Search

Background and aimThe International Cancer of the Pancreas Screening Consortium met in 2018 to update its consensus recommendations for the management of individuals with increased risk of pancreatic cancer based on family history or germline mutation status (high-risk individuals).MethodsA modified Delphi approach was employed to reach consensus among a multidisciplinary group of experts who voted on consensus statements. Consensus was considered reached if ≥75% agreed or disagreed.ResultsConsensus was reached on 55 statements. The main goals of surveillance (to identify high-grade dysplastic precursor lesions and T1N0M0 pancreatic cancer) remained unchanged. Experts agreed that for those with familial risk, surveillance should start no earlier than age 50 or 10 years earlier than the youngest relative with pancreatic cancer, but were split on whether to start at age 50 or 55. Germline ATM mutation carriers with one affected first-degree relative are now considered eligible for surveillance. Experts agreed that preferred surveillance tests are endoscopic ultrasound and MRI/magnetic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, but no consensus was reached on how to alternate these modalities. Annual surveillance is recommended in the absence of concerning lesions. Main areas of disagreement included if and how surveillance should be performed for hereditary pancreatitis, and the management of indeterminate lesions.ConclusionsPancreatic surveillance is recommended for selected high-risk individuals to detect early pancreatic cancer and its high-grade precursors, but should be performed in a research setting by multidisciplinary teams in centres with appropriate expertise. Until more evidence supporting these recommendations is available, the benefits, risks and costs of surveillance of pancreatic surveillance need additional evaluation.

Background: Chronic pancreatitis (CP) is a complex inflammatory disease with remarkably impaired quality of life and permanent damage of the pancreas. This paper is part of the international consensus guidelines on CP and presents the consensus on factors elevating the risk for CP. Methods: An international working group with 20 experts on CP from the major pancreas societies (IAP, APA, JPS, and EPC) evaluated 14 statements generated from evidence on four questions deemed to be the most clinically relevant in CP. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evalu-ation (GRADE) approach was used to evaluate the level of evidence available per statement. To determine the level of agreement, the working group voted on the 14 statements for strength of agreement, using a nine-point Likert scale in order to calculate Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient. Results: Strong consensus and agreement were obtained for the following statements: Alcohol, smoking, and certain genetic alterations are risk factors for CP. Past history, family history, onset of symptoms, and life-style factors including alcohol intake and smoking history should be determined. Alcohol con-sumption dose-dependently elevates the risk of CP up to 4-fold. Ever smokers, even smoking less than a pack of cigarettes per day, have an increased risk for CP, as compared to never smokers. Conclusions: Both genetic and environmental factors can markedly elevate the risk for CP. Therefore, health-promoting lifestyle education and in certain cases genetic counselling should be employed to reduce the incidence of CP. (C) 2020 IAP and EPC. Published by Elsevier B.V.

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. © 2016 Elsevier Inc.

Context Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (P-NET) is a rare and slow-growing tumor. Unfortunately, there is no clear consensus on the role and timing of surgery for primary tumor and liver metastases, although current reports refer to liver surgery including LT for unresectable liver metastases. Case report A thirty-nine-year-old man was diagnosed with nonfunctioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (P-NET) in the pancreatic head, with multiple liver metastases. The tumor was 2.5 cm in diameter and he was asymptomatic. Small but multiple metastases were detected in the liver, and no extrahepatic metastases were observed. We initially intended to control the liver metastases before resection of the primary tumor. To begin with, transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and transcatheter arterial infusion (TAI) were repeated. Thereafter, systemic chemotherapy and biotherapy were introduced according to follow-up assessments. Unfortunately, imaging assessment at about 10 months later revealed that liver metastases were partially enlarged, although some were successfully treated. Therefore, these therapies were switched to other regimens, and TACE/TAI, systemic chemotherapies and biotherapies were repeated. Although liver metastases seemed to be stable for a while, the primary tumor was enlarged even after therapy. At 3.5 years after initial diagnosis, the primary tumor became symptomatic (pain and jaundice). Liver metastases enlarged and massive swelling of the para-aortic lymph nodes was observed. Thereafter, palliative therapy was the main course of action. He died at 4.3 years after initial diagnosis. Conclusion Our young patient could have been a candidate for initial surgery for primary tumor and might have had a chance of subsequent liver transplantation for unresectable metastases. Surgeons still face questions in deciding the best surgical scenario in patients with P-NET with liver metastases. Image: Primary tumor grew after therapy., JOP. Journal of the Pancreas, Vol 15, No 6 (2014): November - p. 541-632

Effects of the pentapeptide renin inhibitor (RI-78; Phe(4Cl)-Phe-Val-Tyr-Lys-NH2) and the angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor (teprotide) on mean arterial pressure (MAP) were examined in conscious monkeys (M. fascicularis). In salt depleted normotensive monkeys with a MAP of 95 +/- 4 mmHg and plasma renin activity (PRA) of 15.9 +/- 2.7 ngAI/ml/h, a bolus injection of a dose of 375 micrograms/kg of RI-78 caused a prompt hypotensive effect. Maximal hypotensive action was seen within 1 min, and MAP returned to the basal level within 15 min. With this dose, MAP was reduced by 20 +/- 6 mmHg. Teprotide (1 mg/kg) decreased MAP and reached a nadir after 13 min. There was no significant difference between maximal hypotensive responses seen with RI-78 (375 micrograms/kg) and with teprotide (1 mg/kg). Hypotensive effects of RI-78 and teprotide were also examined in acute renal hypertensive monkeys with a MAP of 125 +/- 5 mmHg and a PRA of 27.1 +/- 5.7 ngAI/ml/h. Again, similar hypotensive effects were observed. We conclude that antihypertensive effect of RI-78 is comparable to that seen with teprotide.

