Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for periampullary tumours

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic resection as an alternative to open pancreatoduodenectomy may yield short-term benefits, but has not been investigated in a randomized trial. The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopic and open pancreatoduodenectomy for short-term outcomes in a randomized trial.

METHODS

Patients with periampullary cancers were randomized to either laparoscopic or open pancreatoduodenectomy. The outcomes evaluated were hospital stay (primary outcome), and blood loss, radicality of surgery, duration of operation and complication rate (secondary outcomes).

RESULTS

Of 268 patients, 64 who met the eligibility criteria were randomized, 32 to each group. The median duration of postoperative hospital stay was longer for open pancreaticoduodenectomy than for laparoscopy (13 (range 6-30) versus 7 (5-52) days respectively; P = 0·001). Duration of operation was longer in the laparoscopy group. Blood loss was significantly greater in the open group (mean(s.d.) 401(46) versus 250(22) ml; P < 0·001). Number of nodes retrieved and R0 rate were similar in the two groups. There was no difference between the open and laparoscopic groups in delayed gastric emptying (7 of 32 versus 5 of 32), pancreatic fistula (6 of 32 versus 5 of 32) or postpancreatectomy haemorrhage (4 of 32 versus 3 of 32). Overall complications (defined according to the Clavien-Dindo classification) were similar (10 of 32 versus 8 of 32). There was one death in each group.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy offered a shorter hospital stay than open pancreatoduodenectomy in this randomized trial. Registration number: NCT02081131( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Splenic vein turndown for vascular reconstruction following pancreatic cancer resection in patients with high risk profile

Introduction: Vascular reconstruction is utilized following resections for pancreatic cancers with borderline resectability. This is defined by venous or partial superior mesenteric artery (SMA) involvement, where vessels are resected en bloc to achieve an R0 resection. There are many vascular reconstruction techniques post en bloc R0 resection, each with its own complication profile. The splenic turndown technique separates the vascular anastomosis from the pancreatic anastomosis, reducing the risk of vascular disruption should a pancreatic leak occur. Case Report: This is the first report in literature of the splenic vein turndown technique being utilized for vascular reconstruction post- pancreatic resection for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. To date, splenic vein turndown repair has only been described in a trauma setting. In this case, splenic vein turndown was preferred as the patient was on long-term corticosteroids with a high risk of anastomotic leak. Conclusion: This case report showing that splenic vein turndown technique is a feasible option for vascular reconstruction post-pancreatic resection. The main disadvantage of this technique is high risk of segmental portal hypertension if the spleen is not removed concomitantly. For this reason, its utility should be restricted to patients at high risk of pancreatic leak.

Surgery for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Surgical resection is the only potentially curative option in the treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Preoperative radiological imaging allows to rule out the presence of metastases. Three resectability categories are established based on the radiological findings depending on the degree of contact between the tumor and the blood vessels. Histological confirmation of malignancy is only required in cases of borderline or non-resectable tumors, prior to neoadjuvant treatment initiation. Diagnostic laparoscopy is recommended in the presence of large tumors of the body or tail and in borderline tumors to explore the possibility of resection and to apply treatment with curative intent, as well as in those cases with high level of biomarkers to rule out peritoneal involvement. Prior to surgery preoperative nutritional measures as well as endoscopic biliary drainage can be applied to optimize patient's conditions. Cephalic pancreaticoduodenectomy is the recommended surgical technique in tumors located in the head of the pancreas. The benefits from pyloric preservation, type or reconstruction (one vs. two loops), type of anastomosis (pancreaticojejunostomy vs. pancreaticogastrostomy), intraoperative biopsy of the pancreatic resection margin or the use of intraperitoneal drainages are inconclusive. Total pancreatectomy and/or portal resection should only be performed in particular cases; however, arterial resections have shown no benefits. Radical antegrade modular pancreaticosplenectomy, that can be performed laparoscopically, is the technique used for those tumors located in the pancreatic body-tail.

Current and future therapies for advanced pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer remains a deadly disease with a 5-year survival rate of only 8%. Even after surgical resection, most patients have recurrence of their cancer. Over the last 10 years, improvements in chemotherapy regimens led to a doubling in median overall survival. Here we review the management of advanced pancreatic cancer and highlight vaccine therapy as a novel modality of treatment.

Consensus guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of patients with pancreatic cancer in Spain

The management of patients with pancreatic cancer has advanced over the last few years. We convey a multidisciplinary group of experts in an attempt to stablish practical guidelines for the diagnoses, staging and management of these patients. This paper summarizes the main conclusions of the working group. Patients with suspected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma should be rapidly evaluated and referred to high-volume centers. Multidisciplinary supervision is critical for proper diagnoses, staging and to frame a treatment plan. Surgical resection together with chemotherapy offers the highest chance for cure in early stage disease. Patients with advanced disease should be classified in treatment groups to guide systemic treatment. New chemotherapeutic regimens have resulted in improved survival. Symptomatic management is critical in this disease. Enrollment in a clinical trial is, in general, recommended.

Superior mesenteric artery (SMA) resection during pancreatectomy for malignant disease of the pancreas: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Resection of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) during pancreatectomy is performed infrequently and is undertaken with the aim of removing non-metastatic locally advanced pancreatic tumours. SMA resection reports also encompass resection of other visceral vessels. The consequences of resection of these different arteries are not necessarily equivalent. This is a focused systematic review of the outcome of SMA resection during pancreatectomy for cancer.

METHODS

A computerized search of the English language literature was undertaken for the period 1st January 2000 through 30th April 2016. The keywords "Pancreatic surgery" and "Vascular resections" were used. Thirteen studies reported 70 patients undergoing pancreatectomy with SMA resection from 10,726 undergoing pancreatectomy. Individual patient-level outcome data were available for 25.

RESULTS

Median (range) accrual period was 132 (48-372) months. Reported peri-operative morbidity ranged from 39% to 91%. There were 5 peri-operative deaths in the 25 patients with individual-outcome data. Median survival was 11 months (95% Confidence interval 9.5-12.5 months; standard error 0.8 months).

CONCLUSIONS

SMA resection during pancreatectomy is undertaken infrequently incurring high peri-operative morbidity and mortality. Median survival is 11 (95% CI 9.5-12.5) months. In contemporary practice there is no evidence to support SMA resection during pancreatectomy.

Complete Response after Treatment with Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation with Prolonged Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced, Unresectable Adenocarcinoma of the Pancreas

Surgery is the only chance for cure in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. In unresectable, locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) suggests chemotherapy and consideration for radiation in cases of unresectable LAPC. Here we present a rare case of unresectable LAPC with a complete histopathological response after chemoradiation followed by surgical resection. A 54-year-old female presented to our clinic in December 2013 with complaints of abdominal pain and 30-pound weight loss. An MRI demonstrated a mass in the pancreatic body measuring 6.2 × 3.2 cm; biopsy revealed proven ductal adenocarcinoma. Due to splenic vein/artery and contiguous celiac artery encasement, she was deemed surgically unresectable. She was started on FOLFIRINOX therapy (three cycles), intensity modulated radiation to a dose of 54 Gy in 30 fractions concurrent with capecitabine, followed by FOLFIRI, and finally XELIRI. After 8 cycles of ongoing XELIRI completed in March 2015, restaging showed a remarkable decrease in tumor size, along with PET-CT revealing no FDG-avid uptake. She was reevaluated by surgery and taken for definitive resection. Histopathological evaluation demonstrated a complete R0 resection and no residual tumor. Based on this patient and literature review, this strategy demonstrates potential efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiation with prolonged chemotherapy, followed by surgery, which may improve outcomes in patients deemed previously unresectable.

