Patency rates of portal vein/superior mesenteric vein reconstruction after pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer

Use of Vascular Shunt at the Time of Pancreatectomy with Venous Resection: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The rising diffusion of vascular resections during complex pancreatectomy for malignancy, for both oncological and technical matters, brought with it the use of vascular shunts, either temporary or definitive, to prevent bowel congestion and liver ischemia. This study aimed to systematically review the literature on the technical feasibility of vascular shunts during advanced pancreatic surgery, analyzing intraoperative and postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed on PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library Central, according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies published before 2006 were excluded, considering the lack of a standardized definition of locally advanced pancreatic cancer. The main outcomes evaluated were the overall complication rate and shunt patency.

RESULTS

Among 789 papers retrieved from the database search, only five fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the review, amounting to a total of 145 patients undergoing a shunt creation at the time of pancreatectomy. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) was found to be the most common diagnosis and pancreaticoduodenectomy was the main surgical procedure, accounting for 88% and 83% of the overall cohort, respectively. The distal splenorenal shunt was the most performed. Overall, 44 out of 145 patients (30%) experienced postoperative complications; the long-term patency of definitive shunts was 83% (110 out of 120 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

An increasing number of patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced PDAC are becoming amenable to resection and shunt creation may facilitate vascular resection with clear margins, becoming a valid tool of modern pancreatic surgery.

Venous reconstruction thrombosis after pancreaticoduodenectomy with superior mesenteric/portal vein resection due to pancreatic cancer: an 8 years single institution experience

BACKGROUND

Superior mesenteric/portal vein reconstruction (SMPVR) thrombosis remains a challenging complication following pancreaticoduodenectomy concomitant with venous resection. In this context, we aimed to present our SMPVR experiences and identify potential clinicopathological factors that increased SMPVR thrombosis.

METHODS

A total of 33 patients who underwent SMPVR during pancreaticoduodenectomy were analyzed. Of these, 26 patients who experienced pancreatic head ductal adenocarcinoma met our inclusion criteria. Patients' data were compared as classified by SMPVR type and the development of SMPVR thrombosis. All interposition grafts were Dacron in this cohort.

RESULTS

Types of SMPVR included: tangential resection with primary repair (n = 12); segmental resection with splenic vein preservation and either primary anastomosis (n = 8) or 14 mm tubular Dacron grafting (n = 1); segmental resection with splenic vein division either 14 mm tubular Dacron grafting (n = 2) or 14/7 mm 'Y'-shaped Dacron grafting (n = 3). A total of four patients having 14/7 mm 'Y'-shaped (n = 3) and 14 mm tubular Dacron (n = 1) developed SMPVR thrombosis (p = .001). Dacron grafting (p = .001) and splenic vein division (p = .010) were associated with SMPVR thrombosis. The median time to detection of SMPVR thrombosis was 4.3 months (2.5-21.0 months). The median follow-up time was 12.2 months (3.0-45 months).

CONCLUSIONS

During pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic head ductal carcinoma, extended venous resection requiring SMPVR with 'Y'-shaped and use of Dacron interposition grafts appeared to be associated with the development of SMPVR thrombosis. This result warrants further investigations.

Cryopreserved allografts versus end-to-end anastomosis for the reconstruction of a segment-resected portomesenteric vein during advanced pancreatic cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

Porto-mesenteric vein (PMV) infiltration of pancreatic cancer is classified as borderline resectable cancer. For en-bloc resectability, the probability of PMV resection and reconstruction is the most decisive factor. The purpose of this study was to compare and analyze PMV resection and reconstruction during pancreatic cancer surgery using end-to-end anastomosis (EA) and a cryopreserved allograft (AG) and to verify the effectiveness of reconstruction using an AG.

METHODS

Between May 2012 and June 2021, 84 patients (65 underwent EA, and 19 received AG reconstruction) underwent pancreatic cancer surgery with PMV reconstruction. An AG is a cadaveric graft with a diameter of 8-12 mm and is obtained from a liver transplant donor. Patency after reconstruction, disease recurrence, overall survival, and perioperative factors were assessed.

RESULTS

The median age was higher in EA patients (p = .022) and neoadjuvant therapy (p = .02) was more in AG patients. Upon histopathological examination, the R0 resection margin did not show a significant difference by reconstruction method. During a 36-month survival analysis, primary patency was significantly superior in EA patients (p = .004), and there was no significant difference in recurrence-free survival (p = .628) or overall survival (p = .638) rates.

