1
|
van Vuren RMG, Janssen YF, Hogenbirk RNM, de Graaff MR, van den Hoek R, Kruijff S, Heineman DJ, van der Plas WY, Wouters MWJM. The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Time to Treatment in Surgical Oncology: A National Registry Study in The Netherlands. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:1738. [PMID: 38730690 PMCID: PMC11083561 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16091738] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/12/2024] [Revised: 04/24/2024] [Accepted: 04/27/2024] [Indexed: 05/13/2024] Open
Abstract
To avoid delay in oncological treatment, a 6-weeks norm for time to treatment has been agreed on in The Netherlands. However, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on health systems resulted in reduced capacity for regular surgical care. In this study, we investigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on time to treatment in surgical oncology in The Netherlands. METHODS A population-based analysis of data derived from five surgical audits, including patients who underwent surgery for lung cancer, colorectal cancer, upper gastro-intestinal, and hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) malignancies, was performed. The COVID-19 cohort of 2020 was compared to the historic cohorts of 2018 and 2019. Primary endpoints were time to treatment initiation and the proportion of patients whose treatment started within 6 weeks. The secondary objective was to evaluate the differences in characteristics and tumour stage distribution between patients treated before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS A total of 14,567 surgical cancer patients were included in this study, of these 3292 treatments were started during the COVID-19 pandemic. The median time to treatment decreased during the pandemic (26 vs. 27 days, p < 0.001) and the proportion of patients whose treatment started within 6 weeks increased (76% vs. 73%, p < 0.001). In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, adjusting for patient characteristics, no significant difference in post-operative outcomes between patients who started treatment before or after 6 weeks was found. Overall, the number of procedures performed per week decreased by 8.1% during the pandemic. This reduction was most profound for patients with stage I lung carcinoma and colorectal carcinoma. There were fewer patients with pulmonary comorbidities in the pandemic cohort (11% vs. 13%, p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS Despite pressure on the capacity of the healthcare system during the COVID-19 pandemic, a larger proportion of surgical oncological patients started treatment within six weeks, possibly due to prioritisation of cancer care and reductions in elective procedures. However, during the pandemic, a decrease in the number of surgical oncological procedures performed in The Netherlands was observed, especially for patients with stage I disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Roos M. G. van Vuren
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands; (R.M.G.v.V.); (R.N.M.H.); (M.R.d.G.); (R.v.d.H.); (S.K.)
| | - Yester F. Janssen
- Department of Neurosurgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands;
- TRACER Europe B.V., Aarhusweg 2-1, 9723 JJ Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Rianne N. M. Hogenbirk
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands; (R.M.G.v.V.); (R.N.M.H.); (M.R.d.G.); (R.v.d.H.); (S.K.)
| | - Michelle R. de Graaff
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands; (R.M.G.v.V.); (R.N.M.H.); (M.R.d.G.); (R.v.d.H.); (S.K.)
- Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Scientific Bureau, 2333 AA Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Rinske van den Hoek
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands; (R.M.G.v.V.); (R.N.M.H.); (M.R.d.G.); (R.v.d.H.); (S.K.)
| | - Schelto Kruijff
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands; (R.M.G.v.V.); (R.N.M.H.); (M.R.d.G.); (R.v.d.H.); (S.K.)
- Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, University Medical Centre Groningen, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, 17177 Stockholm, Sweden
| | - David J. Heineman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (D.J.H.); (W.Y.v.d.P.)
| | - Willemijn Y. van der Plas
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (D.J.H.); (W.Y.v.d.P.)
