Minimally invasive RAMPS in well-selected left-sided pancreatic cancer within Yonsei criteria: long-term (>median 3 years) oncologic outcomes

A comparative analysis and survival analysis of open versus minimally invasive radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy for pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a major public health concern, ranking as the fourth leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States. Traditional surgical approaches often yield suboptimal outcomes, highlighting the need for innovative surgical strategies. Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) has demonstrated improvements in surgical visualization and oncological outcomes. Recently, laparoscopic RAMPS (L-RAMPS) has been introduced as a minimally invasive alternative.

Objectives

This meta-analysis aims to compare the safety and efficacy of open RAMPS (O-RAMPS) versus L-RAMPS, focusing on operative outcomes, minimally invasive outcomes, intra-abdominal outcomes, overall postoperative outcomes, and oncologic outcomes.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Eligible studies included prospective or retrospective cohort studies and randomized controlled trials comparing L-RAMPS with O-RAMPS. Data were extracted from EMBASE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library databases through September 16, 2023. The ROBINS-I tool was used to assess the risk of bias. Statistical analyses included odds ratios (OR), risk differences (RD), mean differences (MD), and survival analyses.

Results

Eight studies involving 588 patients were included. O-RAMPS was associated with longer operative times (MD = 39.39 minutes, 95% CI = 22.93 to 55.84) and greater blood loss (MD = -231.84 mL, 95% CI = -312.00 to -151.69). No significant differences were observed in blood transfusion rates, pancreatic fistula rates, delayed gastric emptying, or length of hospital stay. L-RAMPS demonstrated a shorter time to oral feeding (MD = -0.79 days, 95% CI = -1.35 to -0.22). Survival analysis suggested a potentially improved long-term prognosis for L-RAMPS.

Conclusion

L-RAMPS offers advantages over O-RAMPS in terms of reduced blood loss, faster time to oral feeding, and potentially better long-term prognosis. Further research is warranted, particularly regarding the learning curve of L-RAMPS and its broader applicability.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero, identifier CRD42024498383.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Port-site metastasis after laparoscopic radical pancreatosplenectomy in left-sided pancreatic cancer

Despite debates regarding the safety of well-selected left-sided pancreatic cancer, minimally invasive distal pancreatosplenectomy is considered safer and more effective than open distal pancreatosplenectomy in well-selected patients. Previous studies have shown that minimally invasive surgery yields comparable oncologic outcomes to open surgery. While patients who undergo minimally invasive distal pancreatosplenectomy also experience recurrences and metastases after surgery, port-site metastasis is particularly rare. In this report, we report an extremely rare case of port-site metastasis following minimally invasive distal pancreatosplenectomy for left-sided pancreatic cancer.

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.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

FINDINGS

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

INTERPRETATION

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

FUNDING

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

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy enhances local control of the disease in patients with left-sided pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) was developed to enhance curability in patients with left-sided pancreatic cancer. However, no evidence is available regarding the prognostic superiority of RAMPS compared with conventional distal pancreatectomy (cDP). Here, we aimed to assess the oncological benefit of RAMPS by comparing surgical outcomes between patients who underwent cDP and RAMPS with propensity score (PS) adjustment.

METHODS

Clinical data of 174 patients undergoing cDP and RAMPS between 2009 and 2016 at two high-volume centers were analyzed with PS matching. Recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and local recurrence rates were compared between patients who underwent cDP and RAMPS.

RESULTS

The cDP and RAMPS groups were successfully matched with baseline characteristics. No differences were found in the 3-year RFS and OS rates between the two groups (3-year RFS: cDP 46% vs RAMPS 40%, p = 0.451, 3-year OS: cDP 57% vs RAMPS 53%, p = 0.692). However, the 3-year local recurrence rate was lower in the RAMPS (10%) than that in the cDP group (34%) (hazard ratio 0.275, 95% confidence interval 0.090-0.842, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

RAMPS is oncologically superior to conventional procedure in achieving local control of the disease in patients with left-sided pancreatic cancer.

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.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatosplenectomy for left-sided pancreatic cancer in patients with radical subtotal gastrectomy for gastric cancer

After radical subtotal gastrectomy (RSTG) for stomach cancer, the remnant stomach is supposed to be perfused through the short gastric vessels. What if a patient who received previous RSTG is diagnosed with resectable distal pancreatic cancer? Can radical distal pancreatosplenectomy (DPS) be performed safely without ischemic damage to the remnant stomach? Unfortunately, there are limited studies on this specific clinical issue. Notably, in spite of rare clinical presentation, it is expected to increase due to prolonged survival of patients with resected gastric cancer. Therefore, we aimed to demonstrate the safety and feasibility of the radical DPS in patients with previous RSTG. In this study, we investigated perioperative and long-term survival outcomes of DPS for left-sided pancreatic cancer in patients with previous RSTG.

