Pancreas-preserving duodenectomy is a safe alternative to high-risk pancreatoduodenectomy for premalignant duodenal lesions

Impact of extra-ampullary duodenal adenocarcinoma subtypes on surgical and oncological outcomes following pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

There is little information about the relevance of extra-ampullary duodenal adenocarcinoma (EDA) subtypes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of EDA subtypes on surgical and oncological outcomes following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD).

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing PD for EDA from 2000 to 2019 were analyzed. Results were stratified by pathologic subtype (intestinal versus non-intestinal). Uni-and multivariable analyses were performed using standard statistical methods.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 70 patients, of whom 49 (70%) had an intestinal phenotype. EDA with intestinal phenotype was more frequently proximal to the Ampulla of Vater, while non-intestinal EDA was more frequently found distally (76% vs. 33%, p = 0.002). Patients with intestinal EDA were less likely to experience severe morbidity, with decreased reoperation and unplanned Intensive Care Unit admission rates relative to non-intestinal subtypes (2% vs. 29% p = 0.002, and 2% vs. 19%, p = 0.007, respectively). The median follow-up post-pancreatectomy was 73 months. Intestinal EDA was associated with improved overall and disease-free survival, with 3-year and 5-year survival rates of 71% vs. 29% and 53% vs. 24%, respectively. (p = 0.019 and p = 0.025).

CONCLUSION

Intestinal-type EDA, which more often arises from supra-ampullary duodenum, was associated with better postoperative outcomes and improved survival.

Pancreas-sparing partial duodenectomy as an alternative to emergency pancreaticoduodenectomy for a major duodenal perforation: a case report

A 71-year-old woman underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection for early duodenal cancer at the second portion of the duodenum and developed acute peritonitis due to delayed duodenal perforation. Emergency laparotomy was performed. A huge perforation formed at the descending duodenum without ampulla involvement. Pancreas-sparing partial duodenectomy (PPD) with gastrojejunostomy was performed (250 min operative time) with 50 mL of intraoperative blood loss. She required intensive care for 3 days and was discharged on postoperative day 21 with no severe complications. Emergency treatment for a major duodenal injury or perforation remains challenging because of high morbidity and mortality. An appropriate treatment should be considered according to the nature of the defect. Although PPD is an acceptable procedure for patients with a duodenal neoplasm, its use in emergency surgery is rarely reported. PPD is more reliable than primary repair or anastomosis using a jejunal wall, and less invasive than pancreaticoduodenectomy, for emergency treatment. We performed PPD in this patient because the duodenal perforation was too large to reconstruct and did not involve the ampulla. PPD can be a safe and feasible alternative surgical procedure to pancreaticoduodenectomy for a major duodenal perforation, especially in patients with a duodenal perforation that does not involve the ampulla.

Pancreatoduodenectomy for suspected malignancy: nonmalignant histology confers increased risk of serious morbidity

BACKGROUND/AIMS

A tissue diagnosis is not always obtained prior to pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and a proportion of patients are found to have noncancerous histology postoperatively. It is unknown if these patients have different outcomes when compared with those who have malignancy confirmed.

METHODS

A retrospective paired case matched control study was undertaken. Patients who underwent PD for suspected malignancy but ultimately had nonmalignant histology were identified. Each was matched to a confirmed malignant control using the following criteria: age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, neoadjuvant treatment, preoperative serum bilirubin, preoperative biliary stenting and type of pancreatic anastomosis. Matching was blinded to the measured outcomes, which included perioperative morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

Forty-five cases were compared with 45 well-matched controls. There was no difference in 30- or 90-day mortality, or length of stay. While overall morbidity rates were the same, patients with nonmalignant disease were more likely to experience major (Clavien-Dindo grade III-IV) morbidity (40.0% versus 17.8%, p = 0.0352). Independently, rates of clinically relevant pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) were higher in the nonmalignant group (22.2% versus 4.44%, p = 0.0131).

