Effect of centralization and regionalization of pancreatic surgery on resection rates and survival

Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment, Treatment Decisions, and Outcomes in Older Patients Eligible for Pancreatic Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Periampullary cancer has a poor prognosis. Surgical resection is a potentially curative but high-risk treatment. Comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) can inform treatment decisions, but has not yet been evaluated in older patients eligible for pancreatic surgery.

METHODS

This prospective observational study included patients ≥ 70 years of age eligible for pancreatic surgery. Frailty was defined as impairment in at least two of five domains: somatic, psychological, functional, nutritional, and social. Outcomes included postoperative complications, functional decline, and mortality.

RESULTS

Of the 88 patients included, 87 had a complete CGA. Sixty-five patients (75%) were frail and 22 (25%) were non-frail. Frail patients were more likely to receive nonsurgical treatment (43.1% vs. 9.1% p = 0.004). Fifty-seven patients underwent surgery, of which 52 (59%) underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy. The incidence of postoperative delirium was three times higher in frail patients (29.7% vs. 0%, p = 0.005). The risk of mortality was three times higher in frail patients (HR: 3.36, 95% CI: 1.43-7.89, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

Frailty is common in older patients eligible for pancreatic surgery and is associated with treatment decision, a higher incidence of delirium and a three times higher risk of all-cause mortality. CGA can contribute to shared decision-making and optimize perioperative care in older patients.

Analysis of Recent Improvement of Survival Outcomes in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer Who Underwent Upfront Surgery

Background/Aims

: Recently, patients with pancreatic cancer (PC) who underwent resection have exhibited improved survival outcomes, but comprehensive analysis is limited. We analyzed the trends of contributing factors.

Methods

: Data of patients with resected PC were retrospectively collected from the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA) database and separately at our institution. Cox regression analysis was conducted with the data from our institution a survival prediction score was calculated using the β coefficients.

Results

: Comparison between the periods 2013-2015 (n=3,255) and 2016-2018 (n=3,698) revealed a difference in the median overall survival (25.9 months vs not reached, p<0.001) when analyzed with the HIRA database which was similar to our single-center data (2013-2015 [n=119] vs 2016-2018 [n=148], 20.9 months vs 32.2 months, p=0.003). Multivariable analyses revealed six factors significantly associated with better OS, and the scores were as follows: age >70 years, 1; elevated carbohydrate antigen 19-9 at diagnosis, 1; R1 resection, 1; stage N1 and N2, 1 and 3, respectively; no adjuvant treatment, 2; FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel after recurrence, 4; and other chemotherapy or supportive care only after recurrence, 5. The rate of R0 resection (69.7% vs 80.4%), use of adjuvant treatment (63.0% vs 74.3%), and utilization of FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (25.2% vs 47.3%) as palliative chemotherapeutic regimen, all increased between the two time periods, resulting in decreased total survival prediction score (mean: 7.32 vs 6.18, p=0.004).

Conclusions

: Strict selection of surgical candidates, more use of adjuvant treatment, and adoption of the latest combination regimens for palliative chemotherapy after recurrence were identified as factors of recent improvement.

Towards Equal Access to Cytoreductive Surgery with Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy and Survival in Patients with Isolated Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases: A Nationwide Population-Based Study

BACKGROUND

Before 2016, patients with isolated synchronous colorectal peritoneal metastases (PMCRC) diagnosed in expert centers had a higher odds of undergoing cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) and better overall survival (OS) than those diagnosed in referring centers. Nationwide efforts were initiated to increase awareness and improve referral networks.

METHODS

This nationwide study aimed to evaluate whether the between-center differences in odds of undergoing CRS-HIPEC and OS have reduced since these national efforts were initiated. All patients with isolated synchronous PMCRC diagnosed between 2009 and 2021 were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Associations between hospital of diagnosis and the odds of undergoing CRS-HIPEC, as well as OS, were assessed using multilevel multivariable regression analyses for two periods (2009-2015 and 2016-2021).

RESULTS

In total, 3948 patients were included. The percentage of patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC increased from 17.2% in 2009-2015 (25.4% in expert centers, 16.5% in referring centers), to 23.4% in 2016-2021 (30.2% in expert centers, 22.6% in referring centers). In 2009-2015, compared with diagnosis in a referring center, diagnosis in a HIPEC center showed a higher odds of undergoing CRS-HIPEC (odds ratio [OR] 1.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-2.67) and better survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.80, 95% CI 0.66-0.96). In 2016-2021, there were no differences in the odds of undergoing CRS-HIPEC between patients diagnosed in HIPEC centers versus referring centers (OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.76-2.13) and survival (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.76-1.32).

CONCLUSION

Previously observed differences in odds of undergoing CRS-HIPEC were no longer present. Increased awareness and the harmonization of treatment for PMCRC may have contributed to equal access to care and a similar chance of survival at a national level.