Laparoscopic Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy with Anterocranial Splenic Artery-First Approach for Left-Sided Resectable Pancreatic Cancer (with Videos)

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (Lap-RAMPS) for left-sided pancreatic cancer remains a technically challenging procedure. How to approach the splenic artery in laparoscopic surgery has not been discussed in adequate detail, and the implications of an artery-first approach in left-sided pancreatic cancer remain unclear.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Forty-five consecutive patients with left-sided resectable pancreatic cancer underwent Lap-RAMPS between July 2018 and September 2020. They were divided according to whether Lap-RAMPS was performed using an anterocranial splenic artery-first (ASF) approach (ASF group, n = 23) or via another approach (non-ASF group, n = 22). Clinical, pathological, and short-term outcomes were reviewed and compared between the groups.

RESULTS

The ASF approach was performed safely in all patients with resectable left-sided pancreatic cancer, and none required conversion to laparotomy. The ASF group had better outcomes in terms of conspicuous bleeding from the spleen during splenic mobilization (P = 0.016) and blood pooling during posterior dissection (P = 0.035). Consequently, blood loss was significantly less and operation time was significantly shorter in the ASF group than in the non-ASF group. There was no significant between-group difference in other short-term outcomes, including mortality, length of hospital stay, or Clavien-Dindo classification.

CONCLUSIONS

The ASF approach was safe when performed for resectable left-sided pancreatic cancer and may help to prevent congestion of the pancreas and lessen intraoperative blood loss.

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

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

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.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Surgical approaches for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

A comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: Propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the perioperative and pathologic outcomes of robotic distal pancreatectomy compared with a laparoscopic approach.

METHODS

A total of 121 robotic distal pancreatectomies and 992 laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies were retrospectively evaluated, comparing the demographic, perioperative and pathologic outcomes. After 1:2 propensity score matching (PSM) with 11 demographic variables, the factors were analysed again.

RESULTS

Following PSM, 104 robotic distal pancreatectomy patients were compared with 208 laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy patients. The operation time and proportion of spleen preservation were not different between the groups. The rates of open conversion were lower, whereas the hospital costs were higher in the robotic group. Other perioperative outcomes and pathologic factors did not differ between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Although robotic distal pancreatectomy is more expensive, this operation is feasible, with a higher probability of proceeding with the planned operation and with low open conversion rate.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Korean clinical practice guideline for pancreatic cancer 2021: A summary of evidence-based, multi-disciplinary diagnostic and therapeutic approaches

Pancreatic cancer is the eighth most common cancer and the fifth most common cause of cancer-related death in Korea. To enable standardization of management and facilitate improvements in outcome, a total of 53 multi-disciplinary experts in gastroenterology, surgery, medical oncology, radiation oncology, radiology, nuclear medicine, and pathology in Korea developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date, evidence-based research findings and expert opinions. Recommendations were made on imaging diagnosis, endoscopic management, surgery, radiotherapy, palliative chemotherapy, and specific management procedures, including neoadjuvant treatment or adjuvant treatment for patients with resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer. This is the English version of the Korean clinical practice guideline for pancreatic cancer 2021. This guideline includes 20 clinical questions and 32 statements. This guideline represents the most standard guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in adults at this time in Korea. The authors believe that this guideline will provide useful and informative advice.

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.

Complete response of locally advanced left-sided pancreatic cancer after modified FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy followed by conversion surgery: A case report

For years, neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer is being investigated and radical surgical resection with laparoscopic approach is getting up to speed. Pathological complete remission is known as a predictive marker for a good prognosis for various carcinomas. Although there are a few case reports about pathological complete remission, there has been no case report of pathological complete remission resulted from successful extensive resection by laparoscopic surgery after a neoadjuvant modified FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy. A 68-year-old male patient was admitted due to a palpable abdominal mass which turned out to be 16-cm-sized huge locally advanced left-sided pancreatic cancer with possible stomach, left adrenal gland, left kidney, and colon invasion. After administration of 10th modified FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy, the tumor had decreased and he underwent laparoscopic radical distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy, left adrenalectomy, wedge resection of stomach, and segmental resection of transverse colon. Although patient had a postoperative micro-abscess around the colon anastomosis site, he was successfully managed with conservative treatment and discharged on 12 days postoperatively. The final pathology reported complete tumor regression. We hereby emphasize the oncologic significance of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in huge left-sided pancreatic cancer and the potential role of laparoscopic conversion surgery.

Efficacy of the slow firing method using a reinforced triple-row stapler for preventing postoperative pancreatic fistula during laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy

PURPOSE

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains the most clinically relevant complication of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP). The present study evaluated the efficacy of the "slow firing method" using a reinforced triple-row stapler (Covidien, Tokyo, Japan) during LDP.

METHODS

This retrospective single-center study included 73 consecutive patients who underwent LDP using the slow firing method. A black cartridge was used in all patients. The primary endpoint was the rate of clinically relevant POPF (CR-POPF) after LDP. Secondary endpoints included perioperative outcomes and factors associated with CR-POPF as well as the correlation between the transection time and thickness of the pancreas.