CONCLUSION

Compared with EA, AG reconstruction after PMV resection during pancreatic cancer surgery showed a lower primary patency, but there was no difference in recurrence-free or overall survival rates. Therefore, the use of AG can be a viable option for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer surgery if the patient is properly followed-up postoperatively.

Surgical Considerations for Neoadjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a challenging disease process with a 5-year survival rate of only 11%. Neoadjuvant therapy in patients with localized pancreatic cancer has multiple theoretical benefits, including improved patient selection for surgery, early delivery of systemic therapy, and assessment of response to therapy. Herein, we review key surgical considerations when selecting patients for neoadjuvant therapy and curative-intent resection. Accurate determination of resectability at diagnosis is critical and should be based on not only anatomic criteria but also biologic and clinical criteria to determine optimal treatment sequencing. Borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer is best treated with neoadjuvant therapy and resection, including vascular resection and reconstruction when appropriate. Lastly, providing nutritional, prehabilitation, and supportive care interventions to improve patient fitness prior to surgical intervention and adequately address the adverse effects of therapy is critical.

Technical Outcomes of Porto-Mesenteric Venous Reconstruction in Pancreatic Resection Using Autologous Left Renal Vein Graft as Conduit

BACKGROUND

Portal or superior mesenteric vein (PV-SMV) resection and reconstruction is sometimes required during pancreatic tumor resection. In patients requiring segmental venous resection with interposition grafting, the left renal vein (LRV) is an accessible autologous solution. However, long-term patency outcomes of the LRV as an interposition conduit in this setting have not been analyzed.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients undergoing pancreatic resection with PV-SMV reconstruction using LRV between 2002 and 2022. The primary outcome was PV-SMV patency at last follow-up, assessed with postoperative CT scans and analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival methods that account for variation in follow-up duration. Development of any postoperative acute kidney injury within 7 days of surgery and morbidity were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

The study cohort includes 65 patients who underwent LRV harvest; 60 (92%) ultimately underwent successful reconstruction with harvested LRV graft. Kaplan-Meier 2-year estimated patency rate of the LRV graft was 88%, with no cases of complete occlusion. Six (10%) patients experienced graft stenosis. Nine of 61 (15%) patients experienced grade II or III acute kidney injury, 6 of 9 returning to normal renal function before discharge. No difference in median serum creatinine was observed at baseline, 6 and 12 months from surgery. LRV remnant thrombosis was seen in 7 of 65 (11%) patients. Only 3 of 61 (5%) patients had persistent acute kidney injury caused by complications unrelated to LRV harvesting.

CONCLUSIONS

Autologous LRV graft was a reliable conduit for segmental PV-SMV reconstruction, resulting in a high patency rate and marginal impact on renal function. LRV harvest is a safe and potentially ideal surgical option for PV-SMV reconstruction in pancreatic surgery.

Portal Vein Resection in Pancreatic Cancer Surgery: Risk of Thrombosis and Radicality Determine Survival

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the outcomes of pancreatic cancer [pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC)] surgery with concomitant portal vein resection (PVR), focusing on the PVR type according to the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS).

BACKGROUND

Surgery offers the only chance for cure in PDAC. PVR is often performed for borderline or locally advanced tumors.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with PDAC operated between January 2006 and January 2018 were included. Clinicopathologic characteristics and outcomes were analyzed and tested for survival prediction.

RESULTS

Of 2265 PDAC resections, 1571 (69.4%) were standard resections and 694 (30.6%) were resections with PVR, including 149 (21.5%) tangential resections with venorrhaphy (ISGPS type 1), 21 (3.0%) resections with patch reconstruction (type 2), 491 (70.7%) end-to-end anastomoses (type 3), and 33 (4.8%) resections with graft interposition (type 4). The 90-day mortality rate was 2.6% after standard resection and 6.3% after resection with PVR ( P <0.0001). Postoperative portal vein thrombosis and pancreas-specific surgical complications most frequently occurred after PVR with graft interposition (21.2% and 48.5%, respectively). In multivariable analysis, age 70 years and above, ASA stages 3/4, increased preoperative serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9, neoadjuvant treatment, total pancreatectomy, PVR, higher UICC stage, and R+ resections were significant negative prognostic factors for overall survival. Radical R0 (>1 mm) resection resulted in 23.3 months of median survival.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest single-center, comparative cohort study of PVR in PDAC surgery, showing that postoperative morbidity correlates with the reconstruction type. When radical resection is achieved, thrombosis risk is outweighed by beneficial overall survival times of nearly 2 years.