Challenges in pancreatic adenocarcinoma surgery - National survey and current practice guidelines

Background

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains one of the most deadly cancers in Europe and the USA. There is consensus that radical tumor surgery is the only viable option for any long-term survival in patients with PDAC. So far, limited data are available regarding the routine surgical management of patients with advanced PDAC in the light of surgical guidelines.

Methods

A national survey on perioperative management of patients with PDAC and currently applied criteria on their tumor resectability in German university and community hospitals was carried out.

Results

With a response rate of 81.6% (231/283) a total of 95 (41.1%) participating departments practicing pancreatic surgery in Germany are certified as competence and reference centers for surgical diseases of the pancreas in 2016. More than 95% of them indicate to carry out structured and interdisciplinary therapies along with an interdisciplinary pre- and postoperative tumor board. The majority of survey respondents prefer the pylorus-preserving partial pancreatoduodenectomy (93.1%) with standard lymphadenectomy for cancer of the pancreatic head. Intraoperative histological evaluation of the resection margins is used regularly by 99% of the survey respondents. 98.7% of survey respondents carry out partial or complete vein resection, 126 respondents (54.5%) would resect tumor adjacent arteries, and 102 respondents (44.2%) would perform metastasectomy if complete PDAC resection (R0) is possible.

Conclusion

Evidence-based and standardized pancreatic surgery is practiced by a large number of hospitals in Germany. However, a significant number of survey respondents support an extended radical tumor resection in patients with advanced PDAC even when not indicated by current clinical guidelines.

Poor Glycemic Control Is Associated with Failure to Complete Neoadjuvant Therapy and Surgery in Patients with Localized Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

The impact of glycemic control in patients with pancreatic cancer treated with neoadjuvant therapy is unclear.

METHODS

Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) values were measured in patients with localized pancreatic cancer prior to any therapy (pretreatment) and after neoadjuvant therapy prior to surgery (preoperative). HbA1c levels greater than 6.5% were classified as abnormal. Patients were categorized based on the change in HbA1c levels from pretreatment to preoperative: GrpA, always normal; Gr B, worsened; GrpC, improved; and GrpD, always abnormal.

RESULTS

Pretreatment HbA1c levels were evaluable in 123 patients; there were 67 (55%) patients in GrpA, 8 (6%) in GrpB, 22 (18%) in GrpC, and 26 (21%) in GrpD. Of the 123 patients, 92 (75%) completed all intended therapy to include surgery; 57 (85%) patients in GrpA, 4 (50%) patients in GrpB, 16 (72%) patients in GrpC, and 15 (58%) patients in GrpD (p = 0.01). Elevated preoperative carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) (OR 0.22;[0.07-0.66]), borderline resectable (BLR) disease stage (OR 0.20;[0.01-0.45]) and abnormal preoperative HbA1c (OR 0.30;[0.11-0.90]) were negatively associated with completion of all intended therapy. Abnormal preoperative HbA1c was associated with a 2.74-fold increased odds of metastatic progression during neoadjuvant therapy (p = 0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

Elevated preoperative HbA1c is associated with failure to complete neoadjuvant therapy and surgery and a trend for increased risk of metastatic progression.

Updated therapeutic outcome for patients with periampullary and pancreatic cancer related to recent translational research

Chemotherapy with improved effect in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer has recently been established, launching a new era for patients with this very aggressive disease. FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel are different regimens, both capable of stabilizing the disease, thus increasing the number of patients who can reach second line and even third line of treatment. Concurrently, new windows of opportunity open for nutritional support and other therapeutic interventions, improving quality of life. Also pancreatic surgery has changed significantly during the latest years. Extended operations, including vascular/multivisceral resections are frequently performed in specialized centers, pushing borders of resectability. Potentially curative treatment including neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy is offered new patient groups. Translational research is the basis for the essential understanding of the ongoing development. Even thou biomarkers for clinical management of patients with periampullary tumors have almost been lacking, biomarker driven trials are now in progress. New insight is constantly made available for clinicians; one recent example is selection of patients for gemcitabine treatment based on the expression level of the human equilibrium nucleoside transporter 1. An example of new diagnostic tools is identification of early pancreatic cancer patients by a three-biomarker panel in urine: The proteins lymphatic vessel endothelial hyaluronan receptor 1, regenerating gene 1 alpha and translation elongation factor 1 alpha. Requirement of treatment guideline revisions is intensifying, as combined chemotherapy regimens result in unexpected advantages. The European Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer 4 trial outcome is an illustration: Addition of capecitabine in the adjuvant setting improved overall survival more than expected from the effect in advanced disease. Rapid implementation of new treatment options is mandatory when progress finally extends to patients with this serious disease.

Significance of pathological positive superior mesenteric/portal venous invasion in pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Pancreaticoduodenectomy with superior mesenteric/portal venous resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is frequently performed with no added morbidity or mortality in case of tumor abutment to the superior mesenteric or portal vein so as to obtain a margin negative resection. True histopathological portal vein invasion is found only in a small subset of such patients. The aim of this review aimed to discuss the significance of histopathological venous invasion in PDAC.

DATA SOURCES

For this review available data was searched from PubMed and analyzed. No randomized trials have been published on this topic.

RESULTS

Existing data on prognostic factors in histopathological venous invasion by PDAC are limited and recent studies indicate worse survival in this subgroup of patients. In addition, venous invasion in PDAC has been associated with large tumors, involved lymph nodes, perineural invasion and R1 resection. The survival of patients with portal venous resection but without histologic venous invasion is reportedly better than those with histopathological venous invasion; though conflicting studies do exist on the subject. Some studies also relate the depth of venous invasion to prognosis after surgical resection of PDAC.

CONCLUSIONS

Frank/'histopathological' invasion of superior mesenteric/portal venous and R1 resection indicate a very poor survival. Such patients may be given the opportunity of benefit of neoadjuvant treatment.

Prediction of Vascular Invasion Using a 3-Point Scale Computed Tomography Grading System in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Correlation With Surgery

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between a 3-point scale multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) grading system and surgical exploration in predicting vascular invasion and resectability in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA).

METHODS

Fifty-five patients with surgical and pathologic confirmation of PDA were retrospectively analyzed by 3 radiologists independently. All patients had MDCT examination with multiplanar reformatted images, computed tomography (CT) angiography, and negative-contrast CT cholangiopancreatography (nCTCP). A 3-point scale CT grading system and criteria for unresectability adopting the latest guidelines were used in predicting the correlation between the invasion and resectability of 5 peripancreatic vessels and surgical grade and pathology.