Effect of Hospital Cancer Designation on use of Multimodal Therapy and Survival of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A State-Wide Analysis

BACKGROUND

Stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) often requires multidisciplinary approach. However, multimodal treatment options (receipt of > 1 type of treatment) may not be uniformly delivered across health systems. We characterized the association between center-level cancer center designation and receipt of multimodal treatment and survival.

METHODS

The Texas Cancer Registry was used to identify patients diagnosed with stage IV CRC from 2004-2017. We identified those who received care at either: a National Cancer Institute-designated (NCI-D), an American College of Surgeons-Commission on Cancer-designated (ACS-D), or an undesignated facility. We used multivariable logistic regression and Cox regression for analysis to assess receipt of one or more treatment modality and 5-year overall survival.

RESULTS

Of 19,355 patients with stage IV CRC, 2955 (15%) received care at an NCI-D facility and 5871 (30%) received multimodal therapy. Both NCI-D (odds ratio [OR] 1.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.49-1.81) and ACS-D (OR 1.37; 95% CI 1.27-1.48) were associated with increased likelihood of multimodal therapy compared with undesignated centers. NCI-D also was associated with significantly improved survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.74; 95% CI 0.70-0.78), although ACS-D was associated with a modest improvement in survival (HR 0.95; 95% CI 0.92-0.99). Receipt of multimodal therapy was strongly associated with improved survival (HR 0.61; 95% CI 0.59-0.63).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with stage IV CRC, treatment at ACS-D and NCI-D facilities was associated with increased use of multimodality therapy and improved survival. However, only a small proportion of patients have access to these specialized centers, highlighting a need for expanded access to multimodal therapies at other centers.

Short-term Outcomes of Robotic Versus Open Pancreatoduodenectomy: Propensity Score-matched Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The goal of the current study was to investigate the perioperative outcomes of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) in a high-volume center.

BACKGROUND

Despite RPDs prospective advantages over OPD, current evidence comparing the 2 has been limited and has prompted further investigation. The aim of this study was to compare both approaches while including the learning curve phase for RPD.

METHODS

A 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis of a prospective database of RPD with OPD (2017-2022) at a high-volume center was performed. The main outcomes were overall- and pancreas-specific complications.

RESULTS

Of 375 patients who underwent PD (OPD n=276; RPD n=99), 180 were included in propensity score-matched analysis (90 per group). RPD was associated with less blood loss [500 (300-800) vs 750 (400-1000) mL; P =0.006] and more patients without a complication (50% vs 19%; P <0.001). Operative time was longer [453 (408-529) vs 306 (247-362) min; P <0.001]; in patients with ductal adenocarcinoma, fewer lymph nodes were harvested [24 (18-27) vs 33 (27-39); P <0.001] with RPD versus OPD. There were no significant differences for major complications (38% vs 47%; P =0.291), reoperation rate (14% vs 10%; P =0.495), postoperative pancreatic fistula (21% vs 23%; P =0.858), and patients with the textbook outcome (62% vs 55%; P =0.452).

CONCLUSIONS

Including the learning phase, RPD can be safely implemented in high-volume settings and shows potential for improved perioperative outcomes versus OPD. Pancreas-specific morbidity was unaffected by the robotic approach. Randomized trials with specifically trained pancreatic surgeons and expanded indications for the robotic approach are needed.

Nationwide evaluation of pancreatic cancer networks ten years after the centralization of pancreatic surgery

BACKGROUND

Due to centralization of pancreatic surgery, patients with pancreatic cancer are treated in pancreatic cancer networks, composed of referring hospitals (Spokes) and an expert center (Hub). This study aimed to investigate I) how pancreatic cancer networks are organized and II) evaluated by involved clinicians.

METHODS

Two online surveys were sent out between January-May 2022. Part I was sent out to the surgical network directors of all hospitals of the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group (DPCG). Part II was sent out to all involved clinicians in the Hubs-and-Spokes networks.

RESULTS

There was a large variety between the 15 networks concerning number of affiliated Spokes (1-7), annual pancreatoduodenectomies (20-129), and use of a service level agreement (SLA) (40%). More Spoke clinicians considered the Spoke the best location for diagnostic workup (74% vs 36%, P < 0.001). Only 30% of Spoke clinicians attended the Hubs multidisciplinary team meeting frequently. More Hub clinicians thought that exchange of patient information should be improved (37% vs 51%, P = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

A large variety in Dutch pancreatic cancer networks was observed concerning number of affiliated Spokes, use of SLAs, and logistic aspects of network care. Improvement of network care concern agreements on diagnostic workup, use of SLA, Spoke participation in the MDT, and patient information exchange.

Population-based impact of COVID-19 on incidence, treatment, and survival of patients with pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has put substantial strain on the healthcare system of which the effects are only partly elucidated. This study aimed to investigate the impact on pancreatic cancer care.

METHODS

All patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer between 2017 and 2020 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients diagnosed and/or treated in 2020 were compared to 2017-2019. Monthly incidence was calculated. Patient, tumor and treatment characteristics were analyzed and compared using Chi-squared tests. Survival data was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and Log-rank tests.