| | - Michel W. J. M. Wouters
- Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Scientific Bureau, 2333 AA Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Centre, 2333 ZA Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Overbeek KA, Cahen DL, Bruno MJ. The role of endoscopic ultrasound in the detection of pancreatic lesions in high-risk individuals. Fam Cancer 2024:10.1007/s10689-024-00380-5. [PMID: 38573399 DOI: 10.1007/s10689-024-00380-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/07/2023] [Accepted: 03/17/2024] [Indexed: 04/05/2024]
Abstract
Individuals at high risk of developing pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma are eligible for surveillance within research programs. These programs employ periodic imaging in the form of magnetic resonance imaging/magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography or endoscopic ultrasound for the detection of early cancer or high-grade precursor lesions. This narrative review discusses the role of endoscopic ultrasound within these surveillance programs. It details its overall strengths and limitations, yield, burden on patients, and how it compares to magnetic resonance imaging. Finally, recommendations are given when and how to incorporate endoscopic ultrasound in the surveillance of high-risk individuals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kasper A Overbeek
- Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Djuna L Cahen
- Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marco J Bruno
- Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Mackay TM, Latenstein AEJ, Augustinus S, van der Geest LG, Bogte A, Bonsing BA, Cirkel GA, Hol L, Busch OR, den Dulk M, van Driel LMJ, Festen S, de Groot DJA, de Groot JWB, Groot Koerkamp B, Haj Mohammad N, Haver JT, van der Harst E, de Hingh IH, Homs MYV, Los M, Luelmo SAC, de Meijer VE, Mekenkamp L, Molenaar IQ, Patijn GA, Quispel R, Römkens TEH, van Santvoort HC, Stommel MW, Venneman NG, Verdonk RC, van Vilsteren FGI, de Vos-Geelen J, van Werkhoven CH, van Hooft JE, van Eijck CHJ, Wilmink JW, van Laarhoven HWM, Besselink MG. Implementation of Best Practices in Pancreatic Cancer Care in the Netherlands: A Stepped-Wedge Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Surg 2024; 159:429-437. [PMID: 38353966 PMCID: PMC10867778 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2023.7872] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/18/2023] [Accepted: 10/26/2023] [Indexed: 02/17/2024]
Abstract
Importance Implementation of new cancer treatment strategies as recommended by evidence-based guidelines is often slow and suboptimal. Objective To improve the implementation of guideline-based best practices in the Netherlands in pancreatic cancer care and assess the impact on survival. Design, setting, and participants This multicenter, stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial compared enhanced implementation of best practices with usual care in consecutive patients with all stages of pancreatic cancer. It took place from May 22, 2018 through July 9, 2020. Data were analyzed from April 1, 2022, through February 1, 2023. It included all patients in the Netherlands with pathologically or clinically diagnosed pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. This study reports 1-year follow-up (or shorter in case of deceased patients). Intervention The 5 best practices included optimal use of perioperative chemotherapy, palliative chemotherapy, pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT), referral to a dietician, and use of metal stents in patients with biliary obstruction. A 6-week implementation period was completed, in a randomized order, in all 17 Dutch networks for pancreatic cancer care. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was 1-year survival. Secondary outcomes included adherence to best practices and quality of life (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC] global health score). Results Overall, 5887 patients with pancreatic cancer (median age, 72.0 [IQR, 64.0-79.0] years; 50% female) were enrolled, 2641 before and 2939 after implementation of best practices (307 during wash-in period). One-year survival was 24% vs 23% (hazard ratio, 0.98, 95% CI, 0.88-1.08). There was no difference in the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (11% vs 11%), adjuvant chemotherapy (48% vs 51%), and referral to a dietician (59% vs 63%), while the use of palliative chemotherapy (24% vs 30%; odds ratio [OR], 1.38; 95% CI, 1.10-1.74), PERT (34% vs 45%; OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.28-2.11), and metal biliary stents increased (74% vs 83%; OR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.13-2.80). The EORTC global health score did not improve (area under the curve, 43.9 vs 42.8; median difference, -1.09, 95% CI, -3.05 to 0.94). Conclusions and Relevance In this randomized clinical trial, implementation of 5 best practices in pancreatic cancer care did not improve 1-year survival and quality of life. The finding that most patients received no tumor-directed treatment paired with the poor survival highlights the need for more personalized treatment options. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03513705.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tara M. Mackay
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Anouk E. J. Latenstein
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Simone Augustinus
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Lydia G. van der Geest
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Auke Bogte
- Department of Gastroenterology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Bert A. Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Geert A. Cirkel
- Department of Medical Oncology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Lieke Hol
- Department of Gastroenterology, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Olivier R. Busch
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marcel den Dulk
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- NUTRIM-School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital Aachen, Germany, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Nadia Haj Mohammad