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, PD patients with nonmalignant histology had significantly higher incidence of major morbidity and CR-POPF when compared with those who had malignancy confirmed. This should be considered when planning the management of patients with known or presumed benign/premalignant disease.

Robotic parenchymal-sparing pancreatectomy and pancreas-sparing duodenectomy avoid pancreaticoduodenectomy for benign and low-grade malignant tumours

BACKGROUND

Parenchymal-sparing pancreatectomy (PSP) or pancreas-sparing duodenectomy (PSD) is an alternative method for patients with benign or low-grade malignant tumours at the pancreatic head or duodenum. It avoids traumatic pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) with pancreatic function preservation and improves quality of life. However, few studies have reported on robotic PSP (RPSP) or robotic PSD (RPSD).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 17 patients with benign and low-grade malignant pancreatic head and duodenal tumours who underwent RPSP or RPSD from January 2018 to February 2022 was conducted. The demographic, perioperative, and postoperative data of all patients were collected and analysed.

RESULTS

The operations were successful for all seventeen patients without conversion, including 10 cases of RPSP and 7 cases of RPSD. For RPSP, eight patients underwent pancreatic enucleation, and two patients underwent uncinate process resection. For RPSD, five patients underwent local duodenectomy, and two patients underwent segmental duodenectomy, with five simultaneous jejunostomies and two distal gastrectomies. The median OT and EBL were 135 min and 50 mL for RPSP and 220 min and 100 mL for RPSD, respectively. The median LOS was 8 days for RPSP and 19 days for RPSD. The main postoperative complications for RPSP included POPF (grade B, 6 cases), DGE (grade B, 1 case), PPH (1 case), and intra-abdominal infection (1 case). The main postoperative complications for RPSD included DGE (grade B, 1 case, grade C, 3 cases), postoperative haemorrhage (1 case), intra-abdominal infection (1 case), and duodenal fistula (1 case). One patient underwent interventional drain placement after RPSP because of POPF.

CONCLUSION

RPSP or RPSD is feasible for highly selected patients with benign and low-grade malignant pancreatic head and duodenal tumours, avoiding potential pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Surgical results of non-ampullary duodenal cancer: a nationwide survey in Japan

BACKGROUND

As non-ampullary duodenal cancer is relatively rare, the optimal treatment strategy, including the appropriate surgical procedure and efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy, remains unclear. This nationwide survey aimed to clarify the actual lymph node spread pattern and determine the optimal treatment strategy for this disease, using a large-scale database.

METHODS

We used a questionnaire and a retrospective registry of 1083 patients with non-ampullary duodenal cancer who had undergone surgery during 2008-2017 in 114 high-volume Japanese Society of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery-certified training institutions. Propensity score-matched analyses were conducted to minimise background bias. Cox regression was performed to identify covariates associated with recurrence-free survival. There were distinct disparities in the nodal dissection rate according to the predominant tumor location and tumor invasion depth. Metastases were frequently observed in the peripancreatic nodes and those along the superior mesenteric artery, irrespective of tumor location. Their dissection seemed to be beneficial for improved survival. In the overall cohort, no survival benefit was observed in patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy when compared with that in patients who underwent surgery alone. Nevertheless, in the matched cohort, adjuvant chemotherapy for > 6 months was associated with a significant improvement in recurrence-free survival (median: 43.5 vs. 22.5 months, p = 0.016), particularly in patients with tumor invasion of the subserosa or deeper tumor invasion, lymph node metastasis, or elevated serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels.

CONCLUSION

Pancreatoduodenectomy should be the standard procedure for advanced non-ampullary duodenal cancer. Adjuvant chemotherapy for > 6 months, especially for advanced tumors, significantly improves survival.

Over-the-scope clip-assisted endoscopic full-thickness resection has potential to treat complex nonampullary duodenal lesions: a single-center case series

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The duodenum is considered a challenging area for the endoscopic resection of lesions. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of over-the-scope clip (OTSC)-assisted endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) for complex nonampullary duodenal lesions unsuitable for conventional resection techniques.