RESULTS

In total, 11019 patients were assessed. The incidence in quarter (Q)2 of 2020 was comparable with that in Q2 of 2017-2019 (p = 0.804). However, the incidence increased in Q4 of 2020 (p = 0.031), mainly due to a higher incidence of metastatic disease (p = 0.010). Baseline characteristics, surgical resection (15% vs 16%; p = 0.466) and palliative systemic therapy rates (23% vs 24%; p = 0.183) were comparable. In 2020, more surgically treated patients received (neo)adjuvant treatment compared to 2017-2019 (73% vs 67%; p = 0.041). Median overall survival was comparable (3.8 vs 3.8 months; p = 0.065).

CONCLUSION

This nationwide study found a minor impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pancreatic cancer care and outcome. The Dutch health care system was apparently able to maintain essential care for patients with pancreatic cancer.

Implications of the interaction between travel burden and area deprivation for patients with pancreatic cancer

INTRODUCTION

Fragmentation of care and distance traveled are classically surrogates for poor access to care, but little is known about how social determinants of health interact with travel burden to affect survival for patients with pancreatic cancer (PC). We sought to characterize the individual and composite impact of these factors.

METHODS

20769 patients treated for PC between 2005 and 2019 in the Texas Cancer Registry were included. The Area Deprivation Index and Poverty Index were used to quantify social determinants of health. Survival analyses were performed at 2 years as well as subgroup analysis on patients with the greatest travel burden.

RESULTS

Improved survival was associated with FC (HR 0.74, CI 0.71-0.77) and distance from an accredited cancer center (Quartile 4 HR 0.90, CI 0.81-1.00). High ADI led to worse outcomes while low ADI led to improved outcomes with increasing travel burden.

CONCLUSIONS

This data shows a complex relationship between travel burden and survival for patients with pancreatic cancer where stratifying by area deprivation reveals divergent outcomes and the potential to exacerbate disparities.

Fistula Risk Score for Auditing Pancreatoduodenectomy: The Auditing-FRS

OBJECTIVE

To develop a fistula risk score for auditing, to be able to compare postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreatoduodenectomy among hospitals.

BACKGROUND

For proper comparisons of outcomes in surgical audits, case-mix variation should be accounted for.

METHODS

This study included consecutive patients after pancreatoduodenectomy from the mandatory nationwide Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. Derivation of the score was performed with the data from 2014 to 2018 and validation with 2019 to 2020 data. The primary endpoint of the study was POPF (grade B or C). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed for case-mix adjustment of known risk factors.

RESULTS

In the derivation cohort, 3271 patients were included, of whom 479 (14.6%) developed POPF. Male sex [odds ratio (OR)=1.34; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.09-1.66], higher body mass index (OR=1.07; 95% CI: 1.05-1.10), a final diagnosis other than pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma/pancreatitis (OR=2.41; 95% CI: 1.90-3.06), and a smaller duct diameter (OR=1.43/mm decrease; 95% CI: 1.32-1.55) were independently associated with POPF. Diabetes mellitus (OR=0.73; 95% CI: 0.55-0.98) was independently associated with a decreased risk of POPF. Model discrimination was good with a C -statistic of 0.73 in the derivation cohort and 0.75 in the validation cohort (n=913). Hospitals differed in particular in the proportion of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma/pancreatitis patients, ranging from 36.0% to 58.1%. The observed POPF risk per center ranged from 2.9% to 25.4%. The expected POPF rate based on the 5 risk factors ranged from 11.6% to 18.0% among hospitals.

CONCLUSIONS

The auditing fistula risk score was successful in case-mix adjustment and enables fair comparisons of POPF rates among hospitals.

Nationwide Impact of Centralization, Neoadjuvant Therapy, Minimally Invasive Surgery, and Standardized Pathology Reporting on R0 Resection and Overall Survival in Pancreatoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

Surgeons aim for R0 resection in patients with pancreatic cancer to improve overall survival. However, it is unclear whether recent changes in pancreatic cancer care such as centralization, increased use of neoadjuvant therapy, minimally invasive surgery, and standardized pathology reporting have influenced R0 resections and whether R0 resection remains associated with overall survival.

METHODS

This nationwide retrospective cohort study included consecutive patients after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) for pancreatic cancer from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and the Dutch Nationwide Pathology Database (2009-2019). R0 resection was defined as > 1 mm tumor clearance at the pancreatic, posterior, and vascular resection margins. Completeness of pathology reporting was scored on the basis of six elements: histological diagnosis, tumor origin, radicality, tumor size, extent of invasion, and lymph node examination.

RESULTS

Among 2955 patients after PD for pancreatic cancer, the R0 resection rate was 49%. The R0 resection rate decreased from 68 to 43% (2009-2019, P < 0.001). The extent of resections in high-volume hospitals, minimally invasive surgery, neoadjuvant therapy, and complete pathology reports all significantly increased over time. Only complete pathology reporting was independently associated with lower R0 rates (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.69-0.83, P < 0.001). Higher hospital volume, neoadjuvant therapy, and minimally invasive surgery were not associated with R0. R0 resection remained independently associated with improved overall survival (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.66-0.79, P < 0.001), as well as in the 214 patients after neoadjuvant treatment (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.42-0.87, P = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

The nationwide rate of R0 resections after PD for pancreatic cancer decreased over time, mostly related to more complete pathology reporting. R0 resection remained associated with overall survival.