RESULTS

Four patients (5.5%) developed CR-POPF (grade B). Overall morbidity rates, defined as grade ≥ II and ≥ III according to the Clavien-Dindo classification, were 21 and 11%, respectively. The median postoperative hospital stay was 10 days. Preoperative diabetes (13.6 vs. 0.2%, P = 0.044) and thickness of the pancreas ≥ 15 mm (13.8% vs. 0%, P = 0.006) were identified as independent risk factors for CR-POPF. The median transection time was 16 (8-29) min.

CONCLUSION

The slow firing method using a reinforced triple-row stapler for pancreatic transection is simple, safe, and effective for preventing CR-POPF after LDP.

Comparison of perioperative short-term outcomes and oncologic long-term outcomes between open and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Purpose

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is widely performed but its efficacy and safety are not established for malignant lesions. This study was aimed to compare outcomes of LDP and open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

Methods

Patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy for PDAC between 2009 and 2017 were enrolled. The preoperative clinical stage was evaluated and propensity score matching (PSM) was performed using age, sex, The American Joint Committee on Cancer 8th clinical T stage, and other organ involvement.

Results

In 186 patients enrolled, 35 (18.8%) received LDP. The ODP group showed larger tumor size and frequent involvement of other organs in preoperative images. However, after PSM, these differences were balanced. R0 resection (90.5% vs. 94.3%, P = 0.730), harvested lymph nodes (14.3 vs. 12.6, P = 0.380) and pathologic T stage (P = 0.474) were comparable between ODP and LDP groups, respectively. LDP demonstrated shorter operation time, less postoperative pain, and shorter hospitalization (14.4 days vs. 11.1 days, P = 0.026). In terms of long-term oncologic outcomes, median overall survival (32 months vs. 28 months, P = 0.724) and disease-free survival (18 months vs. 19 months, P = 0.926) were comparable.

Conclusion

LDP demonstrated better short-term outcomes and comparable long-term outcomes compared with ODP. LDP is a safe and feasible procedure for PDAC.

Short-term and long term morbidity in robotic pancreatic surgery: a systematic review

Background

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most aggressive and lethal tumours in Western society. Pancreatic surgery can be considered a challenge for open and laparoscopic surgeons, even if the accuracy of gland dissection, due to the close relationship between pancreas, the portal vein, and mesenteric vessels, besides the reconstructive phase (in pancreaticoduodenectomy), lead to significant difficulties for laparoscopic technique. Minimally invasive pancreatic surgery changed utterly with the development of robotic surgery. However, this review aims to make more clarity on the influence of robotic surgery on long-term morbidity.

Methods

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus to identify and analyze studies published from November 2011 to September 2020 concerning robotic pancreatic surgery. The following terms were used to perform the search: "long term morbidity robotic pancreatic surgery".

Results

Eighteen articles included in the study were published between November 2011 and September 2020. The review included 2041 patients who underwent robotic pancreatic surgery, mainly for a malignant tumour. The two most common robotic surgical procedures adopted were the robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) and the robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD). In two studies, patients were divided into groups; on the one hand, those who underwent a robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD), on the other hand, those who underwent robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP). The remaining items included surgical approach such as robotic middle pancreatectomy (RMP), robotic distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy, robotic-assisted laparoscopic pancreatic dissection (RALPD), robotic enucleation of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours.

Conclusions

Comparison between robotic surgery and open surgery lead to evidence of different advantages of the robotic approach. A multidisciplinary team and a surgical centre at high volume are essential for better postoperative morbidity and mortality.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHOD

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy: preliminary experience with 10 cases

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Essential updates 2018/2019: Current topics in the surgical treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is highly malignant. While cancers in other organs have shown clear improvements in 5-year survival, the 5-year survival rate of pancreatic cancer is approximately 10%. Early relapse and metastasis are not uncommon, making it difficult to achieve an acceptable prognosis even after complete surgical resection of the pancreas. Studies have been performed on various treatments to improve the prognosis of PDAC, and multidisciplinary approaches including non-surgical treatments have led to gradual improvement. In the present literature review, we have described the significance of anatomical and biological resectability criteria, the concept of R0 resection in surgical treatment, the feasibility of minimally invasive surgery, the remarkable development of perioperative chemotherapy, the effectiveness of conversion surgery for unresectable PDAC, and ongoing challenges in PDAC treatment. We also provide an essential update on these subjects by focusing on recent trends and topics.

Feasibility and Safety of Laparoscopic Radical Distal Pancreatosplenectomy with Adrenalectomy in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is a lethal condition with poor outcomes and an increasing incidence.1 However, recent meta-analysis reported improved survival and R0 resection rate following neoadjuvant chemotherapy with subsequent surgery in initially unresectable pancreatic cancer.2 In addition, as a result of technological advances during the past 2 decades, even in pancreatic cancers, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) approaches are being used more frequently and safely.3-5 This video shows the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic resection in advanced left-sided pancreatic cancer.

