Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy Procedure for Adenocarcinoma of the Body and Tail of the Pancreas: Ability to Obtain Negative Tangential Margins

Embolize, supercharge, resect: Embolization to enhance hepatic vascularization prior to en-bloc pancreas and arterial resection

INTRODUCTION

Embolization could increase the resectability of pancreatic tumors by supercharging visceral arterial perfusion prior to pancreatic surgery with arterial en-bloc resection. Its indications, however, are controversial.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the results of a single-center database of patients undergoing pancreatic surgery with arterial resection (AR) after preoperative arterial embolization (PAE) to increase hepatic vascular flow and spare arterial reconstruction.

RESULTS

PAE was planned in 15 patients with arterial involvement due to pancreatic tumors. Three patients were excluded due to the finding of irresectable disease during surgery. Twelve cases were resected because of pancreatic cancer (10), distal cholangiocarcinoma (1), and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (1). Arterial involvement in these cases required embolization of the substitute right hepatic artery (RHA) (5), left hepatic artery (1), and common hepatic artery (CHA) (6) to enhance liver vascularization. Two patients presented migration of the vascular plug after PAE. Six pancreatoduodenectomies and 6 distal pancreatectomies were performed, the latter associated with en-bloc celiac trunk and CHA resection. R0 was achieved in 7 out of 12 patients, and pathological vascular involvement was confirmed in 8. Postoperative complications included one patient who developed gastric ischemia and underwent gastrectomy, and one patient who underwent reoperation for acute cholecystitis with liver abscesses.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative arterial embolization before pancreatic surgery with hepatic arterial resection enables surgeons to precondition hepatic vascularization and prevent hepatic ischemia. In addition, this avoids having to perform arterial anastomosis in the presence of pancreatic suture.

Robotic Left Pancreatectomy with Perirenal Tissue Excision and Left Adrenalectomy (Posterior Ramps) for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Abutting the Adrenal Gland

BACKGROUND

Radical antegrade modular pancreato-splenectomy (RAMPS) has been largely described in left-sided pancreatic cancers.1.J Hepato-Biliary-Pancreat Sci 29:1156-1165 Its prognostic advantage is not clear, although a theoretical improvement in R0 resection rate has been shown.2.J Am Coll Surg 204:244-249 Furthermore, RAMPS is usually carried out without adrenal gland removal, the so-called anterior RAMPS, while extending the resection to the adrenal plane could impair perioperative outcomes.3.HPB 25:311-319 METHODS: A 40 mm pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) was found in a 70-year-old patient. Tumor infiltrates the adrenal gland and a robotic posterior RAMPS was indicated.

RESULTS

After sectioning the splenic vessels and the pancreatic neck, the dissection was directed vertically in a sagittal plane along the left border of the superior mesenteric artery to identify the left renal vein. Our dissection plane was then directed on a caudo-cranial axis, after identification of the left renal artery and below the adrenal gland. The resection was also delimitated medially by the left borders of the superior mesenteric artery and the aorta, and posteriorly by the renal parenchyma. Postoperative course was marked by a biochemical leak. The patient was discharged on postoperative day (POD) 5 and the drain removed at POD 18. Pathological examination confirmed a pT2N2 PDAC with negative margins, with 4/18 positive nodes.

CONCLUSIONS

The robotic platform is routinely employed in pancreatic surgery. Thanks to its increased degree of movement, its dexterity, and the magnification, this approach can help surgeons with vascular identification and control, in performing extended lymphadenectomies, and finding the correct planes of dissection. All these elements are crucial in a well-performed posterior RAMPS.

Abdominal drainage after minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: out of sight, out of mind?

BACKGROUNDS

The use of drains in pancreatic surgery remains controversial. The present study investigated postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) without intraperitoneal drain placement.

METHODS

Data of consecutive patients undergoing MIDP between 2013 and 2023 were prospectively collected. Patients were divided in drain group (DG), including patients with prophylactic abdominal drain placed, and no-drain group (NDG) including those without drain. The groups were compared in terms of postoperative outcomes, using a propensity score-matched analysis.

RESULTS

116 patients were selected. After matching, DG and NDG consisted of 29 patients each. The rates of POPF and abdominal collection were lower in NDG in comparison to DG (3.4% vs. 27.6%, p 0.025 and 3.4% vs. 31.0%, p 0.011, respectively). The length of stay was significantly shorter in the NDG (5 vs. 9 days, p < 0.001). No difference between the groups was found for other outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Drain omission was associated with lower rates of POPF and abdominal collections, as well as shorter hospital stays, not affecting the rate of severe complication, reoperation and readmission.

Evaluating the efficacy of laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy in selected early-stage left-sided pancreatic cancer: a propensity score matching study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic radical pancreatectomy is safe and beneficial for recectable pancreatic cancer, but the extent of resection for early-stage tumors remains controversial.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with left-sided pancreatic cancer who underwent either laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (LRAMPS, n = 54) or laparoscopic distal pancreatosplecnectomy (LDP, n = 131) between October 2020 and December 2022 were reviewed. The preoperative radiological selection criteria were as follows: (1) tumor diameter ≤ 4 cm; (2) located ≥ 1 cm from the celiac trunk; (3) didn't invade the fascial layer behind the pancreas.

RESULTS

After 1:1 propensity score matching (LRAMPS, n = 54; LDP, n = 54), baseline data were well-balanced with no differences. LRAMPS resulted in longer operation time (240.5 vs. 219.0 min, P = 0.020) and higher intraoperative bleeding volume (200 vs. 150 mL, P = 0.001) compared to LDP. Although LRAMPS harvested more lymph nodes (16 vs. 13, P = 0.008), there were no statistically significant differences in lymph node positivity rate (35.2% vs. 33.3%), R0 pancreatic transection margin (94.4% vs. 96.3%), and retroperitoneal margin (83.3% vs. 87.0%) rate. Postoperative complications did not significantly differ between the two groups. However, LRAMPS was associated with increased drainage volume (85.0 vs. 40.0 mL, P = 0.001), longer time to recover semi-liquid diet compared to LDP (5 vs. 4 days, P < 0.001) and increased daily bowel movement frequency. Tumor recurrence pattern and recurrence-free survival were comparable between the two groups, but the adjuvant chemotherapy regimens varied, and the completion rate of the 6-month intravenous chemotherapy was lower in the LRAMPS group compared to the LDP group (51.9% vs. 75.9%, P = 0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

LRAMPS did not provide oncological benefits over LDP for left-sided pancreatic cancer within the selection criteria, but it increased operation time, intraoperative bleeding, and postoperative bowel movement frequency. These factors impacted the regimen selection and completion of adjuvant chemotherapy, consequently compromising the potential benefits of LRAMPS in achieving better local control.

Prognostic significance of lymph node metastasis in pancreatic tail cancer: A multicenter retrospective study

Background

Distal pancreatectomy (DP) with lymph node (LN) dissection is the standard procedure for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma of the tail (Pt-PDAC). However, the optimal surgery including extent of LN dissection is still being debated. The present study investigated the incidence and prognostic impact of LN metastasis on patients suffering from Pt-PDAC.

Patients and method

This multicenter, retrospective study involved 163 patients who underwent DP for resectable Pt-PDAC at 12 institutions between 2013 and 2017. The frequency of LN metastasis and the effect of LN dissection on Pt-PDAC prognosis were investigated.

Results

There were high incidences of metastases to the LNs along the splenic artery in the patients with Pt-PDAC (39%). The rate of metastases in the LNs along the common hepatic, left gastric, and celiac arteries were low, and the therapeutic index for these LNs was zero. In pancreatic tail cancer located more distally, there were no metastases to the LNs along the common hepatic artery. Multivariate analysis revealed that tumor size was the only independent factor related to recurrence-free survival (HR = 2.01, 95% CI = 1.33-3.05, p = 0.001). The level of pancreas division and LN dissection along the common hepatic artery did not affect the site of tumor recurrence or recurrence-free survival.

Conclusions

LN dissection along the hepatic artery for Pt-PDAC has little significance. Distal pancreatic transection may be acceptable in terms of oncological safety, but further examination of short-term outcomes and preservation of pancreatic function is required.

Contemporary report of surgical outcomes after single-stage total pancreatectomy: A 10-year experience

BACKGROUND

Surgeons rarely perform elective total pancreatectomy (TP). Our study seeks to report surgical outcomes in a contemporary series of single-stage (SS) TP patients.