- Department of Medical Oncology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Joyce T. Haver
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of nutrition and dietetics, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Maartje Los
- Department of Medical Oncology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | | | - Vincent E. de Meijer
- Department of Surgery, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Leonie Mekenkamp
- Department of Medical Oncology, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - I. Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | | | - Rutger Quispel
- Department of Gastroenterology, Reinier de Graaf Hospital, Delft, the Netherlands
| | - Tessa E. H. Römkens
- Department of Gastroenterology, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, the Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C. van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | | | - Niels G. Venneman
- Department of Gastroenterology, Reinier de Graaf Hospital, Delft, the Netherlands
| | - Robert C. Verdonk
- Department of Gastroenterology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | | | - Judith de Vos-Geelen
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and primary care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, the Netherlands
| | - C. Henri van Werkhoven
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and primary care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, the Netherlands
| | - Jeanin E. van Hooft
- Department of Gastroenterology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | | - Johanna W. Wilmink
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Hanneke W. M. van Laarhoven
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marc G. Besselink
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Stoop TF, Seelen LWF, van 't Land FR, Lutchman KRD, van Dieren S, Lips DJ, van der Harst E, Kazemier G, Patijn GA, de Hingh IH, Wijsman JH, Erdmann JI, Festen S, Groot Koerkamp B, Mieog JSD, den Dulk M, Stommel MWJ, Busch OR, de Wilde RF, de Meijer VE, Te Riele W, Molenaar IQ, van Eijck CHJ, van Santvoort HC, Besselink MG. Nationwide Use and Outcome of Surgery for Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Following Induction Chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol 2024; 31:2640-2653. [PMID: 38105377 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-023-14650-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/29/2023] [Accepted: 11/09/2023] [Indexed: 12/19/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Several international high-volume centers have reported good outcomes after resection of locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) following chemo(radio)therapy, but it is unclear how this translates to nationwide clinical practice and outcome. This study aims to assess the nationwide use and outcome of resection of LAPC following induction chemo(radio)therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS A multicenter retrospective study including all patients who underwent resection for LAPC following chemo(radio)therapy in all 16 Dutch pancreatic surgery centers (2014-2020), registered in the mandatory Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. LAPC is defined as arterial involvement > 90° and/or portomesenteric venous > 270° involvement or occlusion. RESULTS Overall, 142 patients underwent resection for LAPC, of whom 34.5% met the 2022 National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria. FOLFIRINOX was the most commonly (93.7%) used chemotherapy [median 5 cycles (IQR 4-8)]. Venous and arterial resections were performed in 51.4% and 14.8% of patients. Most resections (73.9%) were performed in high-volume centers (i.e., ≥ 60 pancreatoduodenectomies/year). Overall median volume of LAPC resections/center was 4 (IQR 1-7). In-hospital/30-day major morbidity was 37.3% and 90-day mortality was 4.2%. Median OS from diagnosis was 26 months (95% CI 23-28) and 5-year OS 18%. Surgery in high-volume centers [HR = 0.542 (95% CI 0.318-0.923)], ypN1-2 [HR = 3.141 (95% CI 1.886-5.234)], and major morbidity [HR = 2.031 (95% CI 1.272-3.244)] were associated with OS. CONCLUSIONS Resection of LAPC following chemo(radio)therapy is infrequently performed in the Netherlands, albeit with acceptable morbidity, mortality, and OS. Given these findings, a structured nationwide approach involving international centers of excellence would be needed to improve selection of patients with LAPC for surgical resection following induction therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas F Stoop
- Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA.
| | - Leonard W F Seelen
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht/St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Freek R van 't Land
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Kishan R D Lutchman
- Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Susan van Dieren
- Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Daan J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | | | - Geert Kazemier
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije University, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Gijs A Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala Clinics, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | - Ignace H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Jan H Wijsman
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands
| | - Joris I Erdmann
- Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J Sven D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Marcel den Dulk
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - Martijn W J Stommel
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Roeland F de Wilde
