant difference in QALYs between the 2 groups (mean score 2.34 vs 2.46 years, p = 0.63), nor on the QoL subscales. Significant overall change in EQ-5D health utilities were found for both groups over time (p < 0.001). Patients in the MIDP group scored higher on cosmetic satisfaction (21 vs 14, p = 0.049). No differences between the 2 groups were observed for clinical outcomes such as major complications, readmissions, and incisional hernias. CONCLUSIONS: More than 3 years after distal pancreatectomy, no improvement in QALYs and overall QoL was seen after MIDP, whereas cosmetic satisfaction was higher after MIDP as compared with ODP.

Item does not contain fulltext BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy may improve postoperative recovery compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy. However, there are concerns that the extensive learning curve of this complex procedure could increase the risk of complications. We aimed to assess whether laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy could reduce time to functional recovery compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy. METHODS: This multicentre, patient-blinded, parallel-group, randomised controlled phase 2/3 trial was performed in four centres in the Netherlands that each do 20 or more pancreatoduodenectomies annually; surgeons had to have completed a dedicated training programme for laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and have done 20 or more laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomies before trial participation. Patients with a benign, premalignant, or malignant indication for pancreatoduodenectomy, without signs of vascular involvement, were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo either laparoscopic or open pancreatoduodenectomy using a central web-based system. Randomisation was stratified for annual case volume and preoperative estimated risk of pancreatic fistula. Patients were blinded to treatment allocation. Analysis was done according to the intention-to-treat principle. The main objective of the phase 2 part of the trial was to assess the safety of laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (complications and mortality), and the primary outcome of phase 3 was time to functional recovery in days, defined as all of the following: adequate pain control with only oral analgesia; independent mobility; ability to maintain more than 50% of the daily required caloric intake; no need for intravenous fluid administration; and no signs of infection (temperature

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to identify predictors for successful minimally invasive catheter drainage (ie, survival without relaparotomy) for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy.METHODS: Included were consecutive patients undergoing catheter drainage as first intervention for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy (2005-2013) in 9 Dutch centers. Possible prognostic factors for successful catheter drainage (ie, survival without relaparotomy) were selected using Akaike information criterion.RESULTS: Included were 227 patients after 2196 pancreatoduodenectomies. Primary catheter drainage was successful in 175 (77%) of 227 patients. Multivariable logistic regression revealed the following negative prognostic factors for success: male sex (odds ratio [OR], 0.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21-1.00; P = 0.049), higher age (for every 5 years over 50; OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.57-0.84; P < 0.001), and respiratory failure at time of catheter drainage (OR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.03-0.33; P < 0.001). A prognostic model incorporating these factors yielded an area under the curve of 0.76 and demonstrated a success range of 98% to 14%.CONCLUSIONS: Male sex, higher age, and respiratory failure are associated with a low success rate of catheter drainage in patients with pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. These patients might benefit from an intensified postoperative monitoring for early detection and management of pancreatic fistula to prevent respiratory failure.

Background: Patients with locally advanced (T4) or perforated colon cancer are at high risk (~25%) of developing peritoneal metastases (PM), often without curative treatment options. In this study, the effectiveness of adjuvant hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in reducing the development of PM was determined. Methods: In this multicentre non-blinded superiority trial, patients with c/pT4N0-2M0 or perforated colon cancer were randomized to adjuvant HIPEC followed by routine adjuvant systemic chemotherapy or to adjuvant systemic chemotherapy alone. Adjuvant HIPEC with oxaliplatin (460mg/m2, 30 minutes, 42°C, concurrent 5-FU/LV iv) was performed simultaneously (9%) or within 5-8 weeks (91%) after primary tumour resection. In all patients without evidence of recurrent disease at 18 months, a diagnostic laparoscopy was performed. The primary endpoint was PM free survival (PMFS) at 18 months. Findings: Between April 2015 and January 2017, 204 patients were randomized, 102 in each arm. In the control arm, 23 patients were diagnosed with PM, of which 7 by 18 months laparoscopy. In the experimental arm, 19 patients were diagnosed with PM, of which 9 during surgical exploration preceding intentional adjuvant HIPEC, 8 during routine follow-up and 2 by 18 months laparoscopy. In the intention to treat analysis (n=202), no difference in 18 months PMFS was observed; 76% (control) vs. 81% (experimental), HR 0·86 (0·51-1·45). After adjuvant HIPEC, 14% of patients developed postoperative complications and encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis occurred in one. PM were treated with cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC in 15/23 and 13/19 patients in the control and experimental arm, respectively. Interpretation: No superiority of adjuvant HIPEC with oxaliplatin could be demonstrated regarding 18 months PMFS in patients with T4 or perforated colon cancer. Trial registration number: NCT02231086 (Clinicaltrials.gov). Funding Statement: Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMw) and the Dutch Cancer Society (KWF). Declaration of Interest: The authors have nothing to declare. Ethical Approval Statement: The Amsterdam UMC was the coordinating centre and approval of the protocol was obtained from its institutional review board.