Oncological outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in octogenarians: case-control study

BACKGROUND

By the end of this decade, 70 per cent of all diagnosed pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas will be in the elderly. Surgical resection is the only curative option. In the elderly perioperative mortality is higher, while controversy still exists as to whether aggressive treatment offers any survival benefit. This study aimed to assess the oncological benefit of pancreatoduodenectomy in octogenarians with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

METHOD

Retrospective multicentre case-control study of octogenarians and younger controls who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma between 2008 and 2017. The primary endpoint was overall survival and the secondary endpoint was disease-free survival.

RESULTS

Overall, 220 patients were included. Although the Charlson co-morbidity index was higher in octogenerians, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, ASA and pathological parameters were comparable. Adjuvant therapy was more frequently delivered in the younger group (n = 80, 73 per cent versus n = 58, 53 per cent, P = 0.006). There was no significant difference between octogenarians and controls in overall survival (20 versus 29 months, P = 0.095) or disease-free survival (19 versus 22 months, P = 0.742). On multivariable analysis, age was not an independent predictor of either oncological outcome measured.

CONCLUSION

Octogenarians with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma of the head and uncinate process may benefit from comparable oncological outcomes to younger patients with surgical treatment. Due to the age- and disease-related frailty and co-morbidities, careful preoperative assessment and patient selection is of paramount importance.

Hospital Designations and Their Impact on Guideline-Concordant Care and Survival in Pancreatic Cancer. Do They Matter?

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) requires complex multidisciplinary care. European evidence suggests potential benefit from regionalization, however, data characterizing the ideal setting in the United States are sparse. Our study compares the significance of four hospital designations on guideline-concordant care (GCC) and overall survival (OS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The Texas Cancer Registry was queried for 17,071 patients with PDAC treated between 2004 and 2015. Clinical data were correlated with hospital designations: NCI designated (NCI), high volume (HV), safety net (SNH), and American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer accredited (ACS). Univariable (UVA) and multivariable (MVA) logistic regression were used to assess associations with GCC [on the basis of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) recommendations]. Cox regression analysis assessed survival.

RESULTS

Only 43% of patients received GCC. NCI had the largest associated risk reduction (HR 0.61, CI 0.58-0.65), followed by HV (HR 0.87, CI 0.83-0.90) and ACS (HR 0.91, CI 0.87-0.95). GCC was associated with a survival benefit in the full (HR 0.75, CI 0.69-0.81) and resected cohort (HR 0.74, CI 0.68-0.80). NCI (OR 1.52, CI 1.37-1.70), HV (OR 1.14, CI 1.05-1.23), and SNH (OR 0.78, CI 0.68-0.91) all correlated with receipt of GCC. For resected patients, ACS (OR 0.63, CI 0.50-0.79) and SNH (OR 0.50, CI 0.33-0.75) correlate with GCC.

CONCLUSIONS

A total of 43% of patients received GCC. Treatment at NCI and HV correlated with improved GCC and survival. Including GCC as a metric in accreditation standards could impact survival for patients with PDAC.

Impact of network treatment in patients with resected pancreatic cancer on use and timing of chemotherapy and survival

BACKGROUND

Centralization of pancreatic cancer surgery aims to improve postoperative outcomes. Consequently, patients with pancreatic cancer may undergo pancreatic surgery in an expert centre and adjuvant chemotherapy in a local hospital (network treatment). The aim of this study was to assess whether network treatment has an impact on time to chemotherapy, failure to complete adjuvant chemotherapy, and survival. Second, whether these parameters varied between pancreatic networks was studied.

METHODS

This retrospective study included all patients diagnosed with non-metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent pancreatic surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy, registered in the Netherlands Cancer Registry (2015-2020). Time to chemotherapy was defined as the time between surgery and the start of adjuvant chemotherapy. Completion of adjuvant chemotherapy was defined as the receipt of 12 cycles of FOLFIRINOX or six cycles of gemcitabine. Analysis was performed with linear mixed models and multilevel logistic regression models. Cox regression analyses were performed for survival.

RESULTS

In total, 1074 patients were included. Network treatment was observed in 468 patients (43.6 per cent) and was not associated with longer time to chemotherapy (0.77 days, standard error (s.e.) 1.14, P = 0.501), failure to complete adjuvant chemotherapy (odds ratio (OR) = 1.140, 95 per cent c.i. 0.86 to 1.52, P = 0.349), and overall survival (hazards ratio (HR) = 1.04, 95 per cent c.i. 0.88 to 1.22, P = 0.640). Significant variation between the networks was observed for time to chemotherapy (range 40.5-63 days, P < 0.0001) and completion of adjuvant chemotherapy (range 19-52 per cent, P = 0.030). Adjusted for case mix, time to chemotherapy significantly differed between networks.

