Nationwide validation of the distal fistula risk score (D-FRS)

PURPOSE

Distal pancreatectomy (DP) is associated with a high complication rate of 30-50% with postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) as a dominant contributor. Adequate risk estimation for POPF enables surgeons to use a tailor-made approach. Assessment of the risk of POPF prior to DP can lead to the application of preventive strategies. The current study aims to validate the recently published preoperative and intraoperative distal fistula risk score (D-FRS) in a nationwide cohort.

METHODS

This nationwide retrospective Dutch cohort study included all patients after DP for any indication, all of whom were registered in the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (DPCA) database between 2013 and 2021. The D-FRS was validated by filling in the probability equations with data from this cohort. The predictive capacity of the models was represented by an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve.

RESULTS

A total of 896 patients underwent DP of which 152 (17%) developed POPF of whom 144 grade B (95%) and 8 grade C (5%). The preoperative D-FRS, consisting of the variables pancreatic neck thickness and pancreatic duct diameter, showed an AUROC of 0.73 (95%CI 0.68-0.78). The intraoperative D-FRS, comprising pancreatic neck, duct diameter, BMI, operating time, and soft pancreatic aspect, showed an AUROC of 0.69 (95%CI 0.64-0.74).

CONCLUSION

The current study is the first nationwide validation of the preoperative and intraoperative D-FRS showing acceptable distinguishing capacity for only the preoperative D-FRS for POPF. Therefore, the preoperative score could improve prevention and mitigation strategies such as drain management, which is currently investigated in the multicenter PANDORINA trial.

Surgical Outcome After Pancreatoduodenectomy for Duodenal Adenocarcinoma Compared with Other Periampullary Cancers: A Nationwide Audit Study

BACKGROUND

Surgical outcome after pancreatoduodenectomy for duodenal adenocarcinoma could differ from pancreatoduodenectomy for other cancers, but large multicenter series are lacking. This study aimed to determine surgical outcome in patients after pancreatoduodenectomy for duodenal adenocarcinoma, compared with other periampullary cancers, in a nationwide multicenter cohort.

METHODS

After pancreatoduodenectomy for cancer between 2014 and 2019, consecutive patients were included from the nationwide, mandatory Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. Patients were stratified by diagnosis. Baseline, treatment characteristics, and postoperative outcome were compared between groups. The association between diagnosis and major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher) was assessed via multivariable regression analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 3113 patients, after pancreatoduodenectomy for cancer, were included in this study: 264 (8.5%) patients with duodenal adenocarcinomas and 2849 (91.5%) with other cancers. After pancreatoduodenectomy for duodenal adenocarcinoma, patients had higher rates of major complications (42.8% vs. 28.6%; p < 0.001), postoperative pancreatic fistula (International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery [ISGPS] grade B/C; 23.1% vs. 13.4%; p < 0.001), complication-related intensive care admission (14.3% vs. 10.3%; p = 0.046), re-interventions (39.8% vs. 26.6%; p < 0.001), in-hospital mortality (5.7% vs. 3.1%; p = 0.025), and longer hospital stay (15 days vs. 11 days; p < 0.001) compared with pancreatoduodenectomy for other cancers. In multivariable analysis, duodenal adenocarcinoma was independently associated with major complications (odds ratio 1.14, 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.27; p = 0.011).

CONCLUSION

Pancreatoduodenectomy for duodenal adenocarcinoma is associated with higher rates of major complications, pancreatic fistula, re-interventions, and in-hospital mortality compared with patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for other cancers. These findings should be considered in patient counseling and postoperative management.

How to Approach Para-Aortic Lymph Node Metastases During Exploration for Suspected Periampullary Carcinoma: Resection or Bypass?

Background

Intraoperative para-aortic lymph node (PALN) sampling during surgical exploration in patients with suspected pancreatic head cancer remains controversial.

Objective

The aim of this study was to assess the value of routine PALN sampling and the consequences of different treatment strategies on overall patient survival.

Methods

A retrospective, multicenter cohort study was performed in patients who underwent surgical exploration for suspected pancreatic head cancer. In cohort A, the treatment strategy was to avoid pancreatoduodenectomy and to perform a double bypass procedure when PALN metastases were found during exploration. In cohort B, routinely harvested PALNs were not examined intraoperatively and pancreatoduodenectomy was performed regardless. PALNs were examined with the final resection specimen. Clinicopathological data, survival data and complication data were compared between study groups.

Results

Median overall survival for patients with PALN metastases who underwent a double bypass procedure was 7.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.5–8.5), versus 11 months (95% CI 8.8–13) in the pancreatoduodenectomy group (p = 0.049). Patients with PALN metastases who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy had significantly increased postoperative morbidity compared with patients who underwent a double bypass procedure (p < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, severe comorbidity (ASA grade 2 or higher) was an independent predictor for decreased survival in patients with PALN involvement (hazard ratio 3.607, 95% CI 1.678–7.751; p = 0.001).

Conclusion

In patients with PALN metastases, pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with significant survival benefit compared with a double bypass procedure, but with increased risk of complications. It is important to weigh the advantages of resection versus bypass against factors such as comorbidities and clinical performance when positive intraoperative PALNs are found.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1245/s10434-020-08304-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.