RESULTS

Tumor location was correctly identified in all patients including 2 isodense lesions by means of nCTCP. The mean sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of MDCT were 92%, 83%, 95%, 78%, and 90%, respectively, in predicting tumor resectability compared with surgery and pathology and with good agreement (κ = 0.72-0.77). A correlation was observed between CT and surgical grade in predicting vascular invasion on a per-vessel basis, and the agreement presented as good to excellent (κ = 0.66-1.00).

CONCLUSIONS

A 3-point scale CT grading system is a simple and practical method in predicting peripancreatic vessel invasion and, importantly, correlates with surgical grade and pathology. Axial images combined with multiplanar reformation, nCTCP, and CT angiography can strengthen the comprehensive evaluation of PDA for resectability.

Techniques of Vascular Resection and Reconstruction in Pancreatic Cancer

Multimodality therapy has become the standard approach for the treatment of pancreatic cancer. With improved response rates to newer chemotherapeutic agents, tumors that used to be considered unresectable are now being considered for operation. Neoadjuvant therapy for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is considered standard of care and venous resection/reconstruction is no longer controversial. Arterial resection and reconstruction in select patients has also proven to be safe when done in highly specialized centers by high-volume surgeons. This article reviews indications for, and technical aspects of, vascular resection/reconstruction and shunting procedures during pancreatectomy, including critical elements of perioperative care.

[Recommendations for the diagnosis, staging and treatment of pre-malignant lesions and pancreatic adenocarcinoma]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Clinical management of adenocarcinoma of the pancreas is complex, and requires a multidisciplinary approach. The same applies for the premalignant lesions that are increasingly being diagnosed. The current document is an update on the diagnosis and management of premalignant lesions and adenocarcinoma of the pancreas.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A conference to establish the basis of the literature review and manuscript redaction was organized by the Grupo Español Multidisciplinar en Cáncer Digestivo. Experts in the field from different specialties (Gastroenterology, Surgery, Radiology, Pathology, Medical Oncology and Radiation Oncology) met to prepare the present document.

RESULTS

The current literature was reviewed and discussed, with subsequent deliberation on the evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Final recommendations were established in view of all the above.

Comparison of patency rates and clinical impact of different reconstruction methods following portal/superior mesenteric vein resection during pancreatectomy

INTRODUCTION

Few studies have compared patency rates of the different methods of venous reconstruction (VR) during a pancreatectomy. This study aimed to evaluate the patency rates and the clinical impact of various reconstruction methods.

METHODS

For the meta-analysis, databases were systematically searched to identify studies reporting the outcomes of patients who underwent PVR/SMVR. For the retrospective study, clinical data were retrospectively analyzed from patients who underwent a pancreatectomy and VR between Feb. 2009 and Oct. 2015. Patency was assessed by CT and/or ultrasound.

RESULTS

For the meta-analysis, the long-term patency rates of the primary repair group and the autologous graft group were significantly higher than that of the synthetic graft group. For the retrospective study, the reconstruction consisted of primary repair in 62 cases (89.8%) and synthetic grafting in 7 cases (10.1%). Synthetic grafting was more likely to cause acute thrombosis compared with primary repair for PVR/SMVR (85.7% versus 16.7%). Acute thrombosis was associated with decreased median survival (12 versus 6 months) and increased hazard of death. Late thrombosis and stenosis were not associated with survival or serious clinical impact. Median survival for the primary repair group and the synthetic grafting group was 12 and 7 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Primary repair following PVR/SMVR is preferred and can be achieved in most situations. Stenosis should be noted when with risk factors (long segmental and tension), but it produced little clinical impact. Synthetic grafting was associated with a higher thrombosis rate. Acute thrombosis is associated with increased mortality and decreased survival.

Superior mesenteric-portal vein resection during laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) with concomitant resection of major portal vessels has recently emerged as feasible and safe, with similar morbidity and mortality as well as oncologic outcome compared with patients undergoing open PD with major vascular resection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Of a consecutive series of 133 LPD, eight patients underwent concomitant superior mesenteric vein/portal vein (SMV/PV) resection and reconstruction with the intent of achieving a R0 resection.

RESULTS

Four of these eight patients had tangential resection followed by lateral wall repair with Prolene 4.0. One patient had tangential resection with patch reconstruction. Three patients had circular venous resection: One had end-to-end primary venous reconstruction, and two patients had a prosthetic vascular graft interposition. There was no operative mortality. The SMV/PV was patent in all patients postoperatively on ultrasound Doppler or CT scans. Two patients (who underwent circular venous resection) had postoperative complications. One 77-year-old patient with preexisting cardiovascular disease died of heart failure on postoperative day 2, while another (undergoing prosthetic graft reconstruction) had postoperative bilioenteric anastomotic dehiscence and underwent immediate re-laparoscopy for repair.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, LPD with concomitant major venous resection is feasible even in cases of longitudinal venous invasion. Further studies are needed to evaluate the role of laparoscopy in borderline pancreatic cancer.

Analysis of free-form radiology dictations for completeness and clarity for pancreatic cancer staging

PURPOSE

To assess the completeness and clarity of current free-form radiology reports for pancreatic cancer staging by evaluating them against the elements of the RSNA CT oncology primary pancreas mass dictation template.

METHODS

This retrospective study was approved by our Institutional Review Board (IRB). 295 free-form computed tomography (CT) reports for baseline staging of pancreatic cancer (PC) generated between August 2008 and December 2010 were evaluated by one of two radiologists with expertise in pancreatic cancer imaging. Reports which indicated that metastatic disease was present were excluded. The completeness and clarity of the reports were analyzed against the elements of the RSNA CT pancreas mass dictation template. Fisher's exact tests were used to analyze differences by year and type of radiologist.

RESULTS

Primary lesion location, size, and effect on bile duct (BD) were provided in 93.9% (277/295), 69.8% (206/295), and 67.5% (199/295) of reports, respectively. Standard terms to describe vascular involvement were used in 47.5% (140/295) of reports. In 20.3% (60/295), the resectability status could not be defined based on the report alone. In 36.9% (109/295) of reports, review of CT images was necessary to understand vascular involvement. Radiologists expert in pancreatic oncology had a higher proportion of reports using standardized terminology and reports in which vascular involvement was understood without revisiting the images.

CONCLUSIONS

Free-form reports were more likely to use ambiguous terminology and/or require review of the actual images for understanding resectability status. The use of a standardized reporting template may improve the usefulness of pancreatic cancer staging reports.

Pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is a highly lethal disease, for which mortality closely parallels incidence. Most patients with pancreatic cancer remain asymptomatic until the disease reaches an advanced stage. There is no standard programme for screening patients at high risk of pancreatic cancer (eg, those with a family history of pancreatic cancer and chronic pancreatitis). Most pancreatic cancers arise from microscopic non-invasive epithelial proliferations within the pancreatic ducts, referred to as pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasias. There are four major driver genes for pancreatic cancer: KRAS, CDKN2A, TP53, and SMAD4. KRAS mutation and alterations in CDKN2A are early events in pancreatic tumorigenesis. Endoscopic ultrasonography and endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration offer high diagnostic ability for pancreatic cancer. Surgical resection is regarded as the only potentially curative treatment, and adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine or S-1, an oral fluoropyrimidine derivative, is given after surgery. FOLFIRINOX (fluorouracil, folinic acid [leucovorin], irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) and gemcitabine plus nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) are the treatments of choice for patients who are not surgical candidates but have good performance status.