Objective: This trial followed a structured nationwide training program in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP), according to the IDEAL framework for surgical innovation, and aimed to compare time to functional recovery after minimally invasive and open distal pancreatectomy (ODP).Background: MIDP is increasingly used and may enhance postoperative recovery as compared with ODP, but randomized studies are lacking.Methods: A multicenter patient-blinded randomized controlled superiority trial was performed in 14 centers between April 2015 and March 2017. Adult patients with left-sided pancreatic tumors confined to the pancreas without vascular involvement were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo MIDP or ODP. Patients were blinded for type of surgery using a large abdominal dressing. The primary endpoint was time to functional recovery. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial was registered with the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR5689).Results: Time to functional recovery was 4 days [interquartile range (IQR) 3-6) in 51 patients after MIDP versus 6 days (IQR 5-8) in 57 patients after ODP (P = III complication rate was 25% versus 38% (P = 0.21). Delayed gastric emptying grade B/C was seen less often after MIDP (6% vs 20%; P = 0.04). Postoperative pancreatic fistulas grade B/C were seen in 39% after MIDP versus 23% after ODP (P = 0.07), without difference in percutaneous catheter drainage (22% vs 20%; P = 0.77). Quality of life (day 3-30) was better after MIDP as compared with ODP, and overall costs were non-significantly less after MIDP. No 90-day mortality was seen after MIDP versus 2% (n = 1) after ODP.Conclusions: In patients with left-sided pancreatic tumors confined to the pancreas, MIDP reduces time to functional recovery compared with ODP. Although the overall rate of complications was not reduced, MIDP was associated with less delayed gastric emptying and better quality of life without increasing costs.

4016 Background: Preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) may improve overall survival in resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC) and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC). Long term results are presented. Methods: In this multicenter phase III trial, patients with RPC or BRPC were randomized between preoperative CRT, (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 weekly for 7 of 10 weeks, and 15x2.4 Gy radiotherapy in week 4 to 6), followed by surgery and four cycles of adjuvant gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 weekly for 3 of 4 weeks), or immediate surgery followed by 6 cycles of adjuvant gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 weekly for 3 of 4 weeks). Primary endpoint was overall survival by intention-to-treat (ITT). Results: From April 2013 to July 2017, 246 eligible patients were accrued by 16 Dutch centers and randomized, 119 to preoperative CRT and 127 to immediate surgery. After a median follow up of 56 months (35.3-92.0 months), 210 patients have died, 93 (78%) in the preoperative CRT arm and 117 (92%) in the immediate surgery arm. Three- and five-year overall survival ITT was 27.7% and 20.5% after preoperative CRT versus 16.5% and 6.5% after immediate surgery (HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.56 to 0.96; p = 0.025). In addition, disease-free survival (HR 0.70; p = 0.009) locoregional failure-free interval (HR 0.57; p = 0.004) and distant metastases free interval (HR 0.74; p = 0.071) improved after preoperative CRT. Also in the stratified subsets RPC and BRPC, preoperative CRT improved OS: RPC (n = 133, HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.54 to 1.16; P = 0.23). BRPC (n = 113, HR 0.67; 95% CI 0.45 to 0.99; p = 0.045). We could not demonstrate a difference in treatment effect between these subsets (interaction test p = 0.56). Conclusions: Preoperative gemcitabine-based CRT for RPC or BRPC improves long term overall survival compared to immediate surgery with adjuvant gemcitabine. Clinical trial information: NTR3709.

The poor survival of patients with resectable pancreatic cancer might be related to the presence of occult peritoneal tumor cells (OPTC). This systematic review studies the prognostic value of cytology and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) by real-time polymerase chain reaction in peritoneal fluid. The results suggest that presence of OPTC is related to a worse survival in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. Future studies should investigate its possible role in selecting patients for specific treatment strategies. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;114:743-751. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.