METHODS AND PATIENTS

We conducted a retrospective case review of 13 consecutive patients with complex nonampullary duodenal tumors that were unsuitable for conventional resection techniques; these patients underwent EFTR assisted with OTSC at Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University from September 2015 to September 2020. The OTSC device was placed, and tumors were resected after the lesions were identified. Data were abstracted for demographics, lesion features, histopathologic diagnoses, technical success rates, complete resection (R0 resection) rates, and complications.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients with duodenal lesions (6 adenomas and 7 submucosal tumors with nonlifting signs, incomplete lifting signs, difficult locations, failed ESD/EMR attempts or suspected origin in the muscularis propria) subjected to EFTR were included. The sizes of all the lesions evaluated by endoscopy were smaller than 20 mm, and most of them (84.6%, 11/13) were smaller than 12 mm. All 13 applications of the clips, endoscopic resection and full-thickness resection were successful (13/13, 100%). Complete resection was achieved in 12 patients (12/13, 92.3%). There were no immediate or delayed complications, including bleeding, infection and perforation.

CONCLUSIONS

OTSC -assisted EFTR appears to be effective and safe for complex nonampullary duodenal lesions smaller than 20 mm (particularly those ≤ 10-12 mm) that are unsuitable for conventional resection techniques.

Pancreas sparing duodenectomy in the treatment of primary duodenal neoplasms and other situations with duodenal involvement

BACKGROUND

There are no clearly defined indications for pancreas-preserving duodenectomy. The present study aimed to analyze postoperative morbidity and the outcomes of patients undergoing pancreas-preserving duodenectomy.

METHODS

Patients undergoing pancreas-preserving duodenectomy from April 2008 to May 2020 were included. We divided the series according to indication: scenario 1, primary duodenal tumors; scenario 2, tumors of another origin with duodenal involvement; and scenario 3, emergency duodenectomy.

RESULTS

We included 35 patients. Total duodenectomy was performed in 1 patient of adenomatous duodenal polyposis, limited duodenectomy in 7, and third + fourth duodenal portion resection in 27. The indications for scenario 1 were gastrointestinal stromal tumor (n = 13), adenocarcinoma (n = 4), neuroendocrine tumor (n = 3), duodenal adenoma (n = 1), and adenomatous duodenal polyposis (n = 1); scenario 2: retroperitoneal desmoid tumor (n = 2), recurrence of liposarcoma (n = 2), retroperitoneal paraganglioma (n = 1), neuroendocrine tumor in pancreatic uncinate process (n = 1), and duodenal infiltration due to metastatic adenopathies of a germinal tumor with digestive hemorrhage (n = 1); and scenario 3: aortoenteric fistula (n = 3), duodenal trauma (n = 1), erosive duodenitis (n = 1), and biliopancreatic limb ischemia (n = 1). Severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIb) developed in 14% (5/35), and postoperative mortality was 3% (1/35).

CONCLUSIONS

Pancreas-preserving duodenectomy is useful in the management of primary duodenal tumors, and is a technical option for some tumors with duodenal infiltration or in emergency interventions.

Postoperative Outcome of Surgery with Pancreatic Resection for Retroperitoneal Soft Tissue Sarcoma: Results of a Retrospective Bicentric Analysis on 50 Consecutive Patients

BACKGROUNDS

Multivisceral resection is the standard treatment for retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) during which pancreas resection may be necessary.