METHODS

Between the years 2013 to 2023 we conducted a retrospective review of 60 consecutive patients who underwent SSTP. Demographics, pathology, treatment-related variables, and survival were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

SSTP consisted of 3% (60/1859) of elective pancreas resections conducted. Patient median age was 68 years. Ninety percent of these patients (n = 54) underwent SSTP for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Conversion from a planned partial pancreatectomy to TP occurred intraoperatively in 31 (52%) patients. Fifty-nine patients (98%) underwent an R0 resection. Median length of hospital stay was 6 days. The majority of morbidities were minor, with 27% patients (n = 16) developing severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥3). Thirty and ninety-day mortality rates were 1.67% (one patient) and 5% (three patients), respectively. Median survival for the entire cohort was 24.4 months; 22.7 months for PDAC patients, with 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival of 68%, 43%, and 16%, respectively. No mortality occurred in non-PDAC patients (n = 6).

CONCLUSION

Elective single-stage total pancreatectomy can be a safe and appropriate treatment option. SSTP should be in the armamentarium of surgeons performing pancreatic resection.

Comparison of Survival Outcomes between Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy and Conventional Distal Pancreatosplenectomy for Pancreatic Body and Tail Cancer: Korean Multicenter Propensity Score Match Analysis

(1) Background: The aim of this study was to compare the survival benefit of radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) with conventional distal pancreatosplenectomy (cDPS) in left-sided pancreatic cancer. (2) Methods: A retrospective propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was conducted on 333 patients who underwent RAMPS or cDPS for left-sided pancreatic cancer at four tertiary cancer centers. The study assessed prognostic factors and compared survival and operative outcomes. (3) Results: After PSM, 99 patients were matched in each group. RAMPS resulted in a higher retrieved lymph node count than cDPS (15.0 vs. 10.0, p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of R0 resection rate, blood loss, hospital stay, or morbidity. The 5-year overall survival rate was similar in both groups (cDPS vs. RAMPS, 44.4% vs. 45.2%, p = 0.853), and disease-free survival was also comparable. Multivariate analysis revealed that ASA score, preoperative CA19-9, histologic differentiation, R1 resection, adjuvant treatment, and lymphovascular invasion were significant prognostic factors for overall survival. Preoperative CA19-9, histologic differentiation, T-stage, adjuvant treatment, and lymphovascular invasion were independent significant prognostic factors for disease-free survival. (4) Conclusions: Although RAMPS resulted in a higher retrieved lymph node count, survival outcomes were not different between the two groups. RAMPS was a surgical option to achieve R0 resection rather than a standard procedure.

Defining distal splenopancreatectomy by the mesopancreas

BACKGROUND

The implementation of the pathologic CRM (circumferential resection margin) staging system for pancreatic head ductal adenocarcinomas (hPDAC) resulted in a dramatic increase of R1 resections at the dorsal resection margin, presumably because of the high rate of mesopancreatic fat (MP) infiltration. Therefore, mesopancreatic excision (MPE) during pancreatoduodenectomy has recently been promoted and has demonstrated better local disease control, fueling the discussion of neoadjuvant downsizing regimes in MP + patients. However, it is unknown to what extent the MP is infiltrated in patients with distal pancreatic (tail/body) carcinomas (dPDAC). It is also unknown if the MP infiltration status affects surgical margin control in distal pancreatectomy (DP). The aim of our study was to histopathologically analyze MP infiltration and elucidate the influence of resection margin clearance on recurrence and survival in patients with dPDAC. Furthermore, the results were compared to a collective receiving MPE for hPDAC.

METHOD

Clinicopathological and survival parameters of 295 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for PDAC (n = 63 dPDAC and n = 232 hPDAC) were evaluated. The CRM evaluation was performed in a standardized fashion and the specimens were examined according to the Leeds pathology protocol (LEEPP). The MP area was histopathologically evaluated for cancerous infiltration.

RESULTS

In 75.4% of dPDAC patients the MP fat was infiltrated by vital tumor cells. The rates of MP infiltration and R0CRM- resections were similar between dPDAC and hPDAC patients (p = 0.497 and 0.453 respectively). MP- infiltration status did not correlate with CRM implemented resection status in dPDAC patients (p = 0.348). In overall survival analysis, resection status and MP status remained prognostic factors for survival. In follow up analysis. surgical margin clearance in dPDAC patients was associated with a significant improvement in local recurrence rates (5.2% in R0CRM- resected vs. 33.3 in R1/R0CRM + resected, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

While resection margin status was not affected by the MP status in dPDAC patients, the high MP infiltration rate, as well as improved survival in MP- dPDAC patients after R0CRM- resection, justify mesopancreatic excision during splenopancreatectomy. Larger scale studies are urgently needed to validate our results and to study the effect on neoadjuvant treatment in dPDAC patients.

ASO Practice Guidelines Series: Management of Resectable, Borderline Resectable, and Locally Advanced Pancreas Cancer

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is an aggressive disease marked by high rates of both local and distant failure. In the minority of patients with potentially resectable disease, multimodal treatment paradigms have allowed for prolonged survival in an increasingly larger pool of well-selected patients. Therefore, it is critical for surgical oncologists to be abreast of current guideline recommendations for both surgical management and multimodal therapy for pancreas cancer. We discuss these guidelines, as well as the underlying data supporting these positions, to offer surgical oncologists a framework for managing patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Short- and long-term outcomes of robotic versus open radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy: a retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

Robotic distal pancreatectomy has increasingly been accepted as it has overcome some of the limitations of open distal pancreatectomy, whilst the outcomes following robotic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are still uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the short and long-term outcomes of robotic RAMPS and open RAMPS for PDAC.

METHODS

The patients who underwent robotic RAMPS and open RAMPS for PDAC at our clinical centre between January 2017 and December 2021 were reviewed. After a propensity score matching (PSM) at a 1:1 ratio, the perioperative and pathological outcomes in the both groups were reviewed. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to identify independent prognosis factors for overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of these patients.

RESULTS

318 cases were recorded in robotic and open groups. The robotic group showed advantages in operative time [205.00 (166.00, 240.00) min vs 235 (184.75, 270.00) min, P = 0.002], estimated blood loss [100 (50, 100) ml vs 300 (100, 400) ml, P < 0.001], delayed gastric emptying [0 vs 5.03%, P = 0.007] and postoperative hospital stay [7.00 (5.00, 10.00) days vs 11.00 (8.00, 14.00) days, P < 0.001]. There were no significant differences in rate of severe postoperative complications between the robotic group and the open group. Multivariable analysis showed that carbohydrate antigen 19-9, estimated blood loss, N stage, tumour differentiation, chemotherapy and vascular invasion were independent risk factors for OS and RFS of these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic RAMPS was safe and had some advantages over open RAMPS for PDAC. There were no significantly differences in oncological outcomes and long-term survival rates between the robotic and open groups. Robotic RAMPS expanded the indications for minimally invasive surgeries for PDAC to a certain extent.

Minimally invasive versus open radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: an entropy balancing analysis

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy of minimally invasive radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (MI-RAMPS) remain to be established in pancreatic cancer (PDAC) METHODS: Eighty-five open (O)-RAMPS were compared to 93 MI-RAMPS. The entropy balance matching approach was used to compare the two cohorts, eliminating the selection bias. Three models were created. Model 1 made O-RAMPS equal to the MI-RAMPS cohort (i.e., compared the two procedures for resectable PDAC); model 2 made MI-RAMPS equal to O-RAMPS (i.e., compared the two procedures for borderline-resectable PDAC); model 3, compared robotic and laparoscopic RAMPS.

RESULTS

O-RAMPS and MI-RAMPS showed "non-small" differences for BMI, comorbidity, back pain, tumor size, vascular resection, anterior or posterior RAMPS, multi-visceral resection, stump management, grading, and neoadjuvant therapy. Before reweighting, O-RAMPS had fewer clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistulae (CR-POPF) (20.0% vs. 40.9%; p = 0.003), while MI-RAMPS had a higher mean of lymph nodes (25.7 vs. 31.7; p = 0.011). In model 1, MI-RAMPS and O-RAMPS achieved similar results. In model 2, O-RAMPS was associated with lower comprehensive complication index scores (MD = 11.2; p = 0.038), and CR-POPF rates (OR = 0.2; p = 0.001). In model 3, robotic-RAMPS had a higher probability of negative resection margins.