METHOD

The patient was a 63-year-old male with hypertension and diabetes. Initial computed tomography (CT) scan showed a 31 mm-sized pancreatic tail cancer with celiac artery and left adrenal gland abutment. The patient underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy due to the risk of retroperitoneal cancer infiltration. After four cycles of FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy, follow-up CT scan showed the tumor decreased to 2.6 cm and celiac artery abutment became less prominent. Based on the CT scan, laparoscopic radical distal pancreatosplenectomy with left adrenalectomy was planned.

RESULTS

A five-port laparoscopic approach was performed, including three 12 mm trocars and an additional two 5 mm trocars. Initial intra-abdominal exploration showed no peritoneal seeding or micro liver metastasis. Gastric wedge resection was added due to cancer invasion for margin-negative resection. Operation time was 215 min and estimated blood loss was 200 cc without transfusion. The patient was discharged on postoperative day 6 without any complications, including postoperative pancreatic fistula.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic distal pancreatosplenectomy can be technically feasible and safe to obtain negative resection margins in well-selected patients following neoadjuvant therapy in locally advanced pancreatic cancer.6.

Laparoscopic Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy with Vascular Resection for Pancreatic Cancer: Tips and Tricks

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (L-RAMPS) with vascular resection for pancreatic cancer has been rarely reported in the literature. Several critical steps are required to achieve a safe radical resection under laparoscopy while respecting oncologic principles of radicality.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data on a consecutive series of patients undergoing radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) were retrospectively reviewed for the purpose of this study. Patients were divided into two groups based on the surgical approach and the need for vascular resection, and data were compared. The surgical technique is reported in detail focusing on the different modalities of vascular resection.

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients (male/female ratio, 12/11; mean age, 73 years) underwent RAMPS between July 2014 and October 2018 at our institution. Of these, 17 had a laparoscopic approach and six a standard open approach. All patients in the open group underwent complex vascular reconstructions while four out of 17 (23.5%) underwent laparoscopic vascular resection. One patient in the laparoscopic approach required a vascular reconstruction with graft interposition, which combined the two approaches. There was no mortality, and the complication rate and the duration of surgery were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

L-RAMPS with vascular resection is feasible and safe in selected cases when performed by advanced pancreatic surgeons with experience in laparoscopic surgery.

Laparoscopic repeated pancreatectomy for isolated local recurrence in remnant pancreas following laparoscopic radical pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: Two cases report

Typical treatment for recurrent pancreatic cancer is potent chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. However, recent clinical investigations suggest a potential therapeutic role of local resection in recurrent pancreatic cancer. Based on accumulating surgical experience of minimally invasive pancreatectomy, we report cases of two patients who underwent successful laparoscopic re-resection of isolated local recurrence following laparoscopic radical pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer.

Minimally invasive surgery for pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is the most lethal malignancy of the digestive organs. Although pancreatic resection is essential to radically cure this refractory disease, the multi-organ resection involved, as well as sequelae such as glucose tolerance insufficiency and severe complications impose a heavy burden on these patients. Since the late twentieth century, minimally invasive surgery has become more popular for the surgical management of digestive disease and pancreatic cancer. Minimally invasive pancreatic resection (MIPR), including pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy, is now a treatment option for pancreatic cancer. Some evidence suggests that MIPR for pancreatic cancer provides comparable oncological outcomes to open surgery, with some advantages in perioperative outcomes. However, as this evidence is retrospective, prospective investigations, including randomized controlled trials, are necessary. Because neoadjuvant therapy for resectable or borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer and conversion surgery for initially unresectable pancreatic cancer has become more common, the feasibility of MIPR after neoadjuvant therapy or as conversion surgery requires further assessment. It is expected that progress in surgical techniques and devices, as well as the standardization of surgical procedures and widespread educational programs will improve the outcomes of MIPR.

Laparoscopic Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy with Venous Tangential Resection: Focus on Periadventitial Dissection of the Superior Mesenteric Artery for Obtaining Negative Margin and a Safe Vascular Resection

BACKGROUND

Due to its technical complexity, laparoscopic (L-) radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) for left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has been described in a few series.1-4 In addition, splenomesenteric junction tumor involvement is considered a formal contraindication to L-RAMPS.

METHODS

The video shows posterior L-RAMPS with a left approach to the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) for a left-sided PDAC with suspected involvement of the splenomesenteric junction.

RESULTS

The patient was a 61-year-old woman affected by a cT3N0M0 pancreatic body PDAC. Following dissection of the superior mesenteric vein (SMV), proper/common hepatic artery, and gastroduodenal artery, the pancreatic neck is encircled and the celiac trunk (CT) skeletonized. The treitz ligament is opened, and the SMA is identified and dissected on its left anterior margin. Pancreatic mobilization en bloc with the Gerota fascia and left adrenal gland is followed by splenic artery transection and suprapancreatic lymphadenectomy completion. The mesopancreas is dissected from the right margin of the SMA and CT and the pancreas is transected. The portal vein and SMV are cross-clamped and a venous tangential resection/closure is performed. Cryostate histological examination of the venous and pancreatic stumps showed absence of tumor cells. Final pathology revealed a pT2N0(0+/42)R0G2 PDAC of the pancreatic body.