CONCLUSION

In this nationwide analysis, network treatment in patients with resected pancreatic cancer was not associated with longer time to chemotherapy, failure to complete adjuvant chemotherapy, and worse survival. Significant variation between pancreatic cancer networks was found for time to chemotherapy.

Predictors of postoperative complications and readmissions in laparoscopic pancreas resection: Results of a cohort 105 consecutive cases. A retrospective study

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic resection of the pancreas (LRP) has been implemented to a varying degree because it is technically demanding and requires a long learning curve. In the present study we analyze the risk factors for complications and hospital readmissions in a single center study of 105 consecutive LRPs.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study using a prospective database. Data were collected on age, gender, BMI, ASA score, type of surgery, histologic type, operative time, hospital stay, postoperative complications, degree of severity and hospital readmission.

RESULTS

The cohort included 105 patients, 63 females and 42 males with a median age and BMI of 58 (53-70) and 25.5 (22,2-27.9) respectively. Eighteen (17%) central pancreatectomies, 5 (4.8%) enucleations, 81 (77.6%) distal pancreatectomies and one total pancreatectomy were performed. Fifty-six patients (53.3%) experienced some type of complication, of which 13 (12.3%) were severe (Clavien-Dindo > IIIb) and 11 (10.5%) patients were readmitted in the first 30 days after surgery. In the univariate analysis, age, male gender, ASA score, central pancreatectomy and operative time were significantly associated with the development of complications (P <0.05). In the multivariate analysis, male gender (OR 7.97; 95% CI 1.08-58.88)), severe complications (OR 59.40; 95% CI, 7.69-458.99), and the development of intrabdominal collections (OR 8.97; 95% CI, 1.28-63.02)) were associated with hospital readmission.

CONCLUSIONS

Age, male gender, ASA score, operative time and central pancreatectomy are associated with a higher incidence of complications. Male gender, severe complications and intraabdominal collections are associated with more hospital readmissions.

Geographical Disparities and Patients' Mobility: A Plea for Regionalization of Pancreatic Surgery in Italy

Patients requiring complex treatments, such as pancreatic surgery, may need to travel long distances and spend extended periods of time away from home, particularly when healthcare provision is geographically dispersed. This raises concerns about equal access to care. Italy is administratively divided into 21 separate territories, which are heterogeneous in terms of healthcare quality, with provision generally decreasing from north to south. This study aimed to evaluate the distribution of adequate facilities for pancreatic surgery, quantify the phenomenon of long-distance mobility for pancreatic resections, and measure its effect on operative mortality. Data refer to patients undergoing pancreatic resections (in the period 2014-2016). The assessment of adequate facilities for pancreatic surgery, based on volume and outcome, confirmed the inhomogeneous distribution throughout Italy. The migration rate from Southern and Central Italy was 40.3% and 14.6%, respectively, with patients mainly directed towards high-volume centers in Northern Italy. Adjusted mortality for non-migrating patients receiving surgery in Southern and Central Italy was significantly higher than that for migrating patients. Adjusted mortality varied greatly among regions, ranging from 3.2% to 16.4%. Overall, this study highlights the urgent need to address the geographical disparities in pancreatic surgery provision in Italy and ensure equal access to care for all patients.

Telemedicine and Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review

Introduction: Pancreatic cancer requires a multidisciplinary approach in a high-volume center for all the steps of the diagnostic-therapeutic course. However, the most experienced centers are not evenly distributed throughout the country causing a real "health migration" that involves patients and families with relevant economic, time, and energy costs to bear. The COVID-19 pandemic had a deep impact on surgical and oncological care and the travel limits due to COVID-related restrictions, have delayed the care of cancer patient living far from the referral centers. In this scenario, several telemedicine approaches have been proposed to reduce the distance between clinicians and patients and to allow a fast and effective access to care even for patients distant from referral centers. The aim of the study is to analyze the evidence and describe the current utility of telemedicine tool for patients with pancreatic cancer. Methods: We systematically searched the literature in the following databases: Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, and MEDLINE. The inclusion criteria were article describing a telemedicine intervention (virtual visits, telephone follow-up/counseling, mobile or online apps, telemonitoring) and focusing on adult patients with pancreatic cancer at any stage of the disease. Results: In total, 846 titles/abstracts were identified. Following quality assessment, the review included 40 studies. Telemedicine has been proposed in multiple clinical settings, demonstrating high levels of patient and health professional satisfaction. Conclusion: Successful telemedicine applications in patients with pancreatic cancer are telerehabilitation and nutritional assessment, remote symptom control, teledischarge after pancreatic surgery, tele-education and medical mentoring regarding pancreatic disease as well as telepathology.

Surgical outcome of a double versus a single pancreatoduodenectomy per operating day

BACKGROUND

For logistical reasons, some high-volume centers have developed surgical programs wherein 1 surgical team performs 2 pancreatoduodenectomies on a single day. It is unclear whether this practice has a negative impact on surgical outcome.