CONCLUSION

In patients with anatomically resectable PDAC, MI-RAMPS is feasible and as safe as O-RAMPS.

Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer: cranial-to-caudal approach with identification of Gerota's fascia (with video)

BACKGROUND

Although radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has become the gold standard procedure in open distal pancreatectomy, there has been no gold standardized procedure for PDAC in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP). In this study, we analyzed our novel cranial-to-caudal approach (CC approach) for patients undergoing MIDP and provide a video clip illustrating the details of the CC approach.

METHODS

Ninety-four patients who underwent MIDP with splenectomy between 2016 and 2021 were included in this study. The CC approach was performed in 23 (24.5%) of the 94 patients. The concept of the CC approach is easy identification of Gerota's fascia from the cranial side of the pancreas and secure tumor removal (R0 resection) wrapped by Gerota's fascia. The short- and long-term outcomes were compared between the CC and non-CC approaches.

RESULTS

The median operation time and blood loss were similar between the two groups. The ratios of grade ≥ B postoperative pancreatic fistula and Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III complications were also comparable. All patients in the CC approach group achieved R0 resection, and the R0 ratio was similar in the two groups (p = 0.345). The 2-year survival rate in CC and non-CC approach groups was 87.5% and 83.6%, respectively (p = 0.903).

CONCLUSIONS

The details of the CC approach for MIDP were demonstrated based on an anatomical point of view. This approach has the potential to become a standardized approach for left-sided PDAC.

Inframesocolic main pancreatic vessels-first approach for minimally invasive radical antegrade modular pancreaticosplenectomy (RAMPS): technical description and first experience

Radical modular antegrade pancreaticosplenectomy (RAMPS) improves posterior tumor-free margins during resections of pancreatic neoplasia involving the body or tail. However, minimally invasive RAMPS is technically challenging and has been reported seldom. We present for the first time a minimally invasive RAMPS technique with an innovative approach providing early dissection and control of the main peripancreatic vessels from an inframesocolic embryonal window, suitable for laparoscopy and robotics. Minimally invasive RAMPS with inframesocolic main pancreatic vessels-first approach was performed at the Tricase Hospital (Italy) from May 2017 to April 2022 in 11 consecutive patients with neoplastic lesions of the pancreas (8 laparoscopic RAMPS and 3 robotic RAMPS). Among the laparoscopic cases, 1 included a portal vein tangential resection and 1 a celiac artery resection (modified Appleby procedure). There were no conversions, no Clavien-Dindo complications > 2, all resections' margins were tumor free, and no 90-day mortality.

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) versus standard retrograde pancreatosplenectomy (SRPS) for resectable body and tail pancreatic adenocarcinoma: protocol of a multicenter, prospective, randomized phase III control trial (CSPAC-3)

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a highly aggressive malignancy. Radical surgical resection offers the only potential cure. There is increasing agreement that radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) may benefit patients with tumors in the body and tail of the pancreas. To address this, the Chinese Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer (CSPAC)-3 trial is proposed to compare the effect of RAMPS and standard retrograde pancreatosplenectomy (SRPS) on patient survival and preoperative safety METHODS: The randomized controlled trial will be multicenter and two-armed with blinded outcomes and intention-to-treat analysis. Three hundred patients with resectable body and tail pancreatic adenocarcinoma will be enrolled and randomly assigned to RAMPS or SRPS. Adjuvant chemotherapy based on an initial regimen will be recommended 4-6 weeks after surgery if no serious complication occurs. The hypothesis that RAMPS improves survival outcomes compared with SRPS will be tested using a superiority trial. The primary outcome will be overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes will include recurrence-free survival (RFS), R0 resection rate, the number of harvested lymph nodes, postoperative complications, and quality of life scores.

DISCUSSION

The use of RAMPS has increased over the past decade. It is reported that RAMPS is superior to SRPS in improving both the rate of R0 resection and lymph node yield. Despite these advantages, however, there is little high-level documentation of the superiority of RAMPS in terms of survival and this needs to be investigated. To address this issue, CSPAC has instigated the first prospective, randomized phase III control trials, aiming to explore the optimal surgical strategy for improving the prognosis and OS of patients with left-sided pancreatic cancer Trial registration Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2100053844; pre-results. Registered on December 1, 2021.

Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy for resectable pancreatic cancer (DIPLOMA): an international randomised non-inferiority trial

Background

The oncological safety of minimally invasive surgery has been questioned for several abdominal cancers. Concerns also exist regarding the use of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer as randomised trials are lacking.

Methods

In this international randomised non-inferiority trial, we recruited adults with resectable pancreatic cancer from 35 centres in 12 countries. Patients were randomly assigned to either MIDP (laparoscopic or robotic) or open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). Both patients and pathologists were blinded to the assigned approach. Primary endpoint was radical resection (R0, ≥1 mm free margin) in patients who had ultimately undergone resection. Analyses for the primary endpoint were by modified intention-to-treat, excluding patients with missing data on primary endpoint. The pre-defined non-inferiority margin of -7% was compared with the lower limit of the two-sided 90% confidence interval (CI) of absolute difference in the primary endpoint. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN44897265).

Findings

Between May 8, 2018 and May 7, 2021, 258 patients were randomly assigned to MIDP (131 patients) or ODP (127 patients). Modified intention-to-treat analysis included 114 patients in the MIDP group and 110 patients in the ODP group. An R0 resection occurred in 83 (73%) patients in the MIDP group and in 76 (69%) patients in the ODP group (difference 3.7%, 90% CI -6.2 to 13.6%; p_{non-inferiority} = 0.039). Median lymph node yield was comparable (22.0 [16.0-30.0] vs 23.0 [14.0-32.0] nodes, p = 0.86), as was the rate of intraperitoneal recurrence (41% vs 38%, p = 0.45). Median follow-up was 23.5 (interquartile range 17.0-30.0) months. Other postoperative outcomes were comparable, including median time to functional recovery (5 [95% CI 4.5-5.5] vs 5 [95% CI 4.7-5.3] days; p = 0.22) and overall survival (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.67-1.46, p = 0.94). Serious adverse events were reported in 23 (18%) of 131 patients in the MIDP group vs 28 (22%) of 127 patients in the ODP group.

Interpretation

This trial provides evidence on the non-inferiority of MIDP compared to ODP regarding radical resection rates in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. The present findings support the applicability of minimally invasive surgery in patients with resectable left-sided pancreatic cancer.

Funding

Medtronic Covidien AG, Johnson & Johnson Medical Limited, Dutch Gastroenterology Society.

Feasibility of laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) as a standard treatment for distal resectable pancreatic cancer

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic (Lap-) radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) is an attractive radical procedure that aims to achieve negative posterior retroperitoneal margin in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) resections. However, only few institutions are adapting Lap-RAMPS due to the technical difficulties and the lack of supporting evidence for the clinical applications.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed on consecutive patients who underwent RAMPS for distal resectable PDACs. We analyzed the short- and long-term outcomes including local control and the induction of adjuvant chemotherapy compared between Lap- and Open-RAMPS.

RESULTS

Of the 118 RAMPS patients, 43 patients underwent Lap-RAMPS and 75 patients underwent Open-RAMPS. The blood loss was lower (125 vs. 390 mL, p < 0.001), and postoperative hospital stay was shorter (17 vs. 21 days, p = 0.018) in the Lap-RAMPS group. There was no difference in the postoperative complications and no mortality in both groups. R0 resection rate was 100.0% in the Lap-RAMPS and 90.7% in the Open-RAMPS (p = 0.039). Among the patients eligible for adjuvant chemotherapy, the Lap-RAMPS group showed a favorable induction rate (100.0 vs. 89.6%, p = 0.037). Both groups showed a favorable 3-year local recurrence rate (8.7 vs. 10.0%, p = 0.976) and 3-year overall survival (69.8 vs. 71.1%, p = 0.996).

CONCLUSIONS

The safety and efficacy of Lap-RAMPS were comparable to those of Open-RAMPS in terms of achieving local control and adjuvant chemotherapy induction. A higher early induction of adjuvant chemotherapy is an advantage of minimally invasive surgery.