CONCLUSION

During L-RAMPS, periadvential SMA dissection through the left-anterior approach, specular to the right posterior SMA approach described for laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy,5,6 has a primary role in maximizing the vascular surgical margin and, allowing for complete mobilization of the specimen before vein resection, may make a splenomesenteric junction tangential resection/closure easier and safer in case of tumor involvement of the splenomesenteric venous axis.

Predictors for Survival in an International Cohort of Patients Undergoing Distal Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Background

Surgical factors, including resection of Gerota’s fascia, R0-resection, and lymph node yield, may be associated with survival after distal pancreatectomy (DP) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), but evidence from large multicenter studies is lacking. This study aimed to identify predictors for overall survival after DP for PDAC, especially those related to surgical technique.

Patients and Methods

Data from an international retrospective cohort including patients from 11 European countries and the USA who underwent DP for PDAC (2007–2015) were analyzed. Cox proportional hazard analyses were performed and included Gerota’s fascia resection, R0 resection, lymph node ratio, extended resection, and a minimally invasive approach.

Results

Overall, 1200 patients from 34 centers with median follow-up of 15 months [interquartile range (IQR) 5–31 months] and median survival period of 30 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 27–33 months] were included. Gerota’s fascia resection [hazard ratio (HR) 0.74; p = 0.019], R0 resection (HR 0.70; p = 0.006), and decreased lymph node ratio (HR 0.28; p < 0.001) were associated with improved overall survival, whereas extended resection (HR 1.75; p < 0.001) was associated with worse overall survival. A minimally invasive approach did not improve survival as compared with an open approach (HR 1.14; p = 0.350). Adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 0.67; p = 0.003) was also associated with improved overall survival.

Conclusions

This international cohort identified Gerota’s fascia resection, R0 resection, and decreased lymph node ratio as factors associated with improved overall survival during DP for PDAC. Surgeons should strive for R0 resection and adequate lymphadenectomy and could also consider Gerota’s fascia resection in their routine surgical approach.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1245/s10434-020-08658-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Conversion to open laparotomy during laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: lessons from a single-center experience in 70 consecutive patients

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine the factors influencing conversion from laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) to open surgery, and the effect of such conversion on the outcome.

METHODS

This retrospective single-center study included 70 consecutive patients undergoing LDP. The primary endpoint was the rate of conversion to open surgery during LDP. The secondary endpoints were determining the reasons for conversion to open surgery, with detailed analyses of these cases and a comparison of the surgical outcome with and without conversion.

RESULTS

Seven patients (10%) required conversion to open surgery during LDP. Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) was identified as a risk factor for conversion (p = 0.010). The reasons for conversion included technical difficulty (two bleeding, one severe adhesion) and pancreatic stump-related issues (two margin-positive, two stapling failures). Although the overall morbidity rate (29 vs. 11%, p = 0.48) and the rate of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (14 vs. 5%, p = 0.82) were no different for the patients with or without open conversion, the postoperative hospital stay was significantly longer in the former (median 15 vs. 10 days, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Careful preoperative assessment is required when planning LDP for PDAC. Although conversion to open surgery does not result in failure of LDP, efforts to reduce the duration of postoperative hospital stay and the occurrence of complications are desirable to improve the outcome of LDP.

Laparoscopic versus open radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy with artery-first approach in pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

An artery-first approach for pancreatic cancer (PC) is challenging to perform laparoscopically and is mainly performed using an open approach. The aims of this study were to assess the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) with an artery-first approach (L-aRAMPS) as compared with open aRAMPS (O-aRAMPS) in resectable PC using matched-pair analysis.

METHODS

Artery-first approach is an early dissection of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) from behind the pancreas body as the first surgical step. Data on L-aRAMPS and O-aRAMPS, performed between July 2013 and November 2019, were collected retrospectively. Additionally, the spatial characteristics of the splenic artery were analyzed using computed tomography.

RESULTS

Thirty L-aRAMPS and 33 O-aRAMPS for resectable PC were included. After matching, 15 L-aRAMPS were compared with 15 O-aRAMPS. Median intraoperative blood loss and hospital stay were significantly improved in L-aRAMPS compared to O-aRAMPS (30 vs. 220 g, p < 0.001; 12 vs. 16 days, p = 0.049). The overall morbidity was similar in both study groups. The total number of lymph nodes dissected and those harvested from around the SMA and R0 resection was similar in both study groups. We classified the width of the cross section of the pancreas body into three equal parts: the upper, middle, and lower parts of the pancreas; 63% of the splenic artery origin was located in middle and lower parts of the pancreas body.

CONCLUSION

L-aRAMPS is technically safe and oncologically feasible to secure favorable surgical outcomes for resectable PC patients.

Laparoscopic Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) Technique: Toward the Standardization of the Technique (With Video)

Laparoscopic left pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer has increased worldwide over the last decade. However, this procedure is technically challenging compared with traditional laparoscopic left pancreatectomy and still needs to be better standardized. On this video, we describe the standardization of the technique at our center, highlighting some technical tips and tricks.

Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a single-center propensity score matching study

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) for benign and low-grade malignant pancreatic diseases has been increasingly utilized. However, the use of LDP for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains controversial and has not been widely accepted. In this study, the outcomes of LDP versus conventional open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) for left-sided PDAC were examined. A retrospective review of patients who underwent LDP or ODP for left-sided PDAC between January 2010 and January 2019 was conducted. One-to-one propensity score matching (PSM) was used to minimize selection biases by balancing factors including age, sex, ASA grade, tumor size, and combined resection. Demographic data, their pathological and short-term clinical parameters, and long-term oncological outcomes were compared between the LDP and ODP groups. A total of 197 patients with PDAC were enrolled. There were 115 (58.4%) patients in the LDP group and 82 (41.6%) patients in the ODP group. After 1:1 PSM, 66 well-matched patients in each group were evaluated. The LDP group had lesser blood loss (195 vs. 210 mL, p < 0.01), shorter operative time (193.6 vs. 217.5 min; p = 0.02), and shorter hospital stay (12 vs. 15 days, p < 0.01), whereas the overall complication rates were comparable between groups (10.6% vs.16.7%, p = 0.31). There were no significant differences between the LDP and ODP groups regarding 3-year recurrence-free or overall survival rate (p = 0.89 and p = 0.33, respectively). LDP in the treatment of left-sided PDAC is a technically safe, feasible and favorable approach in short-term surgical outcomes. Moreover, patients undergoing LDP than ODP for PDAC had comparable oncological metrics and similar middle-term survival rate.

Yonsei Criteria, a Potential Linkage to Intratumoral Foxp3⁺/CD8⁺ Ratio for the Prediction of Oncologic Outcomes in Resected Left-Sided Pancreatic Cancer

PURPOSE

This study sought to investigate associations among Yonsei criteria (tumor confined to the pancreas, intact fascia layer between the distal pancreas and the left adrenal gland and kidney, and tumor located more than 1-2 cm from the celiac axis) and tumor infiltrating lymphocytes in pancreatic cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent curative distal pancreatectomy due to left-sided pancreatic cancer from January 2000 to December 2011 were enrolled. Follow-up was completed September 30, 2015.

RESULTS

Fifty patients were enrolled. Having ≥ two metastatic lymph nodes (LNs, p=0.002), intraoperative transfusion (p=0.011), low levels of tumor infiltrating CD8⁺ T-cells (p=0.001), and a high Foxp3⁺/CD8⁺ ratio (p=0.009) were independent risk factors for disease-free survival. Not satisfying the Yonsei criteria (p=0.021), having ≥ two metastatic LNs (p=0.032), low levels of tumor infiltrating CD8⁺ T-cells (p=0.040) and a high Foxp3⁺/CD8⁺ ratio (p=0.032) were associated with unfavorable overall survival. High levels of CA19-9 and not satisfying the Yonsei criteria were significantly associated with a high Foxp3⁺/CD8⁺ ratio [Exp(β)=3.558; 95% confidence inverval: 1.000-12.658; p=0.050].

CONCLUSION

Yonsei criteria may be clinically detectable biologic marker with which to predict immunologic status and survival in pancreatic cancer patients.

Comparing laparoscopic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with pancreatic head cancer: oncologic outcomes and inflammatory scores

BACKGROUND

Both the technical and oncological safety of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) remain controversial in treating pancreatic head cancer. We evaluated the oncologic benefit of LPD and compared the inflammatory score between LPD and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD).

METHODS

From January 2014 to March 2019, 61 patients with standard PD not combined with other organ resection were finally enrolled in this study. Among these patients, 27 underwent LPD and 34 underwent OPD (registered on 16 July 2019, and registration number is 2019-1411-001).

RESULTS

The estimated blood loss (EBL) for the LPD group was less than that of the OPD group (P = 0.003). The operation time was similar, as was the incidence of complications such as postoperative fistula, delayed gastric emptying. Overall survival was not different between LPD and OPD (44.62 vs. 45.29 months, P = 0.223). However, a significant improvement in disease-free survival (DFS) was seen in the LPD group (34.19 vs. 23.27 months, P = 0.027). No statistically significant differences were found in terms of the postoperative change in inflammatory scores and differentiated white blood cell counts.

CONCLUSIONS

LPD is not only safe and feasible in pancreatic head cancer patients but is associated with a reduced amount of EBL, favorable DFS.

Outcomes of Elective and Emergency Conversion in Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: An International Multicenter Propensity Score-matched Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of conversion during minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) on outcome by a propensity-matched comparison with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP).

BACKGROUND

MIDP is associated with faster recovery as compared with ODP. The high conversion rate (15%-25%) in patients with PDAC, however, is worrisome and may negatively influence outcome.

METHODS

A post hoc analysis of a retrospective cohort including distal pancreatectomies for PDAC from 34 centers in 11 countries. Patients requiring conversion were matched, using propensity scores, to ODP procedures (1:2 ratio). Indications for conversion were classified as elective conversions (eg, vascular involvement) or emergency conversions (eg, bleeding).

