Assessement of postoperative long-term survival quality and complications associated with radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy and distal pancreatectomy: a meta-analysis and systematic review

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.

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.

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.

A more radical perspective on surgical approach and outcomes in pancreatic cancer-a narrative review

Background and Objective

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma remains a dismal disease and is expected to become an even greater burden in the near future. This review focuses on the different surgical aspects for pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), distal and total pancreatectomy (TP), incorporating lessons from both the western and eastern visions in treating pancreatic cancer.

Methods

We conducted an extensive literature review through PubMed, prioritizing papers published in the last 5 years, but older emblematic papers were also included. We included articles that explored the treatment of pancreatic adenocarcinoma, with focus on the surgical aspect and strategies to improve outcomes. References of selected articles were also reviewed to identify any missed studies. Only papers in English were included.

Key Content and Findings

As evidence continues to build, it is clear that both systemic and surgical therapies have a fundamental and complementary role. State of art surgical treatment encompasses complete mesopancreas excision for radical lymphadenectomy. Preoperative planning of dissection planes, extensive knowledge of vascular anatomic variations, oncological principles and expertise for vascular resections are mandatory to perform a more radical operation, in pursuit of improved outcomes.

Conclusions

Based on current data, patient selection remains key and a more radical surgical approach brings more accomplishing results bringing as to believe that more is better.

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.

Distal pancreatectomy with or without radical approach, vascular resections and splenectomy: Easier does not always mean easy

Because distal pancreatectomy (DP) has no reconstructive steps and less frequent vascular involvement, it is thought to be the easier counterpart of pancreaticoduodenectomy. This procedure has a high surgical risk and the overall incidences of perioperative morbidity (mainly pancreatic fistula), and mortality are still high, in addition to the challenges that accompany delayed access to adjuvant therapies (if any) and prolonged impairment of daily activities. Moreover, surgery to remove malignancy of the body or tail of the pancreas is associated with poor long-term oncological outcomes. From this perspective, new surgical approaches, and aggressive techniques, such as radical antegrade modular pancreato-splenectomy and DP with celiac axis resection, could lead to improved survival in those affected by more locally advanced tumors. Conversely, minimally invasive approaches such as laparoscopic and robotic surgeries and the avoidance of routine concomitant splenectomy have been developed to reduce the burden of surgical stress. The purpose of ongoing surgical research has been to achieve significant reductions in perioperative complications, length of hospital stays and the time between surgery and the beginning of adjuvant chemotherapy. Because a dedicated multidisciplinary team is crucial to pancreatic surgery, hospital and surgeon volumes have been confirmed to be associated with better outcomes in patients affected by benign, borderline, and malignant diseases of the pancreas. The purpose of this review is to examine the state of the art in distal pancreatectomies, with a special focus on minimally invasive approaches and oncological-directed techniques. The widespread reproducibility, cost-effectiveness and long-term results of each oncological procedure are also taken into deep consideration.

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.

Minimally invasive radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy: routine vs. modified

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) was introduced in 2003 by Strasberg to improve survival outcomes in left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Many investigators have shown the feasibility and safety of minimally invasive RAMPS (MI-RAMPS). However, the survival benefit of RAMPS is inconclusive, and possible risks following the procedure, such as exocrine and endocrine insufficiencies, cannot be ignored. Therefore, several modifications of RAMPS were designed. Modified RAMPS is not a specific technique but rather a reduced form of RAMPS that is undertaken without compromising oncologic principles. In this literature review, the surgical technique and strategies of MI-RAMPS were examined.

The efficacy of radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Previous systematic reviews have shown that radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) had favorable outcomes including prognosis. However, recent large studies have shown opposite results, thus necessitating clarification of RAMPS efficacy. We aimed to update existing evidence on the clinical outcomes of RAMPS for left-sided pancreatic cancer by comparing them to those of the conventional approach.

METHODS

Electronic databases and registries were searched until August 2021 to perform random-effect meta-analysis. Methodological quality was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. The protocol was registered at protocols.io (https://doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.bxhfpj3n).

RESULTS

Thirteen cohort studies (1641 patients) and four ongoing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified. RAMPS increased disease-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.42-0.91), but it had little effect on overall survival (HR 0.92, 95% CI = 0.79-1.09) and recurrence-free survival (HR 0.72, 95% CI = 0.37-1.38) with low certainty of evidence.