METHODS

All consecutive patients operated for RPS with pancreatectomy in 2 expert centers between 1993 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

Fifty patients (median age: 57 years, IQR: [46-65]) with a primary (n = 33) or recurrent (n = 17) RPS underwent surgery requiring pancreas resection (distal pancreatectomy (DP) (n = 43), pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) (n = 5), central pancreatectomy (n = 1), and atypical resection (n = 1)). Severe postoperative morbidity (Clavien-Dindo III-IV) was observed in 14 patients (28%), and 7 of them (14%) required reoperation for anastomotic bowel leakage (n = 5), gastric volvulus (n = 1), or hemorrhage (n = 1). Pancreas-related complications occurred in 25 patients (50%): 10 postoperative pancreatic fistulas (POPF) (grade A (n = 12), grade B (n = 6), grade C (n = 1)), 13 delayed gastric emptying (grade A (n = 8), grade B (n = 4), grade C (n = 1)), 1 hemorrhage (grade C). Postoperative mortality was 4% (n = 2), all following PD, caused by a massive intraoperative air embolism and by a multiple organ failure after anastomotic leakage. Pathological analysis confirmed pancreatic involvement in 17 (34%) specimens. Microscopically complete resection (R0) was achieved in 22 (44%) patients. After a follow-up of 60 months, 36 patients (75%) were still alive, among whom 27 without recurrence (56%).

CONCLUSION

Pancreatic resection during RPS surgery is associated with significant postoperative morbidity and mortality. PD should be avoided whenever possible while other procedures seemed achievable without excessive morbidity and with long-term survival.

Limited resection vs. pancreaticoduodenectomy for primary duodenal adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

It is well known that surgery is the mainstay treatment for duodenal adenocarcinoma. However, the optimal extent of surgery is still under debate. We aimed to systematically review and perform a meta-analysis of limited resection (LR) and pancreatoduodenectomy for patients with duodenal adenocarcinoma. A systematic electronic database search of the literature was performed using PubMed and the Cochrane Library. All studies comparing LR and pancreatoduodenectomy for patients with duodenal adenocarcinoma were selected. Long-term overall survival was considered as the primary outcome, and perioperative morbidity and mortality as the secondary outcomes. Fifteen studies with a total of 3166 patients were analyzed; 995 and 1498 patients were treated with limited resection and pancreatoduodenectomy, respectively. Eight and 7 studies scored a low and intermediate risk of publication bias, respectively. The LR group had a more favorable result than the pancreatoduodenectomy group in overall morbidity (odd ratio [OR]: 0.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.17-0.65) and postoperative pancreatic fistula (OR: 0.13, 95% CI 0.04-0.43). Mortality (OR: 0.96, 95% CI 0.70-1.33) and overall survival (OR: 0.61, 95% CI 0.33-1.13) were not significantly different between the two groups, although comparison of the two groups stratified by prognostic factors, such as T categories, was not possible due to a lack of detailed data. LR showed long-term outcomes equivalent to those of pancreatoduodenectomy, while the perioperative morbidity rates were lower. LR could be an option for selected duodenal adenocarcinoma patients with appropriate location or depth of invasion, although further studies are required.

Low Postoperative Platelet Counts Are Associated with Major Morbidity and Inferior Survival in Adult Recipients of Orthotopic Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Platelets (PLT) play an essential functional role in cellular injury and liver regeneration following partial hepatectomy and orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). Here, we investigated the association of postoperative PLT counts with short- and long-term outcomes in adult OLT recipients.

METHODS

Three hundred consecutive patients from our prospective OLT database were analyzed retrospectively (May 2010-November 2017). Ninety-day post-OLT complications were graded using the Clavien-Dindo (CD) classification and quantified by the comprehensive complication index (CCI). To determine the prognostic accuracy of PLT counts, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was calculated for major complications (CD ≥ 3b). Parametric and non-parametric tests were applied for subgroup analyses. Uni- and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify risk factors for major complications. Graft and patient survival were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method as well as uni- and multivariable Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

Postoperative day 6 PLT counts < 70 × 10⁹/L (POD6-70) were identified as the best cutoff for predicting major complications (AUROC = 0.7; p < 0.001; Youden index 0.317). The stratification of patients into low- (n = 113) and high-PLT (n = 187) groups highlighted significant differences in major complications (CCI 68 ± 29 vs. 43 ± 28, p < 0.001); length of hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) stay (53 ± 43 vs. 31 ± 25, p < 0.001; 21 ± 29 vs. 7 ± 11, p < 0.001, respectively) and estimated procedural costs. POD6-70 was associated with inferior 5-year graft survival. Multivariable logistic regression analysis identified POD6-70 as an independent predictor of major complications (odds ratio 2.298, confidence intervals 1.179-4.478, p = 0.015).