Background Despite the potential benefits, the adoption of the minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is still in the initial phase. We investigated the safety and feasibility of the robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy with venous resection/reconstruction (RPD SMV/PV). Methods Since March 2013 to October 2019, a total of 73 RPD and 10 RPD SMV/PV were performed. The two groups were case-matched according to the preoperative characteristics. Results Mean operative times and estimated blood loss were less in the RPD group in comparison to that in the RPD with SMV-PV group (525 vs 642 min, p = 0.003 and 290 vs 620 ml, p = 0.002, respectively). The mean length of hospital stay was similar in the RPD group in comparison to that in the RPD with SMV-PV group (10 days vs 13 days, p = 0.313). The two groups had similar overall postoperative morbidity rate (57.5% vs 60%, p = 0.686), although the severe complication rate was lower in the RPD group (11% vs 40%, p = 0.004). Conclusions RPD with SMV-PV is associated with increased operative time, estimated blood loss, higher major complication rate compared with RPD.

Background: The aim was to evaluate the various operative techniques and outcomes used to manage the pancreatic transection plane (or stump) during a left (distal) pancreatectomy and to develop expert consensus guidelines.Methods: Evidence-based, clinically relevant questions were discussed and then were circulated among members of the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery. After agreement on the questions and statements, voting in a 9-point Likert scale was used to gauge the level of objective support for each.Results: Studies using the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery definition of postoperative pancreatic fistula including 16 randomized trials were reviewed to generate a series of statements set into 14 domains. There was strong consensus in the following statements: there was no difference in the postoperative pancreatic fistula rate after left pancreatectomy between the handsewn and stapler techniques; a stapling technique could not be used in all cases of left pancreatectomy; the use of an energy-based tissue sealant or a chemical sealant device or combinations of these did not impact the postoperative pancreatic fistula rate; there was no difference in the postoperative pancreatic fistula rate between the open, laparoscopic, or robotic approaches; and there are 1 or more clinically important, patient-related risk factors associated with the postoperative pancreatic fistula rate. There was weak or conditional agreement on the use of prophylactic somatostatin analogs, stents, stump closure, stump anastomosis, and the role of abdominal drains.Conclusion: Areas of strong consensus suggests a change in clinical practice and priority setting. Eight domains with lower agreement will require novel approaches and large multicenter studies to determine future key areas of practice. (C) 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Background: The optimal nutritional therapy in the field of pancreatic surgery is still debated. Methods: An international panel of recognized pancreatic surgeons and pancreatologists decided that the topic of nutritional support was of importance in pancreatic surgery. Thus, they reviewed the best contemporary literature and worked to develop a position paper to provide evidence supporting the integration of appropriate nutritional support into the overall management of patients undergoing pancreatic resection. Strength of recommendation and quality of evidence were based on the approach of the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation Working Group. Results: The measurement of nutritional status should be part of routine preoperative assessment because malnutrition is a recognized risk factor for surgery-related complications. In addition to patient's weight loss and body mass index, measurement of sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity should be considered in the preoperative evaluation because they are strong predictors of poor short-term and long-term outcomes. The available data do not show any definitive nutritional advantages for one specific type of gastrointestinal reconstruction technique after pancreatoduodenectomy over the others. Postoperative early resumption of oral intake is safe and should be encouraged within enhanced recovery protocols, but in the case of severe postoperative complications or poor tolerance of oral food after the operation, supplementary artificial nutrition should be started at once. At present, there is not enough evidence to show the benefit of avoiding oral intake in clinically stable patients who are complicated by a clinically irrelevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (a so-called biochemical leak), while special caution should be given to feeding patients with clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula orally. When an artificial nutritional support is needed, enteral nutrition is preferred whenever possible over parenteral nutrition. After the operation, regardless of the type of pancreatic resection or technique of reconstruction, patients should be monitored carefully to assess for the presence of endocrine and exocrine pancreatic insufficiency. Although fecal elastase-1 is the most readily available clinical test for detection of pancreatic exocrine insufficiency, its sensitivity and specificity are low. Pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy should be initiated routinely after pancreatoduodenectomy and in patients with locally advanced disease and continued for at least 6 months after surgery, because untreated pancreatic exocrine insufficiency may result in severe nutritional derangement. Conclusion: The importance of this position paper is the consensus reached on the topic. Concentrating on nutritional support and therapy is of utmost value in pancreatic surgery for both short- and long-term outcomes.

Locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), which progresses locally and surrounds major vessels, has historically been deemed unresectable. Surgery alone failed to provide curative resection and improve overall survival. With the advancements in treatment, reports have shown favorable results in LAPC after undergoing successful chemotherapy therapy or chemoradiation therapy followed by surgical resection, so-called "conversion surgery", at experienced high-volume centers. However, recognizing significant regional and institutional disparities in the management of LAPC, an international consensus meeting on conversion surgery for LAPC was held during the Joint Congress of the 26th Meeting of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) and the 53rd Annual Meeting of Japan Pancreas Society (JPS) in Kyoto in July 2022. During the meeting, presenters reported the current best multidisciplinary practices for LAPC, including preoperative modalities, best systemic treatment regimens and durations, procedures of conversion surgery with or without vascular resections, biomarkers, and genetic studies. It was unanimously agreed among the experts in this meeting that "cancer biology is surpassing locoregional anatomical resectability" in the era of effective multiagent treatment. The biology of pancreatic cancer has yet to be further elucidated, and we believe it is essential to improve the treatment outcomes of LAPC patients through continued efforts from each institution and more international collaboration. This article summarizes the agreement during the discussion amongst the experts in the meeting. We hope that this will serve as a foundation for future international collaboration and recommendations for future guidelines., (Copyright © 2023 IAP and EPC. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)