Anterior versus posterior radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy for pancreatic body and tail cancer: an inverse probability of treatment weighting with survival analysis

PURPOSE

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) is a standard procedure for patients with pancreatic body and tail cancer. There are two types of RAMPS: anterior and posterior, but their indications and surgical outcomes remain unclear. We compared the surgical outcomes, postoperative course, and prognosis between anterior and posterior RAMPS.

METHODS

Between 2007 and 2020, 105 consecutive patients who underwent RAMPS for pancreatic body and tail cancers were divided into an anterior RAMPS group (n = 30) and a posterior RAMPS group (n = 75). To adjust for differences in preoperative characteristics and intraoperative procedures, an inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis was done, using propensity scores.

RESULTS

After IPTW adjustment, the postoperative body temperature of the posterior RAMPS group and the amount of drain discharge in the anterior RAMPS group were significantly lower, from postoperative days (PODs) 1 to 3, but there were no differences in postoperative complications, recurrence patterns, or prognosis between the two groups. Regarding the diagnostic ability of multidetector-row computed tomography (MD-CT) for direct tumor involvement of the left adrenal gland, the sensitivity and specificity were 100% and 90.0%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Pancreatic body and tail cancer without apparent preoperative direct tumor involvement of the left adrenal gland on MD-CT may be sufficient indication for anterior RAMPS.

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS): does adrenalectomy alter outcomes?

BACKGROUND

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) has oncologic superiority compared to a standard distal pancreatectomy (DP). For tumors invading into the adrenal gland, a posterior RAMPS takes the left adrenal gland en bloc with the pancreas specimen. The aim of this analysis is to determine whether addition of adrenalectomy alters the outcomes of DP.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) Procedure-Targeted Pancreatectomy database was accessed from 2014 to 2019. Patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) undergoing posterior RAMPS were compared to patients having a standard DP. 30-day outcomes were analyzed using multivariable regression.

RESULTS

3467 PDAC patients underwent DP; 159 (4.6%) also had an adrenalectomy. Posterior RAMPS patients had higher T stage (T3-4 77% vs. 58%, p < 0.01). On multivariable analysis, posterior RAMPS patients had worse perioperative outcomes including more transfusions (OR 2.78, p < 0.01), serious morbidity (OR 1.45, p = 0.04), prolonged hospital stay (OR 1.36, p < 0.05), and less optimal pancreatic surgery (OR 0.61, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy with adrenalectomy (posterior RAMPS) is associated with worse perioperative outcomes compared to a standard distal pancreatectomy. Improved oncologic outcomes must be weighed against higher perioperative morbidity when selecting patients for this more extensive surgical resection.

Impact of spleen preservation on the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy: Is less more?

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains a major complication after distal pancreatectomy (DP) with a significant impact on patients' quality of life. There is limited evidence that preservation of the spleen reduces the risk of POPF. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the impact of splenectomy on perioperative outcome.

METHODS

Data from patients who underwent DP for malignant and benign disease at our institution between 2004 and 2021 were reviewed. Patients were grouped according to spleen preservation (SP-DP) and splenectomy (DPS). Intraoperative parameters and postoperative outcomes were compared between groups. Univariable and multivariable analyses were used to investigate factors that influence the occurrence of clinically relevant (cr)POPF.

RESULTS

A total of 199 patients were included, of whom 61 (30.7%) patients underwent SP-DP. Patients who underwent SP-DP had a significantly lower rate of crPOPF (p = 0.022), shorter hospital stay (p = 0.003), and less readmissions (p = 0.012). On multivariate analysis, obesity (OR 2.88, p = 0.021), benign lesions (OR 2.35, p = 0.018), postoperative acute pancreatitis (OR 2.53, p = 0.028), and splenectomy (OR 2.83, p = 0.011) were independent risk factors associated with the onset of crPOPF.

DISCUSSION

Preservation of the spleen reduces the risk of crPOPF in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy for benign and malignant disease.

The effect of minimally invasive or open radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy on pancreatic cancer: A multicenter randomized clinical trial protocol

Background

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) has been proven to improve R0 resection and lymph harvest in treating patients with distal pancreatic cancer. The development of minimally invasive surgery has advantages in postoperative recovery. Therefore, minimally invasive (MI-) RAMPS may combine the advantages of both benefits to improve survival. Nevertheless, evidence to validate the safety and efficacy of MI-RAMPS is limited.

Method/Design

The MIRROR trial will be the first multicenter prospective randomized clinical trial to investigate the outcome of MI-RAMPS. The hypothesis is that MI-RAMPS is superior in postoperative recovery. The primary outcome is the length of postoperative stay. Based on the hypothesis and primary outcome, the sample size is 250 patients (125 participants in each group). The trial will investigate factors related to surgical safety, short-term outcome, pathological assessment, and survival as secondary outcomes.

Conclusion

This study will offer a relatively higher level of evidence to further illustrate the accessibility and benefits of MI-RAMPS for the treatment of distal pancreatic cancer.

Clinical Trial Registration

Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03770559.

Current status and future perspectives of clinical research in pancreatic cancer: Establishment of evidence by science

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most aggressive diseases in the world due to a lack of early detection, leading to an overall 5-year survival of only 10%. In recent years, clinical trials targeted pancreatic cancer in efforts to improve survival. These studies introduce new technologies, concepts, and evidence which have instilled new optimism for improving prognosis. This review summarizes the current status of the recent (5-year) clinical trials and describes contemporary research on pancreatic cancer, including surgical technology, diagnostic skills, traditional chemoradiotherapy, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, immunotherapy, targeted therapy, and precision medicine. Then, the future trend and direction of clinical trials on pancreatic cancer are discussed.

Comparison of laparoscopic versus open radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy for pancreatic cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (l-RAMPS) provides a new surgical approach for patients with pancreatic cancers of the body and tail. However, whether it can achieve comparable outcomes to the open RAMPS (o-RAMPS) remains an issue.

METHODS

To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of l-RAMPS, the studies in the databases of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library published before September 13, 2021 were searched and a meta-analysis was performed using the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline. The perioperative and oncological outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Five retrospective cohorts involving 189 patients were included for final pooled analysis. There were no significant differences in the patients' operation time, intra-abdominal bleeding rate, intra-abdominal infection rate, mild morbidity (Clavien-Dindo classification = 1), moderate to severe morbidity (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥2), overall morbidity, wound infection rate, pancreatic fistula rate, delayed gastric emptying rate, reoperation rate, length of hospital stay, postoperative mortality, R0 resection rate, and 2-year overall survival between the 2 approaches. Besides, l-RAMPS was associated with less blood loss (mean difference (MD) = -232.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) = -316.93 to -148.46, P < 0.00001) and shorter days until oral feeding (MD = -0.79, 95% CI = -1.35 to -0.22, P = 0.006). However, the pooled analysis also indicated a significantly fewer lymph nodes dissected (MD = -3.01, 95% CI = -5.59 to -0.43, P = 0.02) in l-RAMPS approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Although l-RAMPS provides similar outcomes associated with benefits of minimal invasiveness compared to o-RAMPS, it harvested significantly fewer lymph nodes which might have potentially negative influence on the patients' long-term survival. L-RAMPS is still in the infancy stage and further investigation is needed to verify its feasibility.

Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy for Left-Sided Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma May Reduce the Local Recurrence Rate

INTRODUCTION

Although several clinical applications have reported the usefulness of the radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) procedure for left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, few studies have reported the advantages of RAMPS with respect to the local recurrence (LR) rate.

METHODS

As of 2018, 68 and 62 patients underwent RAMPS and standard retrograde pancreatosplenectomy (SRPS). The first recurrence and all subsequent recurrence sites observed on images during a follow-up period and/or chemotherapy. The clinical variables are collected retrospectively.

RESULTS

LR only was found in 5 patients in the RAMPS group (5/68, 7.3%) and in 15 patients in the SRPS group (15/62, 24.2%; p = 0.008) as the first recurrence site. Any chemotherapies were not a risk factor for the incidence of LR. The 5-year cumulative LR rate was significantly lower in patients in the RAMPS group compared with those in the SRPS group (23.6% vs. 49.6%; p = 0.019). The 5-year overall survival was 42.2% in the RAMPS group and 33.0% in the SRPS group (p = 0.251).