Survival of patients with resectable pancreatic cancer who received neoadjuvant therapy

BACKGROUND

Enthusiasm for neoadjuvant therapy is growing from the emerging consensus that pancreatic cancer is a systemic disease at the time of diagnosis. Those who remain in favor of upfront surgery often cite the lack of reported data to support alternative treatment sequencing. We therefore report the results of all patients treated outside of a clinical trial under the direction of a multidisciplinary pancreatic cancer working group.

METHODS

We reviewed all patients with resectable pancreatic cancer treated with neoadjuvant therapy (NeoTx) from 2009 to 2013; we excluded those patients treated on prospective clinical trials as they will be the subject of subsequent reports. Data regarding demographics, NeoTx, operative outcomes, pathology, and survival data were abstracted from a prospective database.

RESULTS

NeoTx was initiated in 69 patients; median age was 65 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 11) and median carbohydrate antigen 19-9 at diagnosis was 96.5 (IQR 210). NeoTx consisted of chemotherapy alone (n = 10, 14%), chemotherapy and radiation (chemoradiation, n = 53, 77%), or both (n = 6, 9%). Median carbohydrate antigen 19-9 after NeoTx was 39 (IQR 104) corresponding to a median decrease of 60%. Operative resection was completed in 60 (87%) of the 69 patients. At restaging after NeoTx, 5 (7%) of 69 patients were not considered candidates for surgery because of the development of metastatic disease (n = 4) or an inadequate performance status (n = 1). At the time of surgery, 4 (6%) of 64 patients had metastatic disease found at laparoscopy. Of the 60 patients who underwent surgical resection, a complete pathologic response was observed in 2 (3%) patients; 20 (33%) had positive lymph nodes, and the median number of positive lymph nodes was 2 (IQR 3). R0 resections were achieved in 58 (97%) of the 60 patients. Additional postoperative adjuvant therapy was administered to 37 (62%) of the 60 patients. Median survival of all 69 patients was 31.5 months; 44.9 months for the 60 patients who completed all NeoTx and resection compared with 8.1 months for the 9 patients who were not resected (log rank P < .001).

CONCLUSION

NeoTx for resectable pancreatic cancer was associated with a median overall survival of 32 months; something not reported for patients treated with surgery first if based on intent-to-treat analysis. Treatment sequencing may provide an oncologic benefit beyond that of the selection bias afforded surgery after a period of induction therapy.

Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma is Spread to the Peripancreatic Soft Tissue in the Majority of Resected Cases, Rendering the AJCC T-Stage Protocol (7th Edition) Inapplicable and Insignificant: A Size-Based Staging System (pT1: ≤2, pT2: >2-≤4, pT3: >4 cm) is More Valid and Clinically Relevant

BACKGROUND

Most studies have failed to identify any prognostic value of the current T-stage protocol for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) by the American Joint Committee on Cancer and the Union for International Cancer Control unless some grouping was performed.

METHODS

To document the parameters included in this T-stage protocol, 223 consecutive pancreatoduodenectomy specimens with PDAC were processed by a uniform grossing protocol.

RESULTS

Peripancreatic soft tissue (PST) involvement, the main pT3 parameter, was found to be inapplicable and irreproducible due to lack of a true capsule in the pancreas and variability in the amount and distribution of adipose tissue. Furthermore, 91 % of the cases showed carcinoma in the adipose tissue, presumably representing the PST, and thus were classified as pT3. An additional 4.5 % were qualified as pT3 due to extension into adjacent sites. The T-stage defined as such was not found to have any correlation with survival (p = 0.4). A revised T-stage protocol was devised that defined pT1 as 2 cm or smaller, pT2 as >2-4 cm, and pT3 as larger than 4 cm. This revised protocol was tested in 757 consecutive PDACs. The median and 3-year survival rates of this size-based protocol were 26, 18, 13 months, and 40 %, 26 %, 20 %, respectively (p < 0.0001). The association between higher T-stage and shorter survival persisted in N0 cases and in multivariate modeling. Analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database also confirmed the survival differences (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that resected PDACs are already spread to various surfaces of the pancreas, leaving only about 4 % of PDACs to truly qualify as pT1/T2, and that the current T-stage protocol does not have any prognostic correlation. In contrast, as shown previously in many studies, size is an important prognosticator, and a size-based T-stage protocol is more applicable and has prognostic value in PDAC.

Microscopic Residual Tumor After Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Is Standardization of Pathological Examination Worthwhile?

OBJECTIVES

R1 resection rate after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for cancer is highly variable. The aim of this study was to verify if a standardized histopathological work-up of the specimen affects the rate of R1 resection after PD for cancer.

METHODS

Two groups of specimens were managed with (standardized method [SM] group) or without (non-standardized method [NSM] group) a SM of histopathological work-up. Each group included 50 cases of PD for periampullary cancer. Differences in terms of R1 resection rate between the 2 groups were evaluated. Correlation between R1 status and local recurrence was also evaluated.

RESULTS

The cohort of 100 patients consisted of 66 pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, 15 cholangiocarcinoma, and 19 ampullary cancer. The R1 resection rate resulted statistically higher in the SM group (66% vs 10%). Local recurrence was more frequently related to R1 resection in the SM group (34.3% of cases) than in NSM group (20% of cases).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the SM of pathological evaluation of the specimen after PD for cancer determines a significant increase of R1 resection. This remarkable difference seems to be due to the different definition of minimum clearance. The SM seems to better discriminate patients in terms of risk of local recurrence.

Significance of Portal Vein Invasion and Extent of Invasion in Patients Undergoing Pancreatoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Several studies have confirmed the safety of pancreatoduodenectomy with portal/mesenteric vein resection and reconstruction in select patients. The effect of vein invasion and extent of invasion on survival is less clear. The purpose of this study was to examine the association between tumor invasion of the portal/mesenteric vein and long-term survival.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma at a single academic medical center (2000-2014) was performed. Survival was compared using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

After non-pancreatic periampullary adenocarcinomas and patients with non-segmental (lateral wall only) resection of portal/mesenteric vein were excluded, there were 567 eligible patients. Of these, segmental vein resection was performed in 90 (16 %) with end-to-end primary anastomosis (67) or interposition graft reconstruction (23). Patients with vein resection more likely received neoadjuvant systemic therapy (59 vs. 4 %, p < 0.0001). Histopathology of patients undergoing vein resection revealed a distribution of T stage toward larger tumors and higher rates of perineural invasion. Portal/mesenteric vein resection, however, was not associated with differences in hospital stay, postoperative complications, or operative mortality. Patients with or without vein resection had comparable overall survival rates at 1-, 3-, and 5-years. On final surgical histopathology, only 52 of 90 (58 %) vein resections had adenocarcinoma involvement of the venous wall. Of these, depth of invasion was at the level of the adventitia (9), media/intima (34), and full thickness/intraluminal (9). Venous wall invasion (52) did not significantly influence overall survival (14 vs. 21 months, p = 0.08) but was associated with significantly shorter median disease-free survival (11.3 vs. 15.8 months, p = 0.03), predominantly due to local recurrence. The extent of invasion (adventitia, media/intima, full thickness/intraluminal) did not impact overall survival or disease-free survival (14.4 vs. 15.5 vs. 7.4 months, p = 0.08 and 11.2 vs. 12.2 vs. 5 months, 0.59, respectively). Portal/mesenteric vein resection, histopathologic invasion, or the extent of invasion were not independent predictors of overall survival in Cox regression analysis.