METHODS

We conuducted a retrospective analysis including all consecutive open pancreatoduodenectomies in a single high-volume center (2014-2021). Pancreatoduodenectomies were grouped as the first (pancreatoduodenectomy-1) or second (pancreatoduodenectomy-2) pancreatoduodenectomy on a single day (ie, paired pancreatoduodenectomies) and as pancreatoduodenectomy-3 whenever 1 pancreatoduodenectomy was performed per day (ie, unpaired). Patients undergoing minimally invasive procedures were excluded. The primary outcomes were major morbidity (ie, Clavien-Dindo grade ≥IIIa) and mortality.

RESULTS

Among 689 patients, 151 patients had undergone minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy, leaving 538 patients after open pancreatoduodenectomy for inclusion. The overall rate of major morbidity was 37.4% (n = 200/538) and in-hospital/30-day mortality 1.7% (n = 9/538). Overall, 136 (25.3%) patients were operated in 68 pancreatoduodenectomy-1/ pancreatoduodenectomy-2 pairs and 402 (74.7%) patients as unpaired pancreatoduodenectomy (pancreatoduodenectomy-3). No differences were found between pancreatoduodenectomy-1 and pancreatoduodenectomy-2 regarding the rates of major morbidity (35.3% vs 26.5%; P = .265) and mortality (1.5% vs 0%; P = .999). Between the 68 pancreatoduodenectomy-1/ pancreatoduodenectomy-2 pairs and the 402 unpaired pancreatoduodenectomies, the rates of major morbidity (30.9% vs 39.6%; P = .071) and mortality (0.7% vs 2.0%; P = .461) did not differ significantly. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, pancreatoduodenectomy-1 was not associated with major morbidity (odds ratio = 0.913 [95% confidence interval 0.515-1.620]; P = .756), whereas pancreatoduodenectomy-2 was associated with less major morbidity (odds ratio = 0.522 [95% confidence interval 0.277-0.983]; P = .045).

CONCLUSION

In a high-volume setting, performing 2 consecutive open pancreatoduodenectomies on a single operating day appears to be safe. This approach may be an option when logistically required.

Impact of multicentre diagnostic workup in patients with pancreatic cancer on repeated diagnostic investigations, time-to-diagnosis and time-to-treatment: A nationwide analysis

BACKGROUND

Due to the centralization of pancreatic surgery, patients with suspected pancreatic cancer may undergo diagnostic workup in both a non-pancreatic centre and a pancreatic centre, i.e. multicentre workup. This retrospective study assessed whether multicentre diagnostic workup is associated with repeated diagnostics, delayed time-to-diagnosis, delayed time-to-treatment, survival and whether variation existed among pancreatic cancer networks.

METHODS

This nationwide study included all patients diagnosed with non-metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in 2015, registered by the Netherlands Cancer Registry. A delayed time-to-diagnosis was defined as ≥3 weeks from initial hospital visit to final diagnosis. A delayed time-to-treatment was defined as ≥6 weeks from the first hospital visit to start of first tumour treatment. Multilevel logistic regression analyses and survival analyses were performed.

RESULTS

In total, 931 patients with non-metastatic PDAC were included. Overall, 175 patients (19%) underwent a multicentre diagnostic workup, which was significantly associated with repeated diagnostic investigations (OR = 6.31, 95% CI 4.13-9.64, P < 0.0001), a delayed time-to-diagnosis (OR = 2.66 95% CI 1.74-4.06, P < 0.001), and a delayed time-to-treatment (OR = 1.93 95% CI 1.12-3.31, P = 0.02), but not with decreased survival (HR = 1.09 95% CI 0.83-1.44; P = 0.532). Variation in outcomes per network was observed, especially for time-to-treatment, though the ICC was not statistically significant (P = 0.065).

CONCLUSION

Multicentre diagnostic workup for patients with PDAC is associated with repeated diagnostic investigations, a delayed time-to-diagnosis and delayed time-to-treatment compared to patients with monocentre workup. To reduce costs and improve treatment times, efforts should be made to improve network coordination, for example via network care pathways.

Pancreatic Cancer Surveillance in Carriers of a Germline CDKN2A Pathogenic Variant: Yield and Outcomes of a 20-Year Prospective Follow-Up

PURPOSE

Pancreatic cancer surveillance in high-risk individuals may lead to detection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) at an earlier stage and with improved survival. This study evaluated the yield and outcomes of 20 years of prospective surveillance in a large cohort of individuals with germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in CDKN2A.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data were analyzed from individuals participating in pancreatic cancer surveillance. Surveillance consisted of annual magnetic resonance imaging with magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography and optional endoscopic ultrasound.

