Lymph-node dissection in pancreatic cancer -- what are the facts?

Pancreas transplant with enteric drainage at a single institute in Asia

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

This study is to assess immunological and graft survival outcomes after pancreas transplant at a single institute in Asia.

METHODS

Patients undergoing pancreas transplant with enteric drainage were included. Clinical data and outcomes were evaluated and compared between each subgroup.

RESULTS

There were 165 cases of pancreas transplant, including 38 (23 %) simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant (SPK), 24 (15 %) pancreas after kidney transplant (PAK), 75 (46 %) pancreas transplant alone (PTA), and 28 (17 %) pancreas before kidney transplant (PBK). The overall surgical complication rate was 46.1 %, with highest (62.5 %) in PAK and lowest (32.0 %) in PTA, P = 0.008. The late complications included 32.7 % infection and 3.6 % malignancy. Overall rejection of pancreas graft was 24.8 % including 18.2 % acute and 9.7 % chronic rejection. Rejection was highest in PTA group (36.0 %) and lowest in PBK (3.6 %). There were 56 cases (33.9 %) with graft loss in total, with highest graft loss rate in PTA (38.7 %). The 1-year, 5-year and 10-year pancreas graft survivals for total patients were 98.0 %, 87.7 % and 70.9 % respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Enteric drainage in pancreas transplant could be applied safely not only in SPK but also in other subgroups. Enteric drainage itself would not compromise the immunological and graft survival outcomes.

Mesopancreas level 3 dissection in robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

There are no reports of performing mesopancreas dissections in robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. This study evaluated the feasibility and justification for mesopancreas level 3 dissection in robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy.

METHODS

Surgical outcomes after robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy and open pancreaticoduodenectomy were evaluated and compared.

RESULTS

There were 289 robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy and 162 open pancreaticoduodenectomy patients included in the study. Postoperative diarrhea occurred in 34.5% of mesopancreas level 3 dissection cases and was higher than in levels 2 and 1 dissection cases, P < .001. Blood loss in the robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy group was higher for mesopancreas level 3 dissection, with a median loss of 263 mL (P = .015). The rate of R0 resection with margin >1 mm was higher for mesopancreas level 3 dissection (93.8%) than for level 2 dissection (72.2%) (P < .001). The lymph node yield was higher for mesopancreas level 3 dissection in robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy; the median lymph node yield was 21 for level 3, 18 for level 2, and 14 for level 1 (P < .001). Compared with mesopancreas levels 1 and 2 dissections in the robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy groups, level 3 dissection did not show increased surgical mortality or postoperative complications, including postoperative pancreatic fistula, delayed gastric emptying, postpancreatectomy hemorrhage, chyle leakage, bile leakage, or wound infection. Compared with open pancreaticoduodenectomy, mesopancreas level 3 dissection in robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy had less blood loss, no delayed gastric emptying, and lower chyle leakage.

CONCLUSION

Mesopancreas level 3 dissection in robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy is feasible without compromising surgical safety. Therefore, robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy can be recommended as a safe alternative to open pancreaticoduodenectomy for mesopancreas level 3 dissection.

How Grim is Pancreatic Cancer?

Pancreatic ductal carcinoma continues to be the most lethal malignancy with rising incidence. It is the fourth most common cause of cancer death in the western world due to its low treatment success rate. In addition, because of its rapid growth and silent course, diagnosis is often only established in the advanced stages. As one of the most aggressive malignancies, the treatment of this disease is a great challenge to clinicians. This paper reviewed the natural history of pancreatic cancer, the current clinical practice and the future in pancreatic cancer management.

Extent of lymphadenectomy to associate with pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with pancreatic head cancer for better tumor staging

OBJECTIVES

To define the extent of lymphadenectomy to associate with surgery for pancreatic head cancer.

BACKGROUND

Pancreaticoduodenectomy with extended lymphadenectomy fails to prolong patient survival.

METHODS

Prospective randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials (RCTs and NRCTs), meta-analyses, retrospective reviews, consensus conferences and pre- and intraoperative diagnoses of lymph node (LN) metastases were retrieved. Standard and extended lymphadenectomies were reviewed, including their effects on postoperative complications, mortality rate and long-term survival. The minimum total number of LN examined (TNLE) for adequate tumor staging, and the incidence of metastasis to each LN station were also considered. A pros and cons analysis was performed on the removal of each LN station.