CONCLUSION

Although Portal/mesenteric vein resection is associated with increased 90-day mortality, venous resection is not prognostic of overall survival. Although a subgroup analysis showed that a direct tumor invasion into the vein wall on final histopathology was associated with a higher rate of local recurrence but with no difference in overall survival (even when stratified according to extent of venous wall invasion), larger studies with an increased power will be needed to confirm these findings.

Meta-analyses of treatment standards for pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is the most lethal common cancer with an estimated 5-year survival rate of 6-7% (across all stages). The only potential curative therapy is surgical resection in those with localized disease. Adjuvant (postoperative) therapy confers a survival advantage over postoperative observation alone. Neoadjuvant (preoperative) therapy offers the potential to downstage initially unresectable tumors for resection, sterilize resection margins and decrease locoregional recurrence, and identify a subset of patients with aggressive disease for whom surgery will not be beneficial. Induction chemotherapy followed by consolidation chemoradiation is another recommended approach in those with locally advanced disease. For those who cannot be downstaged, cannot tolerate surgery, or were diagnosed with metastatic disease, treatment remains palliative with chemotherapy being a critical component of this approach. Recently, intensive combination chemotherapy has been shown to improve survival rates in comparison to gemcitabine alone in advanced disease. The past few decades have afforded an accumulation of high-level evidence regarding neoadjuvant, adjuvant and palliative therapies in pancreatic cancer. There are numerous reviews discussing recent retrospective studies, prospective studies and randomized controlled trials in each of these areas. However, reviews of optimal and recommended treatment strategies across all stages of pancreatic cancer that focus on the highest levels of hierarchical evidence, such as meta-analyses, are limited. The discussion of novel therapeutics is beyond the scope of this review. However, an extensive and the most current collection of meta-analyses of first-line systemic and locoregional treatment options for all stages of pancreatic cancer to date has been accumulated.

Malignant Biliary Obstruction: Evidence for Best Practice

What should be done next? Is the stricture benign? Is it resectable? Should I place a stent? Which one? These are some of the questions one ponders when dealing with biliary strictures. In resectable cases, ongoing questions remain as to whether the biliary tree should be drained prior to surgery. In palliative cases, the relief of obstruction remains the main goal. Options for palliative therapy include surgical bypass, percutaneous drainage, and stenting or endoscopic stenting (transpapillary or via an endoscopic ultrasound approach). This review gathers scientific foundations behind these interventions. For operable cases, preoperative biliary drainage should not be performed unless there is evidence of cholangitis, there is delay in surgical intervention, or intense jaundice is present. For inoperable cases, transpapillary stenting after sphincterotomy is preferable over percutaneous drainage. The use of plastic stents (PS) has no benefit over Self-Expandable Metallic Stents (SEMS). In case transpapillary drainage is not possible, Endoscopic Ultrasonography- (EUS-) guided drainage is still an option over percutaneous means. There is no significant difference between the types of SEMS and its indication should be individualized.

Improving Survival of Pancreatic Cancer. What Have We Learnt?

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma still ranks high among cancer-related deaths worldwide. In spite of substantial strides in preoperative staging, surgery, perioperative care, and adjuvant treatment, the survival still remains dismal. A number of patient-, disease-, and surgeon-related factors play a role in deciding the eventual outcome of the patient. The aim of this commentary is to review the current knowledge of various factors and the recent advances that impact the survival of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. A search of scientific literature using Embase and MEDLINE, for the years 1985-2015, was carried out for search terms "pancreatic cancer" and "survival." Further search was based on the various specific prognostic factors that contribute towards survival of patients with pancreatic cancer found in the literature. Most of the studies used for this review include those that deal with pancreatic head cancers, some include patients with pancreatic cancers in all locations while very few included patients with tumors of body and tail only. In spite of significant developments in pre- and perioperative management, increased rates of margin-negative resections, and use of adjuvant treatment, the survival rates of pancreatic cancer patients remains poor. A paradigm shift with more effective adjuvant regimen and genetic interventions may help change the outcomes of patients with pancreatic cancer.

International Association of Pancreatology (IAP)/European Pancreatic Club (EPC) consensus review of guidelines for the treatment of pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most devastating diseases with an extremely high mortality. Medical organizations and scientific societies have published a number of guidelines to address active treatment of pancreatic cancer. The aim of this consensus review was to identify where there is agreement or disagreement among the existing guidelines and to help define the gaps for future studies.

METHODS

A panel of expert pancreatologists gathered at the 46th European Pancreatic Club Meeting combined with the 18th International Association of Pancreatology Meeting and collaborated on critical reviews of eight English language guidelines for the clinical management of pancreatic cancer. Clinical questions (CQs) of interest were proposed by specialists in each of nine areas. The recommendations for the CQs in existing guidelines, as well as the evidence on which these were based, were reviewed and compared. The evidence was graded as sufficient, mediocre or poor/absent.

RESULTS

Only 4 of the 36 CQs, had sufficient evidence for agreement. There was also agreement in five additional CQs despite the lack of sufficient evidence. In 22 CQs, there was disagreement regardless of the presence or absence of evidence. There were five CQs that were not addressed adequately by existing guidelines.

CONCLUSION

The existing guidelines provide both evidence- and consensus-based recommendations. There is also considerable disagreement about the recommendations in part due to the lack of high level evidence. Improving the clinical management of patients with pancreatic cancer, will require continuing efforts to undertake research that will provide sufficient evidence to allow agreement.

The lymphatic system and pancreatic cancer

This review summarizes current knowledge of the biology, pathology and clinical understanding of lymphatic invasion and metastasis in pancreatic cancer. We discuss the clinical and biological consequences of lymphatic invasion and metastasis, including paraneoplastic effects on immune responses and consider the possible benefit of therapies to treat tumors that are localized to lymphatics. A review of current techniques and methods to study interactions between tumors and lymphatics is presented.

Endoscopic stenting for inoperable malignant biliary obstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM: To analyze through meta-analyses the benefits of two types of stents in the inoperable malignant biliary obstruction.