Portal-mesenteric vein resection for pancreatic cancer: Results in par with the defined benchmark outcomes

Background

Patients with pancreatic cancer (PC), which may involve major peripancreatic vessels, have been generally excluded from surgery, as resection was deemed futile. The purpose of this study was to analyze the results of portomesenteric vein resection in borderline resectable or locally advanced PC. This study comprises the largest series of such patients in Greece.

Materials and Methods

Investigator-initiated, retrospective, noncomparative study of patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced adenocarcinoma undergoing pancreatectomy en-block with portal and/or superior mesenteric vein resection in a tertiary referral center in Greece between January 2014 and October 2021. Follow-up was complete up to December 2021. Operative and outcome measures were determined.

Results

Forty patients were included. Neoadjuvant therapy was administered to only 58% and was associated with smaller tumor size (median: 2.9 cm vs. 4.2 cm, p = 0.004), but not with increased survival. Though venous wall infiltration was present in 55%, it was not associated with tumor size, or Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) status. Resection was extensive: a median of 27 LNs were retrieved, R0 resection rate (≥1 mm) was 87%, and median length of resected vein segments was 3 cm, requiring interposition grafts in 40% (polytetrafluoroethylene). Median ICU stay was 0 days and length of hospitalization 9 days. Postoperative mortality was 2.5%. Median follow-up was 46 months and median overall survival (OS) was 24 months. Two-, 3- and 5-year OS rates were 49%, 33%, and 22% respectively. All outcomes exceeded benchmark cutoffs. Lower ECOG status was positively correlated with longer survival (ECOG-0: 32 months, ECOG-1: 24 months, ECOG-2: 12 months, p = 0.02).

Conclusion

This series of portomesenteric resection in borderline resectable or locally advanced PC demonstrated a median survival of 2 years, extending to 32 months in patients with good performance status, which meet or exceed current outcome benchmarks.

Patency for autologous vein is superior to cadaveric vein in portal-mesenteric venous reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Portal venous reconstruction (PVR) is often needed during resection of hepatopancreato-biliary (HPB) malignancies. Primary repair (PR), autologous vein (AV), or cryopreserved cadaveric vein (CCV) are frequently utilized, however relative patency is not well studied.

METHODS

All patients undergoing PVR between 2007-2019 at our center were identified. 3-year primary patency (PP), overall survival (OS), and survival-adjusted patency (SAP) were evaluated with Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards modeling.

RESULTS

One-hundred-twenty patients were identified with a median follow-up of 11 months. PR, AV, and CCV reconstruction were used in 28 (23%), 35 (29%), and 57 (48%) patients, respectively, with two (7%), four (11%), and 29 (51%) thromboses, respectively. 3-year PP was greater for both primary repair (90%) and AV (83%) compared to CCV (33%, both p<0.001). On multivariable analysis, CCV had worse 3-year PP (HR 7.89, p=0.005) and SAP (HR 2.09, p=0.02) compared to PR; AV reconstruction had equivalent oncologic and patency-related outcomes to PR (p>0.4 for both comparisons).

CONCLUSIONS

Primary patency for PR and AV reconstruction is superior to CCV for PVR during resection of HPB malignancies. AV conduit should be the preferred choice of reconstruction when PR is not achievable. Surgeons should only use CCV when factors preclude PR/AV reconstruction.

The short-term outcomes of distal pancreatectomy with portal vein/superior mesenteric vein resection

BACKGROUND

Portal vein/superior mesenteric vein (PV/SMV) resection during distal pancreatectomy (DP) is often associated with technical difficulties due to the close anatomic relationship between pancreatic head and PV/SMV. In this paper, we present our operative technique and short-term outcomes of DP combined with venous resection (DP-VR) for left-sided pancreatic cancer (PC).