RESULTS

Three hundred forty-seven germline PV carriers participated in surveillance and were followed for a median of 5.6 (interquartile range 2.3-9.9) years. A total of 36 cases of PDAC were diagnosed in 31 (8.9%) patients at a median age of 60.4 (interquartile range 51.3-64.1) years. The cumulative incidence of primary PDAC was 20.7% by age 70 years. Five carriers (5 of 31; 16.1%) were diagnosed with a second primary PDAC. Thirty (83.3%) of 36 PDACs were considered resectable at the time of imaging. Twelve cases (12 of 36; 33.3%) presented with stage I disease. The median survival after diagnosis of primary PDAC was 26.8 months, and the 5-year survival rate was 32.4% (95% CI, 19.1 to 54.8). Individuals with primary PDAC who underwent resection (22 of 31; 71.0%) had an overall 5-year survival rate of 44.1% (95% CI, 27.2 to 71.3). Nine (2.6%; 9 of 347) individuals underwent surgery for a suspected malignant lesion, which proved to not be PDAC, and this included five lesions with low-grade dysplasia.

CONCLUSION

This long-term surveillance study demonstrates a high incidence of PDAC in carriers of a PV in CDKN2A. This provides evidence that surveillance in such a high-risk population leads to detection of early-stage PDAC with improved resectability and survival.

The essential requirements for an HPB centre to deliver high-quality outcomes

The concept of a centre approach to the treatment of patients with complex disorders, such as those with hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) diseases, is widely applied, although what is needed for an HPB centre to achieve high-quality outcomes remains unclear. We therefore conducted a literature review, which highlighted the paucity of information linking centre structure or process to outcome data outside of caseloads, specialisation, and quality of training. We then conducted an international survey among the largest 107 HPB centres with experts in HPB surgery and found that most responders work in 'virtual' HPB centres without dedicated space, assigned beds, nor personal. We finally analysed our experience with the Swiss HPB centre, previously reported in this journal 15 years ago, disclosing that budget priorities set by the hospital administration may prevent the development of a fully integrated centre, for example through inconsistent assignment of the centre's beds to HBP patients or removal of dedicated intermediate care beds. We propose criteria for essential requirements for an HPB centre to deliver high-quality outcomes, with the concept of "centre of reference" limited to actual, as opposed to virtual, centres.

Upfront versus resection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for pancreatic adenocarcinomas with venous contact: comparative analysis of operative and survival outcomes

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant treatment before resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma having contact with the splenomesentericoportal venous axis could improve the results of extended pancreatectomies. We compared the outcomes of upfront (UR) and resection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed clinical data of patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy with venous resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2020. Operative, pathologic, and survival outcomes were compared between upfront and resection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Of the 169 patients, 55 patients underwent preoperative chemotherapy and 114 underwent upfront. No differences were found in operative time, morbidity, and mortality between the 2 groups. At pathologic examination, patients who underwent resection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy had a significantly smaller tumor size, higher rate of R0 resection, less lymph node involvement, and a lower rate of pathologic venous invasion (P < .05). The median overall survival was 27.96 months, and the overall survival rates at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years were 82%, 39%, 22%, and 11%, respectively. Multivariate Cox analysis found neoadjuvant treatment (hazard ratio: 0.60; 95% confidence interval: 0.38-0.97; P = .03), and intraoperative transfusion (hazard ratio: 2.25; 95% confidence interval: 1.47-3.46; P = .0002) as independent prognostic factors for overall survival. A dose-dependent effect of perioperative transfusion on overall survival was found (no transfusion, = 2 red blood cells, >2 red blood cells; median overall survival 41.1 months vs 27.01 months vs 19.4 months; P = .0003).

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy improves the pathologic and survival outcomes of pancreaticoduodenectomy with venous resection for pancreatic adenocarcinomas. The dose-dependent effect of perioperative transfusion on overall survival warrants further investigation.

Pancreatic cancer survival by stage and age in seven high-income countries (ICBP SURVMARK-2): a population-based study

BACKGROUND

The global burden of pancreatic cancer has steadily increased, while the prognosis after pancreatic cancer diagnosis remains poor. This study aims to compare the stage- and age-specific pancreatic cancer net survival (NS) for seven high-income countries: Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway, and United Kingdom.

METHODS

The study included over 35,000 pancreatic cancer cases diagnosed during 2012-2014, followed through 31 December 2015. The stage- and age-specific NS were calculated using the Pohar-Perme estimator.

RESULTS

Pancreatic cancer survival estimates were low across all 7 countries, with 1-year NS ranging from 21.1% in New Zealand to 30.9% in Australia, and 3-year NS from 6.6% in the UK to 10.9% in Australia. Most pancreatic cancers were diagnosed with distant stage, ranging from 53.9% in Ireland to 83.3% in New Zealand. While survival differences were evident between countries across all stage categories at one year after diagnosis, this survival advantage diminished, particularly in cases with distant stage.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated the importance of stage and age at diagnosis in pancreatic cancer survival. Although progress has been made in improving pancreatic cancer prognosis, the disease is highly fatal and will remain so without major breakthroughs in the early diagnosis and management.