METHODS: A systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCT) was conducted, with the last update on March 2015, using EMBASE, CINAHL (EBSCO), MEDLINE, LILACS/CENTRAL (BVS), SCOPUS, CAPES (Brazil), and gray literature. Information of the selected studies was extracted in sight of six outcomes: primarily regarding dysfunction, complication and re-intervention rates; and secondarily costs, survival, and patency time. The data about characteristics of trial participants, inclusion and exclusion criteria and types of stents were also extracted. The bias was mainly assessed through the JADAD scale. This meta-analysis was registered in the PROSPERO database by the number CRD42014015078. The analysis of the absolute risk of the outcomes was performed using the software RevMan, by computing risk differences (RD) of dichotomous variables and mean differences (MD) of continuous variables. Data on RD and MD for each primary outcome were calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel test and inconsistency was qualified and reported in χ² and the Higgins method (I²). Sensitivity analysis was performed when heterogeneity was higher than 50%, a subsequent assay was done and other findings were compiled. Student’s t-test was used for the comparison of weighted arithmetic means regarding secondary outcomes.

RESULTS: Initial searching identified 3660 studies; 3539 were excluded through title, repetition, and/or abstract, while 121 studies were fully assessed and were excluded mainly because they did not compare self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) and plastic stents (PS), leading to thirteen RCT selected, with 13 articles and 1133 subjects meta-analyzed. The mean age was 69.5 years old, that were affected mostly by bile duct (proximal) and pancreatic tumors (distal). The preferred SEMS diameter used was the 10 mm (30 Fr) and the preferred PS diameter used was 10 Fr. In the meta-analysis, SEMS had lower overall stent dysfunction compared to PS (21.6% vs 46.8%, P < 0.00001) and fewer re-interventions (21.6% vs 56.6%, P < 0.00001), with no difference in complications (13.7% vs 15.9%, P = 0.16). In the secondary analysis, the mean survival rate was higher in the SEMS group (182 d vs 150 d, P < 0.0001), with a higher patency period (250 d vs 124 d, P < 0.0001) and a lower cost per patient (4193.98 vs 4728.65 Euros, P < 0.0985).

CONCLUSION: SEMS are associated with lower stent dysfunction, lower re-intervention rates, better survival, and higher patency time. Complications and costs showed no difference.

Pre-treatment carbohydrate antigen 19-9 does not predict the response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with localized pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

The prognostic value of CA19-9 in patients with pancreatic cancer (PC) treated with neoadjuvant therapy has not been well described.

METHODS

Pre-treatment CA19-9 levels (with concomitant normal bilirubin level) in patients with localized PC were categorized as normal (≤35), low (36-200), moderate (201-1000), or high (>1000). Post-treatment CA19-9 was measured after neoadjuvant therapy, prior to surgery.

RESULTS

Pre-treatment CA19-9 levels were evaluable in 235 patients, levels were normal in 60 (25%) patients, low in 78 (33%) patients, moderate in 69 (29%) and high in 28 (12%). After neoadjuvant therapy, post-treatment CA19-9 normalized (≤ 35) in 40 (51%) of the patients in the low group, 14 (21%) of the moderate and 5 (19%) of the high group (P < 0.001). Of the 235 patients, 168 (71%) completed all intended therapy including a pancreatectomy; 44 (73%), 62 (79%), 46 (67%) and 16 (57%) of the normal, low, moderate and high groups (P = 0.10). Among these 168 patients, the median overall survival was 38.4, 43.6, 44.7, 27.2 and 26.4 months for normal, low, moderate and high CA19-9 groups (log rank P = 0.72). Among resected patients, an elevated pre-treatment CA19-9 was of little prognostic value; instead, it was the CA19-9 response to neoadjuvant therapy that was prognostic [hazard ratio (HR): 1.80, P = 0.02].

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients who completed neoadjuvant therapy and surgery, pre-treatment CA19-9 obtained at the time of diagnosis was not predictive of overall survival, but normalization of post-treatment CA19-9 in response to neoadjuvant therapy was highly prognostic.

Meta-analysis of radical resection rates and margin assessment in pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

R0 resection rates (complete tumour removal with negative resection margins) in pancreatic cancer are 70-80 per cent when a 0-mm margin is used, declining to 15-24 per cent with a 1-mm margin. This review evaluated the R0 resection rates according to different margin definitions and techniques.

METHODS

Three databases (MEDLINE from 1946, PubMed from 1946 and Embase from 1949) were searched to mid-October 2014. The search terms included 'pancreatectomy OR pancreaticoduodenectomy' and 'margin'. A meta-analysis was performed with studies in three groups: group 1, axial slicing technique (minimum 1-mm margin); group 2, other slicing techniques (minimum 1-mm margin); and group 3, studies with minimum 0-mm margin.

RESULTS

The R0 rates were 29 (95 per cent c.i. 26 to 32) per cent in group 1 (8 studies; 882 patients) and 49 (47 to 52) per cent in group 2 (6 studies; 1568 patients). The combined R0 rate (groups 1 and 2) was 41 (40 to 43) per cent. The R0 rate in group 3 (7 studies; 1926 patients) with a 0-mm margin was 72 (70 to 74) per cent The survival hazard ratios (R1 resection/R0 resection) revealed a reduction in the risk of death of at least 22 per cent in group 1, 12 per cent in group 2 and 23 per cent in group 3 with an R0 compared with an R1 resection. Local recurrence occurred more frequently with an R1 resection in most studies.

CONCLUSION

Margin clearance definitions affect R0 resection rates in pancreatic cancer surgery. This review collates individual studies providing an estimate of achievable R0 rates, creating a benchmark for future trials.

Pancreatectomy with vein reconstruction: technique matters

BACKGROUND

A variety of techniques have been described for portal vein (PV) and/or superior mesenteric vein (SMV) resection/reconstruction during a pancreatectomy. The ideal strategy remains unclear.

METHODS

Patients who underwent PV/SMV resection/reconstruction during a pancreatectomy from 2005 to 2014 were identified. Medical records and imaging were retrospectively reviewed for operative details and outcomes, with particular emphasis on patency.

RESULTS

Ninety patients underwent vein resection/reconstruction with one of five techniques: (i) longitudinal venorrhaphy (LV, n = 17); (ii) transverse venorrhaphy (TV, n = 9); (iii) primary end-to-end (n = 28); (iv) patch venoplasty (PV, n = 17); and (v) interposition graft (IG, n = 19). With a median follow-up of 316 days, thrombosis was observed in 16/90 (18%). The rate of thrombosis varied according to technique. All patients with primary end-to-end or TV remained patent. LV, PV and IG were all associated with significant rates of thrombosis (P = 0.001 versus no thrombosis). Comparing thrombosed to patent, there were no differences with respect to pancreatectomy type, pre-operative knowledge of vein involvement and neoadjuvant therapy. Prophylactic aspirin was used in 69% of the total cohort (66% of patent, 81% of thrombosed) and showed no protective benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary end-to-end and TV have superior patency than the alternatives after PV/SMV resection and should be the preferred techniques for short (<3 cm) reconstructions.

Use of neoadjuvant therapy in patients 75 years of age and older with pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Treatment sequencing in older patients is difficult because of concomitant comorbidities and often decreasing performance status. The present study sought to examine the effect of neoadjuvant therapy and pancreatic surgery in older patients with resectable or borderline-resectable (BLR pancreatic cancer (PC).

METHODS

Patients with resectable or BLR PC treated with neoadjuvant therapy were classified as older (≥ 75 years) or younger (<75 years).