METHODS

We reviewed 368 consecutive cases of DP for PC from January 2013 to December 2018 in our institution, and identified 41 patients (11.1%) who had undergone DP-VR. The remaining 327 DP patients (88.9%) were matched to DP-VR using propensity scores in the proportion of 1:2. Demographics, intraoperative details, postoperative complications and the pathological results were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Out of the 41 DP-VR cases, in 14 (34.1%) venous resection with primary closure was performed, while the remaining 27 (65.9%) underwent end-to-end anastomosis without graft. A propensity-score-matched analysis revealed that DP-VR caused an increased risk of postoperative bleeding (17.1% vs. 3.7%, P = 0.016) and delayed gastric emptying (9.8% vs. 1.2%, P = 0.042) compared to standard DP. Overall morbidity (46.3% vs. 36.6%, P = 0.332), postoperative pancreatic fistula (31.7% vs. 26.8%, P = 0.672), R0 resection (58.5% vs. 67.1%, P = 0.223), 30-day reoperation (2.4% vs. 3.7%, P = 0.719), and 90-day mortality (0% vs. 2.5%, P = 0.550) were comparable between the two groups. In postoperative computed tomographic scans of 34 patients (82.9%) at a 90-day follow-up, PV/SMV stenosis was suggested in two patients (5.9%).

CONCLUSION

Despite the higher rates of postoperative bleeding, DP-VR was found to be a feasible and safe surgery with acceptable postoperative morbidity and mortality compared to standard DP for left-sided pancreatic cancer.

Vascular Resection in Pancreatectomy—Is It Safe and Useful for Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer?

Simple Summary

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a lethal disease with poor prognosis and increased incidence. Surgical resection R0 remains the most important treatment to prolong survival in PDAC patients. In borderline and locally advanced cancer, vascular resection and reconstruction during pancreatectomy enables achieving R0 resection. This study is a comprehensive review of the literature regarding the role of venous and arterial resection with vascular reconstruction in the treatment of pancreatic cancer.

Abstract

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a lethal disease with poor prognosis and increased incidence. Surgical resection R0 remains the most important treatment to prolong survival in PDAC patients. In borderline and locally advanced cancer, vascular resection and reconstruction during pancreatectomy enables achieving R0 resection. This study is a comprehensive review of the literature regarding the role of venous and arterial resection with vascular reconstruction in the treatment of pancreatic cancer. The literature review is focused on the use of venous and arterial resection with immediate vascular reconstruction in pancreaticoduodenectomy. Different types of venous and arterial resections are widely described. Different methods of vascular reconstructions, from primary vessel closure, through end-to-end vascular anastomosis, to interposition grafts with use autologous veins (internal jugular vein, saphenous vein, superficial femoral vein, external or internal iliac veins, inferior mesenteric vein, and left renal vein or gonadal vein), autologous substitute grafts constructed from various parts of parietal peritoneum including falciform ligament, cryopreserved and synthetic allografts. The most attention was given to the most common venous reconstructions, such as end-to-end anastomosis and interposition graft with the use of an autologous vein. Moreover, we presented mortality and morbidity rates as well as vascular patency and survival following pancreatectomy combined with vascular resection reported in cited articles.

Anatomic Criteria Determine Resectability in Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

The introduction of multi-agent chemotherapy and radiation therapy has facilitated potential resection with curative intent in selected locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) patients with excellent outcomes. Nevertheless, there remains a remarkable lack of consensus on the management of LAPC. We sought to describe the outcomes of patients with LAPC and objectively define the multidisciplinary selection process for operative exploration based on anatomical factors.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with LAPC were evaluated for pancreatic surgery in the multidisciplinary clinic of a high-volume institution, between 2013 and 2018. Prospective stratification (LAPC-1, LAPC-2, and LAPC-3), based on the involvement of regional anatomical structures, was performed at the time of presentation prior to the initiation of treatment. Resection rates and patient outcomes were evaluated and correlated with the initial anatomic stratification system.

RESULTS

Overall, 415 patients with LAPC were included in the study, of whom 84 (20%) were successfully resected, with a median overall survival of 35.3 months. The likelihood of operative exploration was associated with the pretreatment anatomic LAPC score, with a resection rate of 49% in patients classified as LAPC-1, 32% in LAPC-2, and 11% in LAPC-3 (p < 0.001). Resected patients with improvement of the LAPC score at the time of exploration had significantly longer median overall survival compared with those with no change or progression of LAPC score (60.7 vs. 29.8 months, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Selected patients with LAPC can undergo curative-intent surgery with excellent outcomes. The proposed Johns Hopkins anatomic LAPC score provides an objective system to anticipate the probability of eventual surgical resection after induction therapy.