CONCLUSION

The meta-analysis of recent studies suggests that RAMPS may have little effect on clinical outcomes. These findings highlight the necessity of further studies, including RCTs to determine the efficacy and subsequent indication of RAMPS in clinical cases.

Clinical outcome comparison of laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy vs. laparoscopic distal pancreatosplenectomy for left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma surgical resection

Background

Laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (LRAMPS) is a validated surgical treatment for patients with left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). In addition, laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDPS) has purported benefits. However, there is a limited analysis comparing the results between LRAMPS and LDPS. Thus, this study aims to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes of patients who underwent LRAMPS and LDPS for PDAC treatment.

Methods

Patients with left-sided PDAC that underwent LRAMPS or LDPS from 2015 to 2021 were retrospectively identified. Demographic and clinic pathologic data were collected. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) probabilities were obtained.

Results

The number of lymph nodes retrieved was significantly greater in the LRAMPS group than in the LDPS group. Several clinicopathological factors, including CA19-9 levels greater than 37 U/ml, positive lymph nodes, moderate to poor tumor differentiation, and peripancreas fat invasion, were associated with DFS. Moderate with poor tumor differentiation was associated with poor DFS (HR 0.568; 95% CI 0.373–0.921; P = 0.021). Levels of CA19-9 greater than 37 U/ml, CEA levels greater than 5 μg/ml, larger tumor size, positive lymph nodes, moderate with poor tumor differentiation, peripancreas fat invasion, and adjuvant chemotherapy were all associated with OS. LRAMPS nearly improved OS but did not reach statistical significance. Serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels greater than 5 ug/ml (HR 1.693; 95% CI 1.200–1.132; P = 0.001), and positive lymph nodes (HR 2.410; 95% CI 1.453–3.995; P = 0.001) were independently associated with poor OS. Treatment with adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with improved OS (HR 0.491; 95% CI 0.248–0.708; P = 0.001).

Conclusions

The LRAMPS procedure achieved comparable results to standard LDPS in terms of postoperative outcomes. Treatment with chemotherapy is important for the prognosis of patients with left-sided pancreatic cancer.

Complications in Distal Pancreatectomy versus Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy: A Disease Risk Score Analysis Utilizing National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Data

INTRODUCTION

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) was developed to improve R0 resections and lymph node harvests versus distal pancreatectomy (DP) in pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC); relative complication rates are understudied.

METHODS

Patients undergoing distal pancreas resections from 2006 to 2020 were identified from our institutional NSQIP database, grouped by resection method, and evaluated for the following outcomes: postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), clinically relevant POPF (crPOPF), incisional surgical site infection (iSSI), organ space SSI (osSSI), and Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 3 (CD ≥ 3) complications using logistic regression. Patients were matched 1:1 based on disease risk score.

RESULTS

Two-hundred-thirty-six and 117 patients underwent DP and RAMPS, respectively. POPF, crPOPF, CD ≥ 3 complications, iSSI, and osSSIs occurred in 105 (30%), 43 (12%), 74 (21%), 34 (10%) and 52 (15%) patients, respectively. Disease risk score matching yielded 89 similar patients per group. On multivariable analysis, patients undergoing RAMPS were not significantly more likely to experience POPF (OR 0.69, P = 0.26), crPOPF (OR 0.41, P = 0.72), CD ≥ 3 complication (OR 0.78, P = 0.44), iSSI (OR 0.58, P = 0.27), or osSSI (OR 0.93, P = 0.86). Of patients with PDAC (n = 108) mean nodal harvest were 14.8 (SD 11.30) and 19.4 (SD 7.19) nodes for patients undergoing DP and RAMPS, respectively (P = 0.01). Six patients (20%) undergoing DP had positive margins versus 12 (15%) undergoing RAMPS (P = 0.56). At a median follow-up of 17 months, there was no difference in locoregional recurrence-free survival (P = 0.32) or overall survival (P = 0.92) on Kaplan-Meier analysis.

CONCLUSION

RAMPS does not result in increased complications compared to DP and routine use is encouraged in pancreatic malignancies.

[Surgical treatment of pancreatic cancer-What is new?]

The incidence of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is continuously increasing and will become the second leading cause of cancer-related death in Europe and the USA by 2030. With a 5-year overall survival rate of less than 10% the prognosis remains poor. So far surgical tumor resection remains the only curative treatment option, which is now partially supported by multimodal neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy concepts. Due to the aggressive tumor biology patients with advanced pancreatic cancer in particular can profit from these multimodal therapy concepts. Additionally, in recent years surgical treatment was optimized, the criteria for tumor resectablity were defined and minimally invasive surgery was widely introduced. This review article summarizes the newest developments and the new German S3 guidelines concerning surgery of pancreatic cancer.