RESULTS

Neoadjuvant therapy was initiated in 246 patients; 210 (85%) younger than 75 years and 36 (15%) older. Older patients had a greater median Charlson comorbidity index (CCI): 6 vs 4 (P < .01). Completion of all intended therapy (neoadjuvant therapy and surgery) occurred in 177 (72%) of the 246 patients; 153 (73%) of the 210 younger and 24 (67%) of the 36 older patients (P = .43). Failure to complete all therapy was associated with BLR clinical stage (odds ratio [OR] 0.26, P = .001), increased posttreatment/preoperative serum levels of CA19-9 (OR 0.27, 95% confidence interval 0.14-0.53), and CCI ≥ 6 (OR 0.44, 95% confidence interval 0.22-0.86). Median overall survival for all study patients was 26.1 and 19.7 months (P = .13) for younger and older patients, respectively. Of the 177 patients who completed all therapy, the difference in survival between younger and older patients was not statistically significant (36.5 months vs 27.2 months, P = .47).

CONCLUSION

Failure to complete neoadjuvant therapy and eventual pancreatic resection is associated with BLR stage, increased posttreatment/preoperative CA19-9, and CCI ≥ 6, but not older age. Older patients who completed neoadjuvant therapy and underwent resection experienced a survival benefit compared with those who did not complete all intended therapy. Balancing the toxicity of sequential therapies with their cumulative effect on tolerance and risk for pancreatic surgery will be the key to developing optimal treatment sequencing in older patients with PC.

Neoadjuvant therapy for localized pancreatic cancer: guiding principles

The management of localized pancreatic cancer (PC) remains controversial. Historically, patients with localized disease have been treated with surgery followed by adjuvant therapy (surgery-first approach) under the assumption that surgical resection is necessary, even if not sufficient for cure. However, a surgery-first approach is associated with a median overall survival of only 22-24 months, suggesting that a large proportion of patients with localized PC have clinically occult metastatic disease. As a result, adjuvant therapy has been recommended for all patients with localized PC, but in actuality, it is often not received due to the high rates of perioperative complications associated with pancreatic resections. Recognizing that surgery may be necessary but usually not sufficient for cure, there has been growing interest in neoadjuvant treatment sequencing, which benefits patients with both localized and metastatic PC by ensuring the delivery of oncologic therapies which are commensurate with the stage of disease. For patients who have clinically occult metastatic disease, neoadjuvant therapy allows for the early delivery of systemic therapy and avoids the morbidity and mortality of a surgical resection which would provide no oncologic benefit. For patients with truly localized disease, neoadjuvant therapy ensures the delivery of all components of the multimodality treatment. This review details the rationale for a neoadjuvant approach to localized PC and provides specific recommendations for both pretreatment staging and treatment sequencing for patients with resectable and borderline resectable (BLR) disease.

Several key issues in surgical treatment of distal pancreatic cancer

Distal pancreatic cancer is an aggressive malignancy with insidious and subtle presentation, low radical resection rate and poor prognosis. The effectiveness of treatments for this disease remains to be improved. Radical resection is the only curable treatment. Personalized therapeutic strategy with surgical resection as a core should be the standard mode for these patients, and a professional multidisciplinary team is indispensable. Patients with borderline resectable cancers may benefit from a neoadjuvant approach by initiating chemotherapy and/or chemoradiation prior to the resection. Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) is designed to establish an operation with oncologic rationales and should be the standard radical resection mode for distal pancreatic cancer. The use of diagnostic laparoscopy can help find hepatic metastases and peritoneal dissemination to avoid an unnecessary open operation. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy has many advantages compared with open operation, but is only applicable to early-stage patients with small tumors. In addition, the long-term oncologic effects of this surgical procedure still need to be verified, and it should be carried out selectively. Radical distal (or left) pancreatectomy with resection of the celiac axis (DP-CAR) is proper for some patients with evidence of celiac arterial invasion and should be conducted meticulously. However, new breakthroughs in early diagnosis and genetically personalized therapy are urgently needed. We still need prospective, randomized studies in multicenter institutions to provide more evidence for the neoadjuvant approach and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy.

Long-term results of pancreaticoduodenectomy with superior mesenteric and portal vein resection for ductal adenocarcinoma in the head of the pancreas

INTRODUCTION

The benefit of pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) with superior mesenteric-portal vein resection (PVR) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA) is still controversial in terms of morbidity, mortality and survival. We conducted a retrospective study to analyze outcomes of PD with PVR in a Spanish tertiary centre.

METHODS

Between 2002 and 2012, 10 patients underwent PVR (PVR+ group) and 68 standard PD (PVR- group). Morbidity, mortality, overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared between PVR+ and PVR- group. Prognostic factors were identified by a Cox regression model.

RESULTS

Postoperative mortality was 5% (4/78), all patients in PVR- group. Morbidity was higher in the PVR- group compared to PVR+ (63 vs. 30%, P=.004). OS at 3 and 5 years was 43 and 43% in PVR+ group, 35 and 29% in PVR- group (P=.07). DFS at 3 and 5 years DFS were 28 and 15% in PVR+ group, 25 and 20% in PVR- group (P=.84). Median survival was 23.1 months in PVR- group, and 22.8 months in PVR+ group (P=.73). Factors related with OS were absence of adjuvant treatment (OR 2.9, 95%IC: 1.39-6.14, P=.003), R1 resection (OR 2.3, 95%IC: 1.2-4.43, P=.006), preoperative CA 19.9 level ≥ 170 UI/mL (OR 2.3, 95%IC: 1.22-4.32, P=.01). DFS risk factors were R1 resection (OR 2.6, 95%IC: 1.41-4.95, P=.002); moderate or poor tumor differentiation grade (OR 2.7, 95%IC: 1.23-6.17, P=.01); N1 lymph node status (OR 1.8, 95%IC: 1.02-3.19, P=.04); CA 19.9 level ≥ 170 UI/mL (OR 2.4, 95%IC: 1.30-4.54, P=.005).

CONCLUSIONS

PVR for PA can be performed safely. Patients with PVR have a comparable survival to patients undergoing standard PD if disease-free margins can be obtained.

Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer

Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) is an evolving diagnostic entity that blurs the distinction between resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (Varadhachary et al. Ann Surg Oncol 13:1035-1046, 2006). Until recently the management of this disease has been poorly defined; however, consensus guidelines have been developed regarding the proper management of this diagnostic entity. Recent studies have shown that if appropriately identified and treated, this subset of disease can have outcomes similar to pancreatic cancer that is defined as resectable (Laurence et al. J Gastrointest Surg 15:2059-2069, 2011). The aim of this review is to outline the current consensus on definitions, workup and management of BRPC, and also provide a summary of issues that require progress as defined by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS).