Graft type for superior mesenteric and portal vein reconstruction in pancreatic surgery - A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Contemporary practice for superior mesenteric/portal vein (SMV-PV) reconstruction during pancreatectomy with vein resection involves biological (autograft, allograft, xenograft) or synthetic grafts as a conduit or patch. The aim of this study was to systematically review the safety and feasibility of the different grafts used for SMV-PV reconstruction.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in PubMed and Embase according to the PRISMA guidelines (January 2000-March 2020). Studies reporting on ≥ 5 patients undergoing reconstruction of the SMV-PV with grafts during pancreatectomy were included. Primary outcome was rate of graft thrombosis.

RESULTS

Thirty-four studies with 603 patients were included. Four graft types were identified (autologous vein, autologous parietal peritoneum/falciform ligament, allogeneic cadaveric vein/artery, synthetic grafts). Early and overall graft thrombosis rate was 7.5% and 22.2% for synthetic graft, 5.6% and 11.7% for autologous vein graft, 6.7% and 8.9% for autologous parietal peritoneum/falciform ligament, and 2.5% and 6.2% for allograft. Donor site complications were reported for harvesting of the femoral, saphenous, and external iliac vein. No cases of graft infection were reported for synthetic grafts.

CONCLUSION

In selected patients, autologous, allogenic or synthetic grafts for SMV-PV reconstruction are safe and feasible. Synthetic grafts seems to have a higher incidence of graft thrombosis.

Feasibility of mesentericoportal vein reconstruction by autologous falciform ligament during pancreaticoduodenectomy-cohort study

BACKGROUND

Mesentericoportal vein (MPV) resection in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) surgery has become a common procedure. A few studies had described the use of falciform ligament (FL) for MPV reconstruction and received encouraging preliminary effects.

AIMS

This study was designed to explore the feasibility and efficacy of this technique compared with others.

METHODS

Patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) with MPV resection for PDAC from 2009 to 2018 were enrolled. Medical records were retrospectively reviewed, MPV reconstructions using FL were distinguished and compared with other techniques.

RESULTS

146 patients underwent MPV reconstruction, and 13 received FL venoplasty. Other reconstruction techniques included primary end-to-end anastomosis (primary, n = 30), lateral venorrhaphy (LV, n = 19), polytetrafluoroethylene conduit interposition (PTFE, n = 24), iliac artery (IA) allografts interposition (n = 47), and portal vein (PV) allografts interposition (n = 13). FL group holds the advantages of shortest operation time (p = 0.023), lowest blood loss (p = 0.109), and shortest postoperative hospital stay (p = 0.125). The grouped patency rates of FL, primary, LV, PTFE, IA, and PV were 100%, 90%, 68%, 54%, 68%, and 85% respectively. Comparison displayed that FL had the highest patency rate (p = 0.008) and lowest antiplatelet/anticoagulation proportion (p = 0.000). Complications and long-term survival were similar among different techniques. The median survival time of patent group (24.0 months, 95% CI: 22.0-26.0) was much longer than that of the thrombosed (17.0 months, 95% CI: 13.7-20.3), though without significant difference (P = 0.148).

CONCLUSIONS

PD with MPV resection and reconstruction by FL is safe, feasible, and efficacious, it might provide a potential benefit for patients.

Comparison between long and short-term venous patencies after pancreatoduodenectomy or total pancreatectomy with portal/superior mesenteric vein resection stratified by reconstruction type

Background

Venous reconstruction has been recently demonstrated to be safe for tumours with invasion into portal vein and/or superior mesenteric vein. This study aims to compare the patency between various venous reconstructions.

Methods

This is retrospective study of 76 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy or total pancreatectomy with venous reconstruction from 2006 to 2018. Patient demographics, tumour histopathology, morbidity, mortality and patency were studied. Kaplan-Meier estimates were performed for primary venous patency.

Results

Sixty-two patients underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy and 14 underwent total pancreatectomy. Forty-seven, 19 and 10 patients underwent primary repair, end-to-end anastomosis and interposition graft respectively. Major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo >grade 2) and 30-day mortality were 14/76(18.4%) and 1/76(1.3%) respectively. There were 12(15.8%) venous occlusion including 4(5.3%) acute occlusions. Overall 6-month, 1-year and 2-year primary patency was 89.1%, 92.5% and 92.3% respectively. 1-year primary patency of primary repair was superior to end-to-end anastomosis and interposition graft (primary repair 100%, end-to-end anastomosis 81.8%, interposition graft 66.7%, p = 0.045). Pairwise comparison also demonstrated superior 1-year patency of primary repair (adjusted p = 0.037). There was no significant difference between the cumulative venous patency for each venous reconstruction method: primary repair 84±6%, end-to-end anastomosis 75±11% and interposition graft 76±15% (p = 0.561).