RESULTS

Eleven retrospective studies (2514 patients), five prospective NRCTs (545 patients), and five prospective RCTs (586 patients) described different lymphadenectomies, which obtained similar long-term results. Five meta-analyses showed they did not influence long-term survival. However, N status is an important component of tumor staging. The recommended minimum TNLE is 15. The percent incidence of metastasis to each LN station was calculated considering at least 385 and up to 3725 patients. Preoperative imaging and intraoperative exploration frequently fail to identify metastatic nodes. A pros and cons analysis suggests that lymph node status is better established removing the following LN stations: 6, 8a-p, 12a-b-c, 13a-b, 14a-b-c-d, 16b1, 17a-b. Metastasis to 16b1 LNs significantly worsens prognosis. Their removal and frozen section examination, before proceeding with resection, may contraindicate resection.

CONCLUSION

A standard lymphadenectomy demands an adequate TNLE and removal of the LN stations metastasizing more frequently, without increasing the surgical risk.

Current state of surgical management of pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is still associated with a poor prognosis and remains—as the fourth leading cause of cancer related mortality—a therapeutic challenge. Overall long-term survival is about 1–5%, and in only 10–20% of pancreatic cancer patients is potentially curative surgery possible, increasing five-year survival rates to approximately 20–25%. Pancreatic surgery is a technically challenging procedure and has significantly changed during the past decades with regard to technical aspects as well as perioperative care. Standardized resections can be carried out with low morbidity and mortality below 5% in high volume institutions. Furthermore, there is growing evidence that also more extended resections including multivisceral approaches, vessel reconstructions or surgery for tumor recurrence can be carried out safely with favorable outcomes. The impact of adjuvant treatment, especially chemotherapy, has increased dramatically within recent years, leading to significantly improved postoperative survival, making pancreatic cancer therapy an interdisciplinary approach to achieve best results.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of standard and extended lymphadenectomy in pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Although some retrospective studies of extended radical lymphadenectomy for pancreatic cancer have suggested a survival advantage, this is controversial.

METHODS

A literature search identified randomized controlled trials comparing extended with standard lymphadenectomy in pancreatic cancer surgery. Overall survival was analysed using hazard ratios and standard errors. Pooled estimates of overall treatment effects were calculated using a random effects model (odds ratio and 95 per cent confidence interval).

RESULTS

Of four randomized trials identified for systematic review, three were included in a meta-analysis of survival. The log hazard ratios (standard errors) for survival for the three trials were 0.36 (0.22), - 0.15 (0.17) and - 0.21 (0.15); the weighted mean log hazard ratio for survival overall was 0.93 (95 per cent confidence interval 0.77 to 1.13), revealing no significant differences between the standard and extended procedure (P = 0.480). Morbidity and mortality rates were also comparable, with a trend towards higher rates of delayed gastric emptying for extended lymphadenectomy. The number of resected lymph nodes was significantly higher in the extended lymphadenectomy groups (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The extended procedure does not benefit overall survival, and there may even be a trend towards increased morbidity. Therefore extended lymphadenectomy should be performed only within adequately powered controlled trials, if at all.

Evidence-based pancreatic head resection for pancreatic cancer and chronic pancreatitis

OBJECTIVE

To review the current status of pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer and chronic pancreatitis using evidence-based methodology.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Despite improved results of pancreatoduodenectomy over the recent years, the reputation of the Whipple procedure and its main modifications has remained poor. In addition, the current status of newer modifications of standard pancreatoduodenectomy is still under debate.

METHODS

Medline search and manual cross-referencing were performed to identify all relevant articles for classification and analysis according to their quality of evidence. The search was limited to articles published between 1990 and 2001.

RESULTS

The mortality rate of pancreatoduodenectomy has declined to less than 5% for chronic pancreatitis and 3% to 8% for pancreatic cancer. In contrast, overall morbidity rates remain high, ranging between 20% and 70%. Delayed gastric emptying represents almost half of all complications. The overall 5-year survival rate for patients with pancreatic cancer remains poor, ranging between 5% and 15%, with a median survival of 13 to 17 months. Mortality and morbidity are not related to the type of pancreatoduodenectomy; however, patients with pancreatic cancer tend to be at increased risk for complications. Extended lymph node dissection and portal vein resection can be performed with similar mortality and morbidity rates as standard procedures, but without apparent survival benefits in the long term. Major relief of pain is achieved in 70% to 100% of patients with chronic pancreatitis.

CONCLUSIONS

Pancreatoduodenectomy and its main modifications are safe and effective treatment modalities, especially in experienced centers with a high patient volume. For chronic pancreatitis, surgical resection provides major relief of pain and thus increased quality of life. Overall survival for patients with pancreatic cancer is determined predominantly by the pathology within the resected specimen.

Personal observations, opinions, and approaches to cancer of the pancreas and the periampullary area

This article reviews the diagnosis, staging, surgical, and adjuvant treatment of pancreatic and periampullary cancer based on personal experience covering 25 years. In spite of remarkable progress, especially in regard to staging and surgical treatment, the authors conclude that with the modalities currently available, timely diagnosis and definitive cure of this particular cancer is rare.