Korean Surgical Practice Guideline for Pancreatic Cancer 2021: A summary of evidence-based surgical approaches

Pancreatic cancer is the eighth most common cancer and the fifth most common cause of cancer-related deaths in Korea. Despite the increasing incidence and high mortality rate of pancreatic cancer, there are no appropriate surgical practice guidelines for the current domestic medical situation. To enable standardization of management and facilitate improvements in surgical outcome, a total of 10 pancreatic surgical experts who are members of Korean Association of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery have developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date, evidence-based research findings and expert opinions. This is an English version of the Korean Surgical Practice Guideline for Pancreatic Cancer 2021. This guideline includes 13 surgical questions and 15 statements. Due to the lack of high-level evidence, strong recommendation is almost impossible. However, we believe that this guideline will help surgeons understand the current status of evidence and suggest what to investigate further to establish more solid recommendations in the future.

Landmark Series: Importance of Pancreatic Resection Margins

An important goal of cancer surgery is to achieve negative surgical margins and remove all disease completely. For pancreatic neoplasms, microscopic margins may remain positive despite gross removal of the palpable mass, and surgeons must then consider extending resection, even to the point of completion pancreatectomy, an option that renders the patient with significant adverse effects related to exocrine and endocrine insufficiency. Counterintuitively, extending resection to ensure clear margins may not improve patient outcome. Furthermore, the goal of improving survival by extending the resection may not be achieved, as an initial positive margin may indicate more aggressive underlying tumor biology. There is a growing body of literature on this topic, and this landmark series review will examine the key publications that guide our management for resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms, and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

Clinical Outcome of RAMPS for Left-Sided Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Comparison of Anterior RAMPS versus Posterior RAMPS for Patients without Periadrenal Infiltration

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) is considered an effective procedure for left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, whether there are differences in perioperative outcomes, pathologies, or survival outcomes between anterior RAMPS (aRAMPS) and posterior RAMPS (pRAMPS) has not been reported previously. We retrospectively reviewed and compared the demographic, perioperative, histopathologic, and survival data of patients who underwent aRAMPS or pRAMPS for PDAC. We also compared these two groups among patients without periadrenal infiltration or adrenal invasion. A total of 112 aRAMPS patients and 224 pRAMPS patients were evaluated. Periadrenal infiltration, neoadjuvant treatment, and concurrent vessel resection were more prevalent in the pRAMPS group. After excluding patients with periadrenal infiltration, 106 aRAMPS patients were compared with 157 pRAMPS patients. There were no significant differences between the aRAMPS and pRAMPS groups in the pathologic tumor size, resection margin, proportion of tangential margin in the R1 resection, and number of harvested lymph nodes. The median overall survival and disease-free survival also did not differ significantly between the two groups. We cautiously suggest that pRAMPS will not necessarily provide more beneficial histopathologic outcomes and survival rates for left-sided PDAC cases without periadrenal infiltration. If periadrenal infiltration is not suspected, aRAMPS alone should be sufficiently effective.

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.

Pancreatic solid pseudopapillary neoplasm: a single-institution study

BACKGROUNDS

Solid pseudopapillary neoplasms (SPNs) are a distinct but rare form of low-grade pancreatic neoplasia, accounting for 0.3%-2.7% of all pancreatic tumours. They are most common in young females. Local recurrence and distant metastasis are reported but extremely rare, and are usually resectable with curative intent. We report the clinicopathological features and long-term outcomes of SPNs following surgical resection from a single institution.

METHODS

A total of 1296 patients undergoing pancreatic resection during the 30 years period from 1991 to 2020 were retrospectively reviewed, and those with a confirmed pathological diagnosis of pancreatic SPN on review were included.

RESULTS

Twenty-two patients (1.7% of all patients undergoing resection), were identified. Twenty patients (91%) were female. Unlike previous studies, most patients (91%) were symptomatic at diagnosis. On diagnostic CT, cystic components were visible in 16 patients (73%), calcifications were found in two patients (9%), haemorrhage in one patient (5%) and a defined capsule was seen in four patients (18%). Surgical resection was undertaken on all cases, with distal pancreatectomy the most commonly performed (n = 11, 50%). One patient (4.7%) had nodal involvement, nine patients had an incomplete tumour capsule (41%) and seven patients (32%) had tumour extension into the pancreatic parenchyma. Despite this, no patients had disease recurrence at 10 years. One patient died within 5 years of heart failure unrelated to the SPN process; no patients died within 10 years of the disease.