Conclusion

1-year primary venous patency of primary repair is superior to end-to-end anastomosis and interposition graft.

Role of Collateral Venous Circulation in Prevention of Sinistral Portal Hypertension After Superior Mesenteric-Portal Vein Confluence Resection during Pancreaticoduodenectomy: a Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

The ligation of the splenic vein (SV) during pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) may result in sinistral portal hypertension (SPH). This study aimed to identify the collateral pathways that formed postoperatively and evaluate the impact of omentum and arc of Barkow preservation in PD.

METHODS

Patients who underwent PD between January 2013 and May 2018 at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University were enrolled in this retrospective study. PD was performed with preservation of the greater omentum and arc of Barkow. Venous collaterals, spleen size, and platelet count were evaluated before and after surgery.

RESULTS

In total, 330 patients underwent PD, of whom, 43 patients who underwent superior mesenteric vein (SMV)/portal vein (PV) reconstruction and splenic vein (SV) ligation were selected. No patient developed severe gastrointestinal bleeding. Three collateral routes were identified: the left gastric route, the colic marginal route, and the first jejunal route. Seventeen patients developed splenomegaly. Twenty-three patients developed thrombocytopenia. However, none of them developed gastrointestinal bleeding or other clinical complaints.

CONCLUSION

Although subclinical SPH developed after SV ligation, postoperative gastrointestinal bleeding was uncommon.

Vascular Resection for Pancreatic Cancer: 2019 French Recommendations Based on a Literature Review From 2008 to 6-2019

Introduction: Vascular resection remains a subject of debate in the management of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (PDAC). These French recommendations were drafted on behalf of the French National Institute of Cancer (INCA-2019).

Material and Methods: A systematic literature search, with PubMed, Medline® (OvidSP), EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, was performed for abstracts published in English from January 2008 to June 2019, and identified systematic reviews/metaanalyses, retrospective analyses and case series dedicated to vascular resections in the setting of PDAC. All selected articles were graded for level of evidence and strength of recommendation was given according to the GRADE system.

Results: Neoadjuvant treatment should be performed rather than direct surgery in borderline and locally advanced non-metastatic PDAC with venous and/or arterial infiltration (T4 stage). Patients who respond or those with stable disease and good performance status should undergo surgical exploration to assess resectability because cross-sectional imaging often fails to identify the extent of the remaining viable tumor. Combining vascular resection with pancreatectomy in these cases increases the feasibility of curative resection which is still the only option to improve long-term survival. Venous resection (VR) is recommended if resection is possible in the presence of limited lateral or circumferential involvement but without venous occlusion and in the absence of arterial contact with the celiac axis (CA; cephalic tumors) or the superior mesenteric artery (SMA; all tumor locations) (Grade B). The patients should be in good general condition because mortality and morbidity are higher than following pancreatectomy without VR (Grade B). In case of planned VR, neoadjuvant treatment is recommended since it improves both rate of R0 resections and survival compared to upfront surgery (Grade B). Due to their complexity and specificities, arterial resection (AR; mainly the hepatic artery (HA) or the CA) must be discussed in selected patients, in multidisciplinary team meetings in tertiary referral centers, according to the tumor location and the type of arterial extension. In case of invasion of a short segment of the common HA, resection with arterial reconstruction may be proposed after neoadjuvant therapy. In case of SMA invasion, neoadjuvant therapy may be followed by laparotomy with dissection and biopsy of peri-arterial tissues. A pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) with SMA-resection is not recommended if the frozen section examination is positive (Grade C). In case of distal PDAC with invasion of the CA, a distal pancreatectomy with CA-resection without arterial reconstruction may be proposed after neoadjuvant therapy and radiologic embolization of the CA branches (expert opinion).

Conclusion: For PDAC with vascular involvement, neoadjuvant treatment followed by pancreatectomy with venous resection or even arterial resection can be proposed as a curative option in selected patients with selected vascular involvement.