CONCLUSION

The RAMPS procedure for left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma may reduce the LR, cumulative LR rates.

Role and Efficacy of Robotic-assisted Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) in Left-sided Pancreatic Cancer

Distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy is the gold-standard surgery for the treatment of left-sided pancreatic cancer. Margin negative resection accompanied by effective lymphadenectomy are the deciding factors affecting the outcome of tail-body pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) is considered as a reasonable approach for margin-negative and systemic lymph node clearance. Herein, we aim to present all existing data regarding this novel approach including surgical technique and comparison with standardized procedures. RAMPS has shown oncological superiority comparing to distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy due to radical lymphadenectomy and improved dissection of the posterior pancreatic aspects. Robotic-assisted RAMPS has recently been described as a valuable alternative to open RAMPS. With this novel technique, anterior, posterior or modified approaches can be achieved; favorable clinical and oncological outcomes have been reported in the current literature, with reduced conversion rates compared to other minimally invasive approaches, as well as vastly improved maneuverability, accuracy and vision. Robotic-assisted RAMPS is not only technically feasible but also oncologically safe in cases of well-selected, left-sided pancreatic cancer.

Optimal Region of Lymph Node Dissection in Distal Pancreatectomy for Left-Sided Pancreatic Cancer Based on Tumor Location

BACKGROUND

The optimal lymph node (LN) dissection for left-sided pancreatic cancer based on tumor location has remained unknown. In particular, the efficacy of LN dissection around the common hepatic artery and the celiac axis for distal tumors has not been established. This study was designed to elucidate the frequency and prognostic impact of LN metastasis, focusing on tumor location.

METHODS

Data from 110 patients with invasive pancreatic cancer who underwent distal pancreatectomy between 2007 and 2020 were collected. We used a quantitative value-the distance between the left side of the portal vein and the right side of tumor (DPT)-to define the tumor location. LN stations were divided into two groups: peripancreatic lymph nodes (PLN) and non-PLN. We then analyzed the frequency of LN metastasis based on the tumor location and prognostic factors.

RESULTS

Non-PLN metastasis was observed in 7.3% of patients. Non-PLN metastasis was found only in patients with a DPT < 20 mm. Patients with non-PLN metastasis exhibited a significantly worse prognosis than those with only-PLN metastasis (median survival time: 20.3 vs. 42.5 months, p = 0.048). Multivariate analysis for survival indicated that tumor size > 4 cm (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.23, p = 0.012) and metastasis in the non-PLN region (HR: 3.02, p = 0.015), and inability to undergo adjuvant chemotherapy (HR: 2.81, p = 0.0018) were also associated with poor prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Dissection of the non-PLN region can be avoided in selected patients with DPT ≥ 20 mm.

International Expert Consensus on Precision Anatomy for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: PAM-HBP Surgery Project

BACKGROUND

Surgical views with high resolution and magnification have enabled us to recognize the precise anatomical structures that can be used as landmarks during minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP). This study aimed to validate the usefulness of anatomy-based approaches for MIDP before and during the Expert Consensus Meeting: Precision Anatomy for Minimally Invasive HBP Surgery (February 24, 2021).

METHODS

Twenty-five international MIDP experts developed clinical questions regarding surgical anatomy and approaches for MIDP. Studies identified via a comprehensive literature search were classified using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology. Online Delphi voting was conducted after experts had drafted the recommendations, with the goal of obtaining >75% consensus. Experts discussed the revised recommendations in front of the validation committee and an international audience of 384 attendees. Finalized recommendations were made after a second round of online Delphi voting.

RESULTS

Four clinical questions were addressed, resulting in 10 recommendations. All recommendations reached at least a 75% consensus among experts.

CONCLUSIONS

The expert consensus on precision anatomy for MIDP has been presented as a set of recommendations based on available evidence and expert opinions. These recommendations should guide experts and trainees in performing safe MIDP and foster its appropriate dissemination worldwide.

Current and emerging therapeutic strategies in pancreatic cancer: Challenges and opportunities

Pancreatic carcinoma (PC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Despite early detection and advances in therapeutics, the prognosis remains dismal. The outcome and therapeutic approach are dependent on the stage of PC at the time of diagnosis. The standard of care is surgery, followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. The advent of newer drugs has changed the landscape of adjuvant therapy. Moreover, recent trials have highlighted the role of neoadjuvant therapy and chemoradiotherapy for resectable and borderline resectable PC. As we progress towards a better understanding of tumor biology, genetics, and microenvironment, novel therapeutic strategies and targeted agents are now on the horizon. We have described the current and emerging therapeutic strategies in PC.

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) was introduced to improve the tangential resection margin rates and N1 node clearance following resection of malignancies of the pancreatic body and tail. Owing to its technical complexity, minimally invasive RAMPS (MI-RAMPS) has only been reported by a few centers worldwide. We performed this meta-analysis to compare both short- and long-term outcomes between open RAMPS (O-RAMPS) and minimally invasive RAMPS (MI-RAMPS).

METHODS

A systematic search of the electronic databases PubMed, Medline (via PubMed), Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, Scopus and Web of Science was performed to identify eligible studies published in the English language regardless of study design. The outcomes of interest were operation time, estimated blood loss, transfusion rates, overall complications, Grade B/C post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) rates, post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), length of stay (LOS), R0 resection rates, lymph node (LN) yield and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Five non-randomized studies comprising of a total 229 patients (89 MI-RAMPS, 140 O-RAMPS) were included for analysis. Intra-operative blood loss was observed to be significantly reduced in MI-RAMPS as compared to O-RAMPS (MD -256.16, P < 0.001), while LN yield was higher in O-RAMPS as compared to MI-RAMPS (MD -2.73, P = 0.02). There were no statistically significant differences observed for the other perioperative, oncologic and survival outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis provides early evidence to suggest that MI-RAMPS may produce comparable short- and long-term outcomes to O-RAMPS, when undertaken by appropriately skilled surgeons in well-selected patients. Further large-scale prospective studies are required to corroborate these findings.

Neoadjuvant Treatment Strategies in Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

Simple Summary

Only 10–20% of patients with newly diagnosed resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma have potentially resectable disease. Upfront surgery is the gold standard, but it is rarely curative. After surgical extirpation of tumors, up to 80% of patients will develop cancer recurrence, and the initial relapse is metastatic in 50–70% of these patients. Adjuvant chemotherapy offers the best strategy to date to improve overall survival but faces real challenges; some patients will experience rapid disease progression within 3 months of surgery and patients who do not receive all planned cycles of chemotherapy have unfavourable oncological outcomes. The neoadjuvant approach is therefore logical but requires further investigation. This approach shows favourable trends regarding disease-free survival and overall survival but, in the absence of rigorous published phase III trials, is not validated to date. Here, we intend to provide a comprehensive analysis of the literature to provide direction for future studies.

Abstract

Complete surgical resection is the cornerstone of curative therapy for resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Upfront surgery is the gold standard, but it is rarely curative. Neoadjuvant treatment is a logical option, as it may overcome some of the limitations of adjuvant therapy and has already shown some encouraging results. The main concern regarding neoadjuvant therapy is the risk of disease progression during chemotherapy, meaning the opportunity to undergo the intended curative surgery is missed. We reviewed all recent literature in the following areas: major surveys, retrospective studies, meta-analyses, and randomized trials. We then selected the ongoing trials that we believe are of interest in this field and report here the results of a comprehensive review of the literature. Meta-analyses and randomized trials suggest that neoadjuvant treatment has a positive effect. However, no study to date can be considered practice changing. We considered design, endpoints, inclusion criteria and results of available randomized trials. Neoadjuvant treatment appears to be at least a feasible strategy for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer.

ISOlation Procedure vs. conventional procedure during Distal Pancreatectomy (ISOP-DP trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) is an isolation procedure in pancreatosplenectomy for pancreatic body/tail cancer. Connective tissues around the bifurcation of the celiac axis are dissected, followed by median-to-left retroperitoneal dissection. This procedure has the potential to isolate blood and lymphatic flow to the area of the pancreatic body/tail and the spleen to be excised. This is achieved by division of the inflow artery, transection of the pancreas, and then division of the outflow vein in the early phases of surgery. In cases of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), the procedure has been shown to decrease intraoperative blood loss and increase R0 resection rate by complete clearance of the lymph nodes. This trial investigates whether the isolation procedure can prolong the survival of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who undergo distal pancreatosplenectomy (DPS) compared with those that undergo the conventional approach.