CONCLUSION

In OLT patients, a PLT count on POD6 of less than 70 × 10⁹/L bears a prognostic significance warranting further investigations.

Comparison of pancreas-sparing duodenectomy (PSD) and pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) for the management of duodenal polyposis syndromes

BACKGROUND

Familial adenomatous polyposis affects primarily the colon but can also involve other locations within the gastrointestinal tract, including the duodenum. The aim of this study was to describe a single center experience with pancreas-sparing duodenectomy for familial adenomatous polyposis and to compare outcomes with pancreatoduodenectomy performed for duodenal polyp disease.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database identified patients who had undergone pancreas-sparing duodenectomy during the period 2001 to 2016. This population was matched 1:1 with a cohort of patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for duodenal adenomas, both sporadic and familial, during the same time period. Baseline demographics and perioperative (short- and long-term) outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 88 patients were included; 44 in each group. The pancreas-sparing duodenectomy cohort was younger (52.6 vs 64.3 years; P < .001) and more patients had undergone prior colectomy (100% vs 32%; P < .001) or additional prior abdominal surgery (27% vs 9% (P < .001). Median operative times were greater for pancreatoduodenectomy (391 vs 460 min; P = .002). There was no difference in any of the early postoperative complications. There was 1 30-day mortality in the pancreatoduodenectomy group secondary to aspiration. Late acute pancreatitis was more common after pancreas-sparing duodenectomy (16% vs 0%; P = .012) and exocrine pancreatic insufficiency was more common after pancreatoduodenectomy (30% vs 11%; P = .034).

CONCLUSION

Pancreas-sparing duodenectomy is a reasonable option for duodenal cancer prophylaxis in familial adenomatous polyposis with high-risk features. The perioperative safety profile is comparable to pancreatoduodenectomy done for similar indications, and pancreas-sparing duodenectomy has a favorable long-term with a lesser incidence of exocrine impairment.

Endoscopic full-thickness resection of gastric and duodenal subepithelial lesions using a new, flat-based over-the-scope clip

Background

Surgical resection of upper gastrointestinal (GI) subepithelial tumors (SETs) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. A new over-the-scope (OTS) clip can be used for endoscopic full-thickness resection (eFTR). We aimed to prospectively evaluate feasibility and safety of upper GI eFTR with a new, flat-based OTS clip.

Methods

Consecutive patients with a gastric or duodenal SET < 20 mm were prospectively included. After identification of the lesion, the clip was placed and lesions were resected. Patients were followed for 1 month to assess severe adverse events (SAEs); 3–6 months after eFTR, endoscopy was performed.

Results

eFTR was performed on 13 lesions in 12 patients: 7 gastric and 6 duodenal SETs. Technical success was achieved in 11 cases (85%). In all 11 cases, R0-resection was achieved. In all 6 duodenal cases and in one gastric case, FTR was achieved (64%). One SAE (pain) was observed after eFTR of a gastric SET. After eFTR of duodenal SETs, several SAEs were observed: perforation (n = 1), microperforation (n = 3), and hemorrhage (n = 1). During follow-up endoscopy, the clip was no longer in situ in most patients (7 of 10; 70%).

Conclusions

eFTR with this new flat-based OTS clip is feasible and effective. Although gastric eFTR was safe, eFTR in the duodenum was complicated by (micro)perforation in several patients. Therefore, the design of the clip or the technique of resection needs further refinement to improve safety of resection of SET in thin-walled areas such as the duodenum before being applied in clinical practice.

Dutch trial register: NTR5023.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00464-017-5989-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.