CONCLUSION

We confirm a high proportion of female patients. Interestingly, a high proportion of our cohort was investigated for symptomatic disease. Despite a high proportion of tumours with an incomplete capsule, and extension into the pancreatic parenchyma, our findings indicated that SPN patients have excellent survival after margin-negative surgical resection.

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.

Treatment of Advanced Pancreatic Body and Tail Cancer by En Bloc Distal Pancreatectomy with Transverse Mesocolon Resection Using a Mesenteric Approach

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic body and tail cancer easily invades retroperitoneal tissue, including the transverse mesocolon. It is difficult to ensure a dissected peripancreatic margin with standard distal pancreatectomy for advanced pancreatic body and tail cancer. Thus, we developed a novel surgical procedure to ensure dissection of the peripancreatic margin. This involved performing dissection deeper than the fusion fascia of Toldt and further extensive en bloc resection of the root of the transverse mesocolon. We performed distal pancreatectomy with transverse mesocolon resection (DP-TCR) using a mesenteric approach and achieved good outcomes.

METHODS

There are two main considerations for surgical procedures using a mesenteric approach: 1) dissection deeper than the fusion fascia of Toldt (securing the vertical margin) and 2) modular resection of the pancreatic body and tail, with the root of the transverse mesocolon and adjacent organs in a horizontal direction (ensuring the caudal margin).

RESULTS

From 2017 to 2019, we performed DP-TCR using a mesenteric approach for six patients with advanced pancreatic body and tail cancer. Histopathological radical surgery was possible in all patients who underwent DP-TCR. No Clavien-Dindo grade IIIa or worse perioperative complications were observed in any patient.

CONCLUSIONS

We believe that DP-TCR is useful as a radical surgery for advanced pancreatic body and tail cancer with extrapancreatic invasion.

Open and Minimal Approaches to Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Surgical options and approaches to pancreatic cancer are changing in the current era. Neoadjuvant treatment strategies for pancreatic cancer combined with the increased use of minimal access surgical techniques mean that the modern pancreatic surgeon requires mastering a number of surgical approaches with to optimally manage patients. Whilst traditional open surgery remains the most frequent approach for surgery, the specific steps during surgery may need to be modified in light of the aforementioned neoadjuvant treatments. Robotic and laparoscopic approaches to pancreatic resection are feasible, but these surgical methods remain in their infancy. In this review article, we summarise the current surgical approaches to pancreatic cancer and how these are adapted to the minimal access setting with discussion of the patient outcome data.

Robotic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) versus standard retrograde pancreatosplenectomy (SRPS): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Data from meta-analysis suggest that robotic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) is a safe and effective procedure for treating adenocarcinoma in the body or tail of the pancreas, and is oncologically superior to standard retrograde pancreatosplenectomy (SRPS). RAMPS is an operation that actively expands the scope of resection, and achieves a higher R0 resection rate and lymph nodes acquisition through expanded resection. However, previous studies on RAMPS were conducted under open and laparoscopic surgery. Robotic surgery, on the other hand, plays a role in ergonomics and offers several advantages, including less fatigue, tremor filtering, 7° of wrist-like motion, motion scaling, and three-dimensional vision. At present, there is still a world-wide lack of clinical studies to observe the safety and clinical efficacy of robotic RAMPS. Hence, prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing robotic RAMPS and SRPS are required. We begin an RCT to compare short-term surgical and oncological outcomes of robotic RAMPS and SRPS in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy.

Methods

This is a randomized, single-center clinical trial. All participants are adult patients with primary pancreatic cancer, who are undergoing RAMPS or SRPS. The primary endpoints are R0 rate (resection margins are classified by a margin to tumor distance ≥ 1 mm). The secondary endpoints are the number of harvested lymph nodes, perioperative complications and perioperative indicators (duration of surgery, blood loss, blood transfusion volume, costs).

Discussion

We are undertaking a prospective RCT to evaluate the surgical and oncological outcomes of robotic RAMPS. This procedure may become a standard approach to robotic pancreatosplenectomy.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR1900020833, Registered on 20 January 2019.