METHODS/DESIGN

Patients with PDAC scheduled to undergo DPS are randomized before surgery to undergo either a conventional procedure (arm A) or to undergo the isolation procedure (arm B). In arm A, the pancreatic body, tail, and spleen are mobilized, followed by removal of the regional lymph nodes. The splenic vein is transected at the end of the procedure. The timing of division of the splenic artery (SA) is not restricted. In arm B, regional lymph nodes are dissected, then we transect the root of the SA, the pancreas, then the splenic vein. At the end of the procedure, the pancreatic body/tail and spleen are mobilized and removed. In total, 100 patients from multiple Japanese high-volume centers will be randomized. The primary endpoint is 2-year recurrence-free survival by intention-to-treat analysis. Secondary endpoints include intraoperative blood loss, R0 resection rate, and overall survival.

DISCUSSION

If this trial shows that the isolation procedures can improve survival with a similar R0 rate and with a similar number of lymph node dissections to the conventional procedure, the isolation procedure is expected to become a standard procedure during DPS for PDAC. Conversely, if there were no significant differences in endpoints between the groups, it would demonstrate justification of either procedure from surgical and oncological points of view.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN Clinical Trials Registry UMIN000041381 . Registered on 10 August 2020. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04600063 . Registered on 22 October 2020.

Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (DIPLOMA): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Recently, the first randomized trials comparing minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) for non-malignant and malignant disease showed a 2-day reduction in time to functional recovery after MIDP. However, for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), concerns have been raised regarding the oncologic safety (i.e., radical resection, lymph node retrieval, and survival) of MIDP, as compared to ODP. Therefore, a randomized controlled trial comparing MIDP and ODP in PDAC regarding oncological safety is warranted. We hypothesize that the microscopically radical resection (R0) rate is non-inferior for MIDP, as compared to ODP.

Methods/design

DIPLOMA is an international randomized controlled, patient- and pathologist-blinded, non-inferiority trial performed in 38 pancreatic centers in Europe and the USA. A total of 258 patients with an indication for elective distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy because of proven or highly suspected PDAC of the pancreatic body or tail will be randomly allocated to MIDP (laparoscopic or robot-assisted) or ODP in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome is the microscopically radical resection margin (R0, distance tumor to pancreatic transection and posterior margin ≥ 1 mm), which is assessed using a standardized histopathology assessment protocol. The sample size is calculated with the following assumptions: 5% one-sided significance level (α), 80% power (1-β), expected R0 rate in the open group of 58%, expected R0 resection rate in the minimally invasive group of 67%, and a non-inferiority margin of 7%. Secondary outcomes include time to functional recovery, operative outcomes (e.g., blood loss, operative time, and conversion to open surgery), other histopathology findings (e.g., lymph node retrieval, perineural- and lymphovascular invasion), postoperative outcomes (e.g., clinically relevant complications, hospital stay, and administration of adjuvant treatment), time and site of disease recurrence, survival, quality of life, and costs. Follow-up will be performed at the outpatient clinic after 6, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months postoperatively.

Discussion

The DIPLOMA trial is designed to investigate the non-inferiority of MIDP versus ODP regarding the microscopically radical resection rate of PDAC in an international setting.

Trial registration

ISRCTN registry ISRCTN44897265. Prospectively registered on 16 April 2018.

Phase I Study of Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy Using Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel for Patients Who Have Localized Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma With Contact or Invasion to Major Arteries

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess the feasibility of preoperative chemoradiotherapy using gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) and to determine the recommended dose (RD) of nab-paclitaxel for patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

METHODS

The participants had localized PDAC with contact or invasion to major arteries. They received GnP on days 1, 15, 29, and 43. The dose of gemcitabine was fixed at 600 mg/m2, whereas that of nab-paclitaxel was at 3 dose levels in accordance with a standard 3 + 3 dose escalation scheme. Three-dimensional radiotherapy was administered concurrently to a total dose of 50.4 Gy per 28 fractions.

RESULTS

The study cohort comprised 15 patients. Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was observed in 4 (26.7%), leukopenia in 1 (6.7%), biliary infection in 2 (13.3%), appetite loss and nausea in 1 (6.7%), and anaphylaxis in 1 (6.7%). The RD was determined as level 2 (gemcitabine, 600 mg/m2; nab-paclitaxel, 100 mg/m2). Three patients underwent pancreatectomy after additional chemotherapy and achieved R0 resection.

CONCLUSIONS

The RD of nab-paclitaxel in our chemoradiotherapy protocol using GnP was 100 mg/m2 with gemcitabine 600 mg/m2 and 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy to a total dose of 50.4 Gy per 28 fractions for patients with localized PDAC.

AGITG MASTERPLAN: a randomised phase II study of modified FOLFIRINOX alone or in combination with stereotactic body radiotherapy for patients with high-risk and locally advanced pancreatic cancer

Background

Among patients with non-metastatic pancreatic cancer, 80% have high-risk, borderline resectable or locally advanced cancer, with a 5-year overall survival of 12%. MASTERPLAN evaluates the safety and activity of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in addition to chemotherapy in these patients.

Methods and design

MASTERPLAN is a multi-centre randomised phase II trial of 120 patients with histologically confirmed potentially operable pancreatic cancer (POPC) or inoperable pancreatic cancer (IPC). POPC includes patients with borderline resectable or high-risk tumours; IPC is defined as locally advanced or medically inoperable pancreatic cancer. Randomisation is 2:1 to chemotherapy + SBRT (investigational arm) or chemotherapy alone (control arm) by minimisation and stratified by patient cohort (POPC v IPC), planned induction chemotherapy and institution. Chemotherapy can have been commenced ≤28 days prior to randomisation. Both arms receive 6 × 2 weekly cycles of modified FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin (85 mg/m² IV), irinotecan (150 mg/m²), 5-fluorouracil (2400 mg/m² CIV), leucovorin (50 mg IV bolus)) plus SBRT in the investigational arm. Gemcitabine+nab-paclitaxel is permitted for patients unsuitable for mFOLFIRINOX. SBRT is 40Gy in five fractions with planning quality assurance to occur in real time. Following initial chemotherapy ± SBRT, resectability will be evaluated. For resected patients, adjuvant chemotherapy is six cycles of mFOLFIRINOX. Where gemcitabine+nab-paclitaxel was used initially, the adjuvant treatment is 12 weeks of gemcitabine and capecitabine or mFOLFIRINOX. Unresectable or medically inoperable patients with stable/responding disease will continue with a further six cycles of mFOLFIRINOX or three cycles of gemcitabine+nab-paclitaxel, whatever was used initially. The primary endpoint is 12-month locoregional control. Secondary endpoints are safety, surgical morbidity and mortality, radiological response rates, progression-free survival, pathological response rates, surgical resection rates, R0 resection rate, quality of life, deterioration-free survival and overall survival. Tertiary/correlative objectives are radiological measures of nutrition and sarcopenia, and serial tissue, blood and microbiome samples to be assessed for associations between clinical endpoints and potential predictive/prognostic biomarkers. Interim analysis will review rates of locoregional recurrence, distant failure and death after 40 patients complete 12 months follow-up. Fifteen Australian and New Zealand sites will recruit over a 4-year period, with minimum follow-up period of 12 months.

Discussion

MASTERPLAN evaluates SBRT in both resectable and unresectable patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Trial registration

Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12619000409178, 13/03/2019.

Protocol version: 2.0, 19 May 2019

Surgical and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic versus open radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

To compare the outcomes of laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (L-RAMPS) with those of open RAMPS (O-RAMPS) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

METHODS

We reviewed, retrospectively, the medical records of 50 patients who underwent RAMPS for PDAC without resection of major vessels and adjacent organs between 2007 and 2019, and analyzed the relationship between the operative method and surgical and oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

Nineteen of the 50 patients underwent L-RAMPS and 31 patients underwent O-RAMPS. L-RAMPS was associated with significantly less blood loss (P = 0.034) but a longer operative time (P = 0.001) than O-RAMPS. There were no significant differences in patient characteristics, tumor factors, or postoperative course; or in the rates of recurrence-free survival (P = 0.084) or overall survival (P = 0.402) between the L-RAMPS and O-RAMPS groups.