Vascular Resections for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Vascular Resections for PDAC

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

It has become clear that vein resection and reconstruction for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the standard of care as supported by multiple guidelines. However, resection of large peri-pancreatic arteries remains debatable.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This review examines the current state of vascular resection with curative intent for PDAC in the last 5 years. Herein, we consider venous (superior mesenteric vein, portal vein), as well as arterial (superior mesenteric artery, celiac trunk, hepatic artery) resection or both with or without reconstruction.

RESULTS

Improvement of multidrug chemotherapy has revolutionized care for PDAC that should shift traditional surgical thinking from an anatomical classification of resectability to a prognostic and biological classification.

CONCLUSION

The present review gives an overview on the results of pancreatectomy associated with vascular resection, with consideration of new perspectives offered by the availability of better systemic therapies.

The North American Neuroendocrine Tumor Society Consensus Paper on the Surgical Management of Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors

This manuscript is the result of the North American Neuroendocrine Tumor Society consensus conference on the surgical management of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors from July 19 to 20, 2018. The group reviewed a series of questions of specific interest to surgeons taking care of patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, and for each, the available literature was reviewed. What follows are these reviews for each question followed by recommendations of the panel.

Portal-Mesenteric Vein Resection in Borderline Pancreatic Cancer; 33 Month-Survival in Patients with Good Performance Status

Background: Patients with pancreatic cancer (PC), which is not upfront resectable, but borderline, involving major peripancreatic vessels, have not been generally considered for surgery, considering that resection in such a setting may be futile.

Materials and Methods: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on patients with borderline pancreatic adenocarcinoma undergoing pancreatectomy en-block with portal and/or superior mesenteric vein resection in a tertiary referral center in Greece between January 2012 and February 2017. Follow-up was complete up to January 2018.

Results: Twenty-four patients were included. Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) was administered to only 38%, but more commonly in the second half of the group (58% vs. 17%, p = 0.035). It was associated with smaller tumor size (median: 2.5 vs. 4.2 cm, p < 0.001), fewer positive lymph nodes (LNs) in the resected specimen (median: 2 vs. 5, p = 0.04), and higher likelihood of adjuvant therapy (78% vs. 40%, p = 0.01), but not with survival. Resection was extensive: a median of 26 LNs were retrieved, R0 resection rate (≥1 mm) was 79%, and median length of vein segments was 4 cm, requiring interposition grafts in 58% (mostly polytetrafluoroethylene). Median intensive care unit stay was 0 days and length of hospital stay was 9 days. Post-operative mortality was 12.5%. Median overall survival was 24 months. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) status was significantly associated with survival (p < 0.001) with ECOG-0: 33 months, ECOG-1: 12 months, and ECOG-2: 6 months.

Conclusion: This first Greek national series of portomesenteric vein resection in borderline PC demonstrates that it results to 2 years of median survival, extending to 33 months in patients with good performance status, especially if NAT is uniformly administered.

The Falciform Ligament for Mesenteric and Portal Vein Reconstruction in Local Advanced Pancreatic Tumor: A Surgical Guide and Single-Center Experience

Background

Since local tumor infiltration to the mesenteric-portal axis might represent a challenging assignment for curative intended resectability during pancreatic surgery, appropriate techniques for venous reconstruction are essential. In this study, we acknowledge the falciform ligament as a feasible and convenient substitute for mesenteric and portal vein reconstruction with high reliability and patency for local advanced pancreatic tumor.

Methods

A retrospective single-center analysis. Between June 2017 and January 2018, a total of eleven consecutive patients underwent pancreatic resections with venous reconstruction using falciform ligament. Among them, venous resection was performed in nine cases by wedge and in two cases by full segment. Patency rates and perioperative details were reviewed.

Results

Mean clamping time of the mesenteric-portal blood flow was 34 min, while perioperative mortality rate was 0%. By means of Duplex ultrasonography, nine patients were shown to be patent on the day of discharge, while two cases revealed an entire occlusion of the mesenteric-portal axis. Orthograde flow demonstrated a mean value of 34 cm/s. All patent grafts on discharge revealed persistent patency within various follow-up assessments.

Conclusion

The falciform ligament appears to be a feasible and reliable autologous tissue for venous blood flow reconstruction with high postoperative patency. Especially the possibility of customizing graft dimensions to the individual needs based on local findings allows an optimal size matching of the conduit. The risk of stenosis and/or segmental occlusion may thus be further reduced.