Short-term outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy in octogenarians: multicentre case-control study

BACKGROUND

Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is frequently the surgical treatment indicated for a number of pathologies. Elderly patients may be denied surgery because of concerns over poor perioperative outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate postoperative clinical outcomes and provide evidence on current UK practice in the elderly population after PD.

METHODS

This was a multicentre retrospective case-control study of octogenarians undergoing PD between January 2008 and December 2017, matched with younger controls from seven specialist centres in the UK. The primary endpoint was 90-day mortality. Secondary endpoints were index admission mortality, postoperative complications, and 30-day readmission rates.

RESULTS

In total, 235 octogenarians (median age 81 (range 80-90) years) and 235 controls (age 67 (31-79) years) were included in the study. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (median 0 (range 0-3) versus 0 (0-2); P = 0.010) and Charlson Co-morbidity Index score (7 (6-11) versus 5 (2-9); P = 0.001) were higher for octogenarians than controls. Postoperative complication and 30-day readmission rates were comparable. The 90-day mortality rate was higher among octogenarians (9 versus 3 per cent; P = 0.030). Index admission mortality rates were comparable (4 versus 2 per cent; P = 0.160), indicating that the difference in mortality was related to deaths after hospital discharge. Despite the higher 90-day mortality rate in the octogenarian population, multivariable Cox regression analysis did not identify age as an independent predictor of postoperative mortality.

CONCLUSION

Despite careful patient selection and comparable index admission mortality, 90-day and, particularly, out-of-hospital mortality rates were higher in octogenarians.

Pancreatic surgery during COVID-19 pandemic: major activity disruption of a third-level referral center during 2020

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic has severely limited the access to cancer surgery, but it is not known to what extent referral centers for pancreatic diseases were affected by its outbreak. The aim of this study is to describe the effect of COVID-19 pandemic on a third-level referral center for pancreatic surgery in Italy.

METHODS

The 2020 activity of The Pancreas Institute of the University of Verona was reviewed, comparing different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic outbreaks using the pre-COVID era as a control. Endpoints were the overall caseload of pancreatic resections, surgical waiting list, administration of preoperative therapy, major morbidity and mortality, residents' training; number of inpatients beds, outpatient visits/procedures/diagnostics.

RESULTS

In 2020, there was an overall significant reduction of pancreatic resections performed (394 vs. 506 in 2019), particularly during the first (March-May) and second (October-December) COVID-19 outbreaks, with an all-time-low of 16 resections/months in April (compared to 43 average resection/month in 2019). The rates of major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3) and mortality were similar to 2019 (16 vs 12%, p = 0.11 and 3 vs 2%, p = 0.29, respectively). During the first and second outbreaks resident's training, inpatient beds, outpatient visits, diagnostics, and procedures were severely impaired, while the waiting list for up-front cancer resections and the use of preoperative chemotherapy concomitantly raised.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic has severely disrupted the activity of a third-level referral center for pancreatic surgery, affecting the access to cancer surgical procedures and raising concerns regarding the solidity of the current centralization model.

Postoperative and long-term survival in relation to life-expectancy after pancreatic surgery in elderly patients (cohort study)

Background

An evaluation of the outcome after pancreatic surgery with focus on post-operative and late survival in elderly patients was performed.

Methods

The study included 1.556 patients from a single HBP unit operated from 1. January 2010 to 31. December 2019. Patients were divided into two cohorts, < 75 years (n = 1.296) and ≥75 years (n = 260). Post-operative outcome was evaluated in all patients and late outcome in patients with adenocarcinoma in the pancreas (n = 765) and the duodenum (n = 117). The follow-up of patients with benign disease and adenocarcinoma was 57.95 (12.1–132.7) and 39.85 (12.0–131.7) months, respectively.

Results

Length of hospital-stay and surgical complications were not significantly different in the two cohorts, but in-hospital death was 1.1% (<75 years) and 3.5% (≥75 years) (p = 0.008). The median overall survival of adenocarcinoma was 29.7 (<75 years) and 24.3 months (≥75 years) (p = 0.3228) with a one, two, and five-years survival of 74.5%, 56.6% and 28.6% vs. 73.6%, 51.1%, and 25.5%. Median time to relapse (46.2% of patients <75 years and 40.5% of patients ≥75 years) was 9 (1 - 51) and 8 (1 - 78) months (p = 0.534), respectively. Adjuvant chemotherapy did not have impact on the survival of the old cohort. Patients who died during the observation period had lost 94% (<75 years) and 87% (≥75 years) of expected remnant life. Estimated years lost in the old cohort was 4.2 in males and 4.9 in females (p = 0.025)

Conclusion

Elderly patients may undergo pancreatic surgery with a low mortality and for adenocarcinoma with an acceptable long-term survival.

•

Surgery is the only potentially curable treatment to pancreatic cancer.

•

Elderly patients may tolerate pancreatic surgery with low mortality.

•

Radical pancreatic surgery improves long-term survival, also in elderly patients.

•

Operability should be evaluated from morbidity and biological age.

•

Pancreatic surgery in elderly should only be performed in high volume centers.