CONCLUSION

L-RAMPS for PDAC resulted in less blood loss but a longer operative time than O-RAMPS. Although L-RAMPS may be feasible, the operative time needs to be reduced by standardizing the procedure.

A systematic scoping review of the initial experience with laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy for pancreatic malignancy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (L-RAMPS) is a validated surgical approach for the surgical treatment of pancreatic malignancies of the body and tail of the pancreas. Open (O-) RAMPS is an established technique that offers oncological efficacy and acceptable post-operative outcomes when compared to standard distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic malignancies. This review aimed to determine the types of evidence available for L-RAMPS, and its selection criteria and reported outcomes, using systematic scoping review methodology.

METHODS

A systematic review of available literature was performed in September 2020. Data extracted included patient selection criteria, technical details, total number of L-RAMPS procedures performed, lymph nodes retrieved, resection margins, survival, LOS and complications.

RESULTS

Eight papers were eligible for inclusion, totalling 92 cases. There were no studies that directly compared O- to L-RAMPS. All reports were small retrospective cohorts with 3-30 patients. Selection criteria were reported in 4/8 studies and differed between studies. Technique descriptions were included in 6/8 studies. Studies reported a median of 5 (range 1-9) out of ten operative and clinical outcomes, including operative time median range 188-431 min, intraoperative blood loss median range 18-445 mL, R0 resection rate median range 91-100%, number of lymph nodes median range 11-43, and length of stay median range 12-20 days.

CONCLUSIONS

L-RAMPS is infrequently reported in the literature. There are currently no data to allow for direct comparison of O- and L-RAMPS. Reports of L-RAMPS have an acceptable oncological and safety profile. A standardised description of the operative technique and outcome reporting, as well as specific training initiatives may be beneficial to broaden the application of L-RAMPS.

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) versus conventional distal pancreatectomy for left-sided pancreatic cancer: findings of a multicenter, retrospective, propensity score matching study

PURPOSE

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) has been reported to achieve high rates of a negative margin and resected metastatic lymph nodes. However, many studies have used historical controls and the results remain controversial. We conducted this study to compare the surgical and long-term outcomes of RAMPS vs. conventional distal pancreatectomy (DP).

METHODS

The subjects of this multicenter retrospective study were 106 patients who underwent curative resection for left-sided pancreatic cancer between 2012 and 2017. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were compared using Kaplan-Meier estimates.

RESULTS

The RAMPS group had more advanced T (T3/T4) and N stages (N1/N2) and a larger tumor size than the conventional group (T stage, p = 0.04; N stage, p = 0.02; tumor size, p = 0.04). The RAMPS group had more harvested metastatic lymph nodes (p = 0.02). After propensity-score matching, 37 patients from each group were included in the final analysis. There was no significant difference in RFS (p = 0.463) or OS (p = 0.383) between the groups. Multivariate analyses revealed the completion of chemotherapy to be an independent factor for RFS and OS (both p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no difference in the RFS or OS between RAMPS and conventional DP in this series. RAMPS may be an option for R0 resection of advanced tumors; however, postoperative chemotherapy has a greater influence than the surgical procedure on the prognosis of patients with pancreatic cancer.

The standardized technique in robotic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy using the flip-up approach

PURPOSE

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) was first introduced in 2003. It has been accepted as an alternative technique for pancreatic cancer of the body and tail. However, robotic RAMPS is not yet popular because of its technical difficulty and lack of standardized technique. This study describes in detail the standard steps of robotic RAMPS using the flip-up approach with the benefit of a robotic view when treating pancreatic cancer of the body and tail.

METHOD

We took advantage of our single-center experience to provide a step-by-step technique of robotic RAMPS procedure using the da Vinci Si system.

RESULTS

We divided the procedure into 11 key steps. The surgical steps are optimized to achieve margin-negative curative resection and sufficient regional lymphadenectomy. The artery-first approach is usually used to determine tumor resectability early before performing an irreversible operative step. We also determine the borders of surgical resection and divide the splenic artery after dividing the pancreatic neck and the splenic vein, which facilitates a complete lymphadenectomy around the celiac axis with a bottom-up view.

CONCLUSION

Robotic RAMPS using the flip-up approach is safe and feasible in performing curative resection for well-selected pancreatic cancer of the body and tail. A randomized controlled trial comparing open and robotic RAMPS is needed in the future.

Laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy: preliminary experience with 10 cases

BACKGROUND

The radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) which is a reasonable surgical approach for left-sided pancreatic cancer is emphasis on the complete resection of regional lymph nodes and tumor-free margin resection. Laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (LRAMPS) has been rarely performed, with only 49 cases indexed on PubMed. In this study, we present our experience of LRAMPS.

METHODS

From December 2018 to February 2020, 10 patients underwent LRAMPS for pancreatic cancer at our department. The data of the patient demographics, intraoperative variables, postoperative hospital stay, morbidity, mortality, pathologic findings and follow-up were collected.

RESULTS

LRAMPS was performed successfully in all the patients. The median operative time was 235 min (range 212-270 min), with an EBL of 120 ml (range 100-200 ml). Postoperative complications occurred in 5 (50.0%) patients. Three patients developed a grade B pancreatic fistula. There was no postoperative 30-day mortality and reoperation. The median postoperative hospital stay was 14 days (range 9-24 days).The median count of retrieved lymph nodes was 15 (range 13-21), and four patients (40%) had malignant-positive lymph nodes. All cases achieved a negative tangential margin and R0 resection. Median follow-up time was 11 months (range 3-14 m). Two patients developed disease recurrence (pancreatic bed recurrence and liver metastasis) 9 months, 10 months after surgery, respectively. Others survived without tumor recurrence or metastasis.

CONCLUSIONS

LRAMPS is technically safe and feasible procedure in well-selected patients with pancreatic cancer in the distal pancreas. The oncologically outcomes need to be further validated based on additional large-volume studies.

Surgical approaches for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) was initially performed for benign tumors, but recently its indications have steadily broadened to encompass other conditions including pancreatic malignancies. Thorough anatomical knowledge is mandatory for precise surgery in the era of minimally invasive surgery. However, expert consensus regarding anatomical landmarks to facilitate the safe performance of MIDP is still lacking.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using keywords to identify articles regarding the vascular anatomy and surgical approaches/techniques for MIDP.

RESULTS

All of the systematic reviews revealed that MIDP was not associated with an increase in postoperative complications. Moreover, most showed that MIDP resulted in less blood loss than open surgery. Regarding surgical approaches for MIDP, a standardized stepwise procedure improved surgical outcomes, including blood loss, operative time, and major complications. There are two approaches to the splenic vessels, superior and inferior; however, no study has ever directly compared them with respect to clinical outcomes. The morphology of the splenic artery affects the difficulty of approaching the artery's root. To select an appropriate dissecting layer when performing posterior resection, thorough knowledge of the anatomy of the fascia, left renal vein/artery, and left adrenal gland is needed.

CONCLUSIONS

In MIDP, a standardized approach and precise knowledge of anatomy facilitates safe surgery and has the advantage of a shorter learning curve. Anatomical features and landmarks are particularly important in cases of radical MIDP and splenic vessel preserving MIDP.

Laparoscopic versus open extended radical left pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: an international propensity-score matched study

BACKGROUND

A radical left pancreatectomy in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) may require extended, multivisceral resections. The role of a laparoscopic approach in extended radical left pancreatectomy (ERLP) is unclear since comparative studies are lacking. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes after laparoscopic vs open ERLP in patients with PDAC.

METHODS

An international multicenter propensity-score matched study including patients who underwent either laparoscopic or open ERLP (L-ERLP; O-ERLP) for PDAC was performed (2007-2015). The ISGPS definition for extended resection was used. Primary outcomes were overall survival, margin negative rate (R0), and lymph node retrieval.