RESULTS

Among 1212 distal pancreatectomies for PDAC, 345 patients underwent MIDP, with 68 (19.7%) conversions, mostly elective (n = 46, 67.6%). Vascular resection (other than splenic vessels) was required in 19.1% of the converted procedures. After matching (61 MIDP-converted vs 122 ODP), conversion did not affect R-status, recurrence of cancer, nor overall survival. However, emergency conversion was associated with increased overall morbidity (61.9% vs 31.1%, P= 0.007) and a trend to worse oncological outcome compared with ODP. Elective conversion was associated with comparable overall morbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

Elective conversion in MIDP for PDAC was associated with comparable short-term and oncological outcomes in comparison with ODP. However, emergency conversions were associated with worse both short- and long-term outcomes, and should be prevented by careful patient selection, awareness of surgeons' learning curve, and consideration of early conversion when unexpected intraoperative findings are encountered.

Stepwise implementation of laparoscopic pancreatic surgery. Case series of a single centre's experience

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic pancreatic surgery still represents a challenge for surgeons. However, in recent decades the experience is expanding. Recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses confirm that laparoscopic pancreatic resection (LPR) is safe, feasible and worthwhile. This study analyses the first 100 consecutive LPRs in our centre.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted of the first 100 LPRs in a single supra-regional Belgian centre, performed between January 2012 and January 2019. Pre-, peri- and postoperative data were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database. All procedures were performed laparoscopically by two attending surgeons, specialized in minimally invasive and hepatopancreatobiliary surgery.

RESULTS

Of 100 procedures, 62 laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomies (LPD) and 36 laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies (LDP) were performed, along with 1 enucleation and 1 central pancreatectomy. Indication was malignancy in 70%. Conversion rate was 24,2% in LPD and 11% in LDP. Median operative time was 330 min (IQR 300-360) in LPD and 150 min (IQR 142.5-210) in LDP. Median blood loss was 200 mL (IQR 100-487.5) in LPD and 150 mL (IQR 50-500) in LDP, transfusion rate was 22.6% and 8.3% respectively. Median length of stay (LOS) was 13 days (IQR 10-19.25) in LPD and 9 days (IQR 9-14) in LDP. R0 resection rate was 88.6% (62/70). Major complication rate (Clavien-Dindo grade III-IV) was 12%. Thirty-day mortality was 0%, 90-day mortality was 2%.

CONCLUSION

Our results confirm that LPR is a feasible and safe alternative to open pancreatic surgery. Safe implementation with a clear strategy is fundamental to gain experience and overcome the learning curve of this technically demanding procedures.

International consensus statement on robotic pancreatic surgery

The robotic surgical system has been applied to various types of pancreatic surgery. However, controversies exist regarding a variety of factors including the safety, feasibility, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of robotic surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the current status of robotic pancreatic surgery and put forth experts' consensus and recommendations to promote its development. Based on the WHO Handbook for Guideline Development, a Consensus Steering Group* and a Consensus Development Group were established to determine the topics, prepare evidence-based documents, and generate recommendations. The GRADE Grid method and Delphi vote were used to formulate the recommendations. A total of 19 topics were analyzed. The first 16 recommendations were generated by GRADE using an evidence-based method (EBM) and focused on the safety, feasibility, indication, techniques, certification of the robotic surgeon, and cost-effectiveness of robotic pancreatic surgery. The remaining three recommendations were based on literature review and expert panel opinion due to insufficient EBM results. Since the current amount of evidence was low/meager as evaluated by the GRADE method, further randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed in the future to validate these recommendations.

Comparison of Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy with Standard Retrograde Pancreatosplenectomy for Left-Sided Pancreatic Cancer: A Meta-Analysis and Experience of a Single Center

BACKGROUND Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) has been reported as a modified surgical technique used to achieve better margin resection and to retrieve more lymph nodes compared with standard retrograde pancreatosplenectomy (SRPS). MATERIAL AND METHODS A systematic literature review was performed to identify studies published in PubMed, EmBase, and Web of Science. Hazard ratio (HR), risk ratio (RR), weighted mean difference (WMD), and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were used as effect measures. In addition, the clinical data of 27 patients in our center were collected and retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS Seven studies containing 474 patients were finally enrolled in this meta-analysis. The pooled results showed that the RAMPS group had a better overall survival (OS) compared with the SRPS group (HR=0.65, 95% CI: 0.43-0.99, P=0.046; I²=41.8%, P=0.143). Significantly more lymph nodes were harvested in the RAMPS group compared with in the SRPS group (WMD=4.74, 95% CI: 0.36-9.12, P=0.034). Recurrence rate (RR=0.8, 95% CI: 0.66-0.98, P=0.028) and blood loss (WMD=-153.19 ml, 95% CI: -303.95 to -2.42, P=0.046) were both significantly reduced in the RAMPS group. Retrospective analysis results showed that only significantly more harvested lymph nodes were noted in the RAMPS group compared with the SRPS group (7.55±0.91 vs. 2.81±0.73, P=0.001). CONCLUSIONS Our study suggests that RAMPS has better prognosis and surgical outcomes than SRPS for left-sided pancreatic cancer. Nevertheless, more high-quality clinical trials are required to validate the result.