Quality appraisal of clinical practice guidelines on pancreatic cancer: a PRISMA-compliant article

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) play an important role in health care. The guideline development process should be precise and rigorous to ensure that the results are reproducible and not vague. To determine the quality of guidelines, the Appraisal of Guidelines and Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument was developed and introduced. The objective of this study is to assess the methodological quality of CPGs on pancreatic cancer. Five databases (included MEDLINE and EMBASE) and guideline websites were searched till April, 2014. The methodological quality of the guidelines was assessed by 4 authors independently using the AGREE II instrument. From 2526 citations, 21 relevant guidelines were included. The overall agreement among reviewers was moderate (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.64-0.96). The mean scores were moderate for the domains "scope and purpose" and "clarity of presentation"; however, they were low for the domains "stakeholder involvement" (31.22), "rigor of development", "applicability", and "editorial independence". These domain scores were lower when compared with international levels. There are 5 (23.81%) guidelines that described the systematic methods for searching. Moreover, only 5 (23.81%) guidelines reported that methodological expertise were included in the guideline developing teams. The quality and transparency of the development process and the consistency in the reporting of pancreatic cancer guidelines need to be improved. Many other methodological disadvantages were identified. In the future, pancreatic cancer CPGs should base on the best available evidence rigorously developed and reported. Greater efforts are needed to provide high-quality guidelines that serve as a useful and reliable tool for clinical decision making in this field.

Impact of the time interval between MDCT imaging and surgery on the accuracy of identifying metastatic disease in patients with pancreatic cancer

OBJECTIVE

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is a rapidly progressive malignancy characterized by its tendency for early metastatic spread. MDCT is the primary diagnostic modality for the preoperative staging of patients with pancreatic cancer, with an accuracy established in multiple studies. However, for a variety of reasons, there is often a prolonged interval between staging MDCT and the surgical intervention. This study examines the relationship between the interval between imaging and surgery and the accuracy of MDCT in determining the presence or absence of metastatic disease at surgery in patients with pancreatic cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients were identified who had undergone surgery for pancreatic cancer at our institution with a dedicated preoperative pancreas-protocol MDCT performed in our department. Findings from the preoperative MDCT report were correlated with the operative findings, as well as the time between imaging and surgery.

RESULTS

Two hundred ninety-two MDCT scans were performed on 256 patients who underwent exploration for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The patients had a median age of 67 years (range, 30-95 years), and 51.6% (132/256) were male. The median time between MDCT and surgical exploration was 15.5 days (range, 1-198 days). MDCT correctly predicted the absence of metastatic disease at surgery in 233 of 274 (85.0%) studies. MDCT was more accurate in predicting the absence of metastatic disease if the study was performed within 25 days of surgery than it was if the study was performed within more than 25 days of surgery (89.3% vs 77.0%; p = 0.0097). Furthermore, regression models showed that the negative predictive value of a given MDCT significantly decreased after approximately 4 weeks.

CONCLUSION

MDCT is an accurate method to stage patients with pancreatic cancer, but its accuracy in excluding distant metastatic disease depreciates over time. Patients should undergo a repeat MDCT within 25 days of any planned definitive operative intervention for pancreatic cancer to avoid unexpectedly finding metastatic disease at surgery.

Pancreatic cancer: diagnosis and treatments

Pancreatic cancer is one of the deadliest cancers, with exceptionally high mortality. Despite the relatively low incidence rate (10th), it is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related deaths in most developed countries. To improve the early diagnosis of pancreatic cancer and strengthen the standardized comprehensive treatment are still the main focus of pancreatic cancer research. Here, we summarized the rapid developments in the diagnosis and treatments of pancreatic cancer. Regarding diagnosis, we reviewed advances in medical imaging technology, tumor markers, molecular biology (e.g., gene mutation), and proteomics. Moreover, great progress has also been made in the treatments of this disease, including surgical resection, chemotherapy, targeted radiotherapy, targeted minimally invasive treatment, and molecular targeted therapy. Therefore, we also recapitulated the development, advantages, and disadvantages of each of the treatment methods in this review.

Surgical management of pancreatic cancer--pancreaticoduodenectomy

Pancreaticoduodenectomy, the Whipple resection, is a complex operation that is commonly performed for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and other malignant or benign lesions in the head of the pancreas. It can be done with low morbidity and mortality rates, particularly when performed at high-volume hospitals and by high-volume surgeons. While it has been conventionally reserved for patients with early-stage malignant disease, it is being used increasingly for patients with locally extensive tumors who have undergone neoadjuvant therapy and downstaging. This article summarizes the role of pancreaticoduodenectomy for the treatment of patients with pancreatic cancer. It highlights the surgical staging of disease, the technical aspects of the operation and perioperative care, and the oncologic outcome.

Neoadjuvant therapy and vascular resection during pancreaticoduodenectomy: shifting the survival curve for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant therapy and vascular resection may offer patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer potential cure.

METHODS

We reviewed medical records of patients with ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) from 1992 through 2011. We identified patients who received neoadjuvant therapy (NA+) or required vascular resection (VR+) for locally advanced disease and compared outcomes to those who did not.

RESULTS

Of the 643 patients who were initially explored, 506 (143 NA+ and 363 NA- patients) ultimately underwent PD. There were no significant differences in R0 resection or morbidity. Mortality was higher in the NA+ versus NA- group (7.0 vs 3.0 %, p = 0.04). More NA+ patients underwent PD VR+ (p < 0.001). Among VR+ patients, neoadjuvant therapy resulted in significantly lower R1 resection. Among resected patients, survival of NA+ patients was significantly longer than both NA- patients (27.3 vs 19.7 months, p < 0.05) and patients abandoned because of locally advanced disease. Age, tumor grade, lymph node ratio, and R1 resection were independent predictors of poor survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant therapy and vascular resection offer patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer the chance for cure with acceptable morbidity and mortality. These patients have improved survival over patients deemed locally inoperable by traditional criteria.

Tips and tricks of the surgical technique for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: mesenteric approach and modified distal pancreatectomy with en-bloc celiac axis resection

Borderline resectable (BR) pancreatic cancer involves the portal vein and/or superior mesenteric vein (PV/SMV), major arteries including the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) or common hepatic artery (CHA), and sometimes includes the involvement of the celiac axis. We herein describe tips and tricks for a surgical technique with video assistance, which may increase the R0 rates and decrease the mortality and morbidity for BR pancreatic cancer patients. First, we describe the techniques used for the "artery-first" approach for BR pancreatic cancer with involvement of the PV/SMV and/or SMA. Next, we describe the techniques used for distal pancreatectomy with en-bloc celiac axis resection (DP-CAR) and tips for decreasing the delayed gastric emptying (DGE) rates for advanced pancreatic body cancer. The mesenteric approach, followed by the dissection of posterior tissues of the SMV and SMA, is a feasible procedure to obtain R0 rates and decrease the mortality and morbidity, and the combination of this aggressive procedure and adjuvant chemo(radiation) therapy may improve the survival of BR pancreatic cancer patients. The DP-CAR procedure may increase the R0 rates for pancreatic cancer patients with involvement within 10 mm from the root of the splenic artery, as well as the CHA or celiac axis, and preserving the left gastric artery may lead to a decrease in the DGE rates in cases where there is more than 10 mm between the tumor edge and the root of the left gastric artery. The development of safer surgical procedures is necessary to improve the survival of BR pancreatic cancer patients.