RESULTS

Between 2007 and 2015, 320 patients underwent ERLP in 34 centers from 12 countries (65 L-ERLP vs. 255 O-ERLP). After propensity-score matching, 44 L-ERLP could be matched to 44 O-ERLP. In the matched cohort, the conversion rate in L-ERLP group was 35%. The L-ERLP R0 resection rate (matched cohort) was comparable to O-ERLP (67% vs 48%; P = 0.063) but the lymph node yield was lower for L-ERLP than O-ERLP (median 11 vs 19, P = 0.023). L-ERLP was associated with less delayed gastric emptying (0% vs 16%, P = 0.006) and shorter hospital stay (median 9 vs 13 days, P = 0.005), as compared to O-ERLP. Outcomes were comparable for additional organ resections, vascular resections (besides splenic vessels), Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III complications, or 90-day mortality (2% vs 2%, P = 0.973). The median overall survival was comparable between both groups (19 vs 20 months, P = 0.571). Conversion did not worsen outcomes in L-ERLP.

CONCLUSION

The laparoscopic approach may be used safely in selected patients requiring ERLP for PDAC, since morbidity, mortality, and overall survival seem comparable, as compared to O-ERLP. L-ERLP is associated with a high conversion rate and reduced lymph node yield but also with less delayed gastric emptying and a shorter hospital stay, as compared to O-ERLP.

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) versus conventional distal pancreatosplenectomy (CDPS) for left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

The insufficient clearance of regional lymph nodes and unsatisfactory R0 resection rate may result in the metastasis of left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) after conventional distal pancreatosplenectomy (CDPS). Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) was designed to achieve R0 resection more successfully with better lymph-node clearance; however, there is still insufficient evidence of its short- and long-term results to confirm its superiority. We conducted this study to compare the efficiency of these two procedures.

METHODS

The subjects of this retrospective analysis were 103 patients with left-sided PDAC who underwent either RAMPS (n = 46) or CDPS (n = 57). We assessed perioperative data and surgical information and used univariate and multivariate analyses to identify prognostic factors for survival.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in baseline data between the groups. RAMPS was associated with a significantly shorter hospital stay (12.11 days vs. 22.98 days; P < 0.001), and significantly less blood loss (451.09 ml vs. 764.04 ml, P = 0.002), as well as a significantly lower rate of blood transfusion (15.22% vs. 33.33%, P = 0.035). RAMPS and CDPS had comparable perioperative complication rates. Moreover, RAMPS achieved more effective lymph-node retrieval (17.87 vs. 10.23; P < 0.001). The RAMPS group had a higher overall survival (OS) rate (28.73 months vs. 18.30 months; P = 0.003) and a higher disease-free survival (DFS) rate (21.97 months vs. 9.40 months; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

RAMPS achieved better survival and surgical outcomes than CDPS for patients with left-sided PDAC.

Irrigation and passive drainage of pancreatic stump after distal pancreatectomy in high-risk patients: an innovative approach to reduce pancreatic fistula

INTRODUCTION

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) represents the most common form of morbidity after distal pancreatectomy (DP). The aim of this study was to illustrate an innovative technique of irrigation and passive drainage to reduce clinically relevant POPF (CR-POPF) incidence in high-risk patients undergoing DP.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twelve consecutive high-risk patients received irrigation and passive drainage of the pancreatic stump with a Salem sump drainage after DP. The Salem sump was irrigated with 100 ml/h of Ringer solution for 2 postoperative days (POD). In the case of low-drain amylase and lipase levels on POD 3, the irrigation was reduced to 50 ml/h. Persistence of low-drain pancreatic enzymes on POD 4 allowed for interruption of irrigation and subsequent removal of drainage from POD 7 onward in the absence of evidence of any pancreatic fistula.

RESULTS

Overall, 16.6% of the patients experienced a grade 3 or higher surgical complication. We experienced only one case of POPF: the fistula was classified as grade B and it was managed with radiologic drainage of the fluid collection. We did not experience any case of re-operation nor in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Irrigation with passive drainage of the pancreatic stump after DP is an interesting approach for CR-POPF prevention in high-risk patients.

Left-posterior approach for artery-first en bloc resection in laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for left-sided pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

We describe a "left-posterior approach" in which the important steps in laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) for left-sided pancreatic cancer are accomplished in the direction caudal and dorsal to the pancreas.

METHODS

The patients who underwent LDP with a left-posterior approach at our hospital from January 2016 to April 2020 were reviewed to evaluate the short-term postoperative outcomes. In LDP, we first dissected retroperitoneal tissues above the left renal vein and superior mesenteric artery, yielding the mobilization of the pancreatic body widely. Then, the splenic artery was divided behind the ventrally lifted pancreas as an artery-first approach. The regional lymphadenectomy was performed in an en bloc manner consecutively in the same operative field. The neck of the pancreas was transected with a linear stapler after mobilization of the spleen.

RESULTS

In nine patients (five men and four women) aged 76 years (range: 64-82 years), the operative time was 398 min (276-482 min) with the estimated blood loss of 40 ml (0-80 ml). No patients developed grade B/C pancreatic fistula or delayed gastric emptying. Postoperative complications classified as grade III in the Clavien-Dindo classification occurred in one patient (abdominal abscess). The pathology confirmed R0 resection in all patients who had pancreatic cancer (n = 5), IPMNs (n = 3), and high-grade pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN) (n = 1). The number of retrieved lymph nodes was 35 (11-49).

CONCLUSION

The procedure with a left-posterior approach is a rational surgical technique in LDP for left-sided pancreatic cancer.

Combining Appleby with RAMPS - Laparoscopic Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy with Celiac Trunk Resection

BACKGROUND

Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) minimizes the risk of a positive retroperitoneal margin and maximizes lymph node harvest in distal pancreatic cancers.1-7 In those with celiac trunk involvement, resection of the celiac trunk (modified Appleby procedure) is a surgical option in which postoperative liver perfusion relies on blood flow via superior mesenteric artery (SMA) and gastroduodenal artery (GDA).8, 9 PATIENT: A 66-year-old male was diagnosed with a 3.8 × 2.5 cm pancreatic body adenocarcinoma abutting the celiac trunk. Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX was initiated with a uniquely good response.

TECHNIQUE

Prior to surgery, a novel preoperative 3D simulation technique accounting for organ displacement during pneumoperitoneum with the goal of optimizing port placement and surgical decision making was employed. At surgery, a RAMPS procedure was performed with the renal vessels and adrenal gland being dissected first (reversed from typical open approach). Following dissection along the SMA towards the celiac axis, desmoplastic reaction enveloping the celiac trunk necessitated its resection. Arterial liver perfusion was confirmed with intraoperative ultrasound.

CONCLUSION

L-RAMPS and modified Appleby procedure is a curative option for patients with distal pancreatic cancers that invade the celiac trunk and in whom the tumor biology is well controlled. A preplanned approach with 3D reconstruction accounting for organ displacement due to pneumoperitoneum optimizes surgical decision making and port placement for visual alignment caudally along the SMA.

Comparison of minimal invasive versus open radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a single center retrospective study

INTRODUCTION

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) was proposed a decade ago with the aim to achieve higher R0 tangential margin and radical N1 lymph node resection for left-sided pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC), which has been widely accepted worldwide at present. Laparoscopic RAMPS (Lap-RAMPS) has been attempted for PDAC during last several years, however, no outcomes evaluation by comparison between laparoscopic vs open RAMPS has been reported yet.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From August, 2012 to March, 2018, patients undergoing open or lap-RAMPS for the diagnosis of left-sided PDAC were reviewed from a prospective database. Patients excluded if they were related with combined organs or vessels resection, systematic metastasis as well as conversion from open RAMPS to lap RAMPS. The surgical and oncologic outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 48 PDAC patients were enrolled (25 underwent lap-RAMPS and 23 underwent open-RAMPS). There were no significant differences in demographic or perioperative morbidity. In the lap-RAMPS group, R0 transection margin and retroperitoneal margin were both achieved in 23 of 25 patients (92%). In the open RAMPS group, R0 transection margin was achieved in 21 of 23 patients (91.3%), R0 retroperitoneal margin was 22 of 23 patients (95.65%). There were no differences in pathological examinations. The number of lymph node (LN) retrieved between lap-RAMPS and open- RAMPS group was not significant difference (15.84 vs 18.22; P = 0.268). Median disease-free survival (DFS) was analogous in two groups (18.11 m vs 20.00 m, P = 0.999). Median overall survival (OS) was 24.53 m in lap-RAMPS group and 28.73 m in the open-RAMPS group (P = 0.633).

CONCLUSIONS

Lap-RAMPS is technically feasible, and has comparable long-term oncological outcome with open-RMAPS.