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy for all pancreatic body and tail tumors: rationale and results

BACKGROUND

Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) has been propagated as the standard of care for pancreatic cancers involving the body and tail of the pancreas. This procedure has been shown to have promising results in enhancing the microscopically negative tangential resection margins as well as the lymph node yield.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained database on the resections performed for all pancreatic body and tail tumors at Tata Memorial Centre.

RESULTS

Sixty-five patients underwent RAMPS without any perioperative mortality. The various pathologies comprised of adenocarcinoma (41.5%), neuroendocrine tumors (12.3%), solid pseudopapillary epithelial neoplasm (15.3%), cystic neoplasms (15.2%), etc. The R0 resection rate was 87.7%. Among this cohort, 27 patients had pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The 3-year OS and DFS for distal pancreatic cancers were 56% and 38%, respectively, but 3-year OS and DFS for other distal pancreatic tumors were 97% and 73%, respectively. On multivariate analysis, R0 resection significantly improved disease-free survival (p = 0.023) for pancreatic cancer.

CONCLUSION

RAMPS procedure aids to achieve high negative tangential margins for all tumors involving the body and tail of the pancreas and not just pancreatic cancer in isolation. Since preoperative histologic diagnosis is not routinely indicated and also a number of other distal pancreatic tumors carry a relatively better prognosis compared with pancreatic cancer, our results provide further evidence that RAMPS should be considered as the procedure of choice for all operable tumors involving body and tail of the pancreas.

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Distal Pancreatectomy (LEOPARD): A Multicenter Patient-blinded Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

This trial followed a structured nationwide training program in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP), according to the IDEAL framework for surgical innovation, and aimed to compare time to functional recovery after minimally invasive and open distal pancreatectomy (ODP).

BACKGROUND

MIDP is increasingly used and may enhance postoperative recovery as compared with ODP, but randomized studies are lacking.

METHODS

A multicenter patient-blinded randomized controlled superiority trial was performed in 14 centers between April 2015 and March 2017. Adult patients with left-sided pancreatic tumors confined to the pancreas without vascular involvement were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo MIDP or ODP. Patients were blinded for type of surgery using a large abdominal dressing. The primary endpoint was time to functional recovery. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial was registered with the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR5689).

RESULTS

Time to functional recovery was 4 days [interquartile range (IQR) 3-6) in 51 patients after MIDP versus 6 days (IQR 5-8) in 57 patients after ODP (P < 0.001). The conversion rate of MIDP was 8%. Operative blood loss was less after MIDP (150 vs 400 mL; P < 0.001), whereas operative time was longer (217 vs 179 minutes; P = 0.005). The Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III complication rate was 25% versus 38% (P = 0.21). Delayed gastric emptying grade B/C was seen less often after MIDP (6% vs 20%; P = 0.04). Postoperative pancreatic fistulas grade B/C were seen in 39% after MIDP versus 23% after ODP (P = 0.07), without difference in percutaneous catheter drainage (22% vs 20%; P = 0.77). Quality of life (day 3-30) was better after MIDP as compared with ODP, and overall costs were non-significantly less after MIDP. No 90-day mortality was seen after MIDP versus 2% (n = 1) after ODP.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with left-sided pancreatic tumors confined to the pancreas, MIDP reduces time to functional recovery compared with ODP. Although the overall rate of complications was not reduced, MIDP was associated with less delayed gastric emptying and better quality of life without increasing costs.

Splenic artery as a simple landmark indicating difficulty during laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy

INTRODUCTION

The use of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is increasing worldwide. It is important for surgeons to predict preoperatively the difficulty and risks of a surgery. However, very few reports have evaluated the impact of patient or tumor factors on the difficulty of LDP. We aimed to determine the predictors of technical difficulties when performing LDP.

METHODS

This study included 34 patients who underwent LDP. Patient information was obtained retrospectively and included age, gender, BMI, primary disease, previous abdominal surgery, previous pancreatitis, tumor size, tumor proximity to the splenic arterial origin, type of splenic artery (SpA), operative time, blood loss, postoperative pancreatic fistula, and length of hospital stay. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine the predictors of a long operative time. SpA anatomy was classified into two types based on the relationship between its origin and the pancreas. Patients whose SpA origin was upward of the pancreatic parenchyma were classified as SpA type 1, whereas patients whose SpA origin was covered by the pancreatic parenchyma were classified as SpA type 2.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis revealed SpA type 2 to be an independent risk factor for a long operation (odds ratio = 9.925; 95% confidence interval: 1.461-67.412; P = 0.019). SpA type 2 was related to a longer operative time (P < 0.001) and greater intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Classification according to SpA type is simple and useful for predicting technical difficulty when performing LDP.