Impact of portal vein infiltration and type of venous reconstruction in surgery for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

The International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) recommends operative exploration and resection of pancreatic cancers in the presence of reconstructable mesentericoportal axis involvement. However, there is no consensus on the ideal method of vascular reconstruction. The effect of depth of tumour invasion of the vessel wall on outcome is also unknown.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of pancreaticoduodenectomy with vein resection for T3 adenocarcinoma of the head of the pancreas across nine centres. Outcome measures were overall survival based on the impact of the depth of tumour infiltration of the vessel wall, and morbidity, in-hospital mortality and overall survival between types of venous reconstruction: primary closure, end-to-end anastomosis and interposition graft.

RESULTS

A total of 229 patients underwent portal vein resection; 129 (56·3 per cent) underwent primary closure, 64 (27·9 per cent) had an end-to-end anastomosis and 36 (15·7 per cent) an interposition graft. There was no difference in overall morbidity (26 (20·2 per cent), 14 (22 per cent) and 9 (25 per cent) respectively; P = 0·817) or in-hospital mortality (6 (4·7 per cent), 2 (3 per cent) and 2 (6 per cent); P = 0·826) between the three groups. One hundred and six patients (47·5 per cent) had histological evidence of vein involvement; 59 (26·5 per cent) had superficial invasion (tunica adventitia) and 47 (21·1 per cent) had deep invasion (tunica media or intima). Median survival was 18·8 months for patients who had primary closure, 27·6 months for those with an end-to-end anastomosis and 13·0 months among patients with an interposition graft. There was no significant difference in median survival between patients with superficial, deep or no histological vein involvement (20·8, 21·3 and 13·3 months respectively; P = 0·111). Venous tumour infiltration was not associated with decreased overall survival on multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSION

In this study, there was no difference in morbidity between the three modes of venous reconstruction, and overall survival was similar regardless of tumour infiltration of the vein.

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.

Safety and efficacy of cryopreserved homologous veins for venous reconstruction in pancreatoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

There are several techniques for reconstructing the portal vein-superior mesenteric vein during pancreatoduodenectomy. The aim of the present study was to present our results with portal vein-superior mesenteric vein reconstruction using cryopreserved homologous veins during pancreatoduodenectomy for patients with pancreatic head cancer.

METHODS

Patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic head cancer were reviewed retrospectively. In patients with portal vein-superior mesenteric vein resection, the detailed method of reconstruction and clinical outcomes were reviewed. Clinical characteristics, patient survival, and portal vein-superior mesenteric vein patency were compared between those with and without homologous vein grafts. Factors affecting the patency of reconstructed veins were assessed by univariate analysis.

RESULTS

Among 144 patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy, portal vein-superior mesenteric vein resection was performed in 36 patients (25%); 18 (50%) underwent reconstruction with homologous veins, and the other 18 (50%) underwent reconstruction without homologous veins. The extent of portal vein-superior mesenteric vein involvement, operative time, duration of clamping of portal vein-superior mesenteric vein, intraoperative blood loss, and length of the venous resection were greater (P ≤ .013 each) in those with homologous vein grafts. There was no significant difference in postoperative morbidity/mortality, patient survival, or portal vein-superior mesenteric vein patency. The 1- and 2-year overall patency of portal vein-superior mesenteric vein was 76% and 71%, respectively, while the 2-year patencies were 67% and 67% in those with homologous veins and 87% and 73% in those without homologous veins without difference between the groups. Circumferential resection and pathologic portal vein-superior mesenteric vein involvement were associated with the patency of the reconstructed vein (P = .002 and P = .028, resp).

CONCLUSION

Use of homologous venous grafts for portal vein-superior mesenteric vein reconstruction are feasible alternatives during pancreatoduodenectomy for advanced pancreatic head cancer.

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.

Advances in the Surgical Management of Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreas Cancer

Successful surgical resection offers the only chance for cure in patients with pancreatic cancer. However, pancreatic resection is feasible in less than 20% of the patients. In this review, the current state of surgical management of pancreatic cancer is discussed. The definition of resectability based on cross-sectional imaging and the technical aspects of surgery, including vascular resection and/or reconstruction, management of aberrant vascular anatomy and extent of lymphadenectomy, are appraised. Furthermore, common pancreatic resection-specific postoperative complications and their management are reviewed.

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.