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Vincent E de Meijer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Wouter Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht/St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht/St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Casper H J van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht/St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Driessens H, Wijma AG, Buis CI, Nijkamp MW, Nieuwenhuijs-Moeke GJ, Klaase JM. Prehabilitation: tertiary prevention matters. Br J Surg 2024; 111:znae028. [PMID: 38436470 PMCID: PMC10910596 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znae028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2023] [Revised: 10/24/2023] [Accepted: 01/30/2024] [Indexed: 03/05/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Heleen Driessens
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Allard G Wijma
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Carlijn I Buis
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Maarten W Nijkamp
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Joost M Klaase
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Marchese U, Desbiens JF, Lenne X, Naveendran G, Tzedakis S, Gaillard M, Bruandet A, Theis D, Boyer L, Truant S, Fuks D, El Amrani M. Study of Risk Factors for Readmission After Pancreatectomy for Cancer: Analysis of Nationwide Cohort. Ann Surg 2024; 279:486-492. [PMID: 37254769 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000005929] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/01/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To identify the factors associated with readmission after pancreatectomy for cancer and to assess their impact on the 1-year mortality in a French multicentric population. BACKGROUND Pancreatectomy is a complex procedure with high morbidity that increases the length of hospital stay and jeopardizes survival. Hospital readmissions lead to increased health system costs, making this a topic of great interest. METHODS Data collected from patients who underwent pancreatectomy for cancer between 2011 and 2019 were extracted from a French national medico-administrative database. A descriptive analysis was conducted to evaluate the association of baseline variables, including age, sex, liver-related comorbidities, Charlson Comorbidity Index, tumor localization, and use of neoadjuvant therapy, along with hospital type and volume, with readmission status. Centers were divided into low and high volumes according to the cutoff of 26 cases/year. Logistic regression models were developed to determine whether the identified bivariate associations persisted after adjusting for the patient characteristics. The mortality rates during readmission and at 1 year postoperatively were also determined. RESULTS Of 22,935 patients who underwent pancreatectomy, 9129 (39.3%) were readmitted within 6 months. Readmission rates by year did not vary over the study period, and mean readmissions occurred within 20 days after discharge. Multivariate analysis showed that male sex [odds ratio (OR) = 1.12], age >70 years (OR = 1.16), comorbidities (OR = 1.21), distal pancreatectomy (OR = 1.11), and major postoperative complications (OR = 1.37) were predictors of readmission. Interestingly, readmission and surgery in low-volume centers increased the risk of death at 1 year by a factor of 2.15 [(2.01-2.31), P < 0.001] and 1.31 [(1.17-1.47), P < 0.001], respectively. CONCLUSIONS Readmission after pancreatectomy for cancer is high with an increased rate of 1-year mortality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ugo Marchese
- Department of Digestive, HPB and Endocrine Surgery, Cochin Hospital, AP-HP Centre, Paris
- Paris University - 15 rue de l'école de médecine, Paris
| | - Jean-François Desbiens
- Department of digestive surgery and Transplantation, CHRU de Lille, Lille
- Lille university, Lille
| | - Xavier Lenne
- Lille university, Lille
- Department of Medical Information, CHRU de Lille, Lille
| | - Gaanan Naveendran
- Department of Digestive, HPB and Endocrine Surgery, Cochin Hospital, AP-HP Centre, Paris
- Paris University - 15 rue de l'école de médecine, Paris
| | - Stylianos Tzedakis
- Department of Digestive, HPB and Endocrine Surgery, Cochin Hospital, AP-HP Centre, Paris
- Paris University - 15 rue de l'école de médecine, Paris
| | - Martin Gaillard
- Department of Digestive, HPB and Endocrine Surgery, Cochin Hospital, AP-HP Centre, Paris
- Paris University - 15 rue de l'école de médecine, Paris
| | - Amelie Bruandet
- Lille university, Lille
- Department of Medical Information, CHRU de Lille, Lille
| | - Didier Theis
- Lille university, Lille
- Department of Medical Information, CHRU de Lille, Lille
| | - Laurent Boyer
- Department of Medical Information La Timone Hospital, Marseille
- Aix-Marseille University, Jardin du Pharo, Marseille
| | - Stephanie Truant
- Department of digestive surgery and Transplantation, CHRU de Lille, Lille
- Lille university, Lille
| | - David Fuks
- Department of Digestive, HPB and Endocrine Surgery, Cochin Hospital, AP-HP Centre, Paris
- Paris University - 15 rue de l'école de médecine, Paris
| | - Mehdi El Amrani
- Department of digestive surgery and Transplantation, CHRU de Lille, Lille
- Lille university, Lille
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Schouten TJ, van Goor IWJM, Dorland GA, Besselink MG, Bonsing BA, Bosscha K, Brosens LAA, Busch OR, Cirkel GA, van Dam RM, Festen S, Groot Koerkamp B, van der Harst E, de Hingh IHJT, Intven MPW, Kazemier G, Liem MSL, van Lienden KP, Los M, de Meijer VE, Patijn GA, Schreinemakers JMJ, Stommel MWJ, van Tienhoven GJ, Verdonk RC, Verkooijen HM, van Santvoort HC, Molenaar IQ, Daamen LA. The Value of Biological and Conditional Factors for Staging of Patients with Resectable Pancreatic Cancer Undergoing Upfront Resection: A Nationwide Analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 2024:10.1245/s10434-024-15070-w. [PMID: 38386198 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-024-15070-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/30/2023] [Accepted: 01/31/2024] [Indexed: 02/23/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Novel definitions suggest that resectability status for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) should be assessed beyond anatomical criteria, considering both biological and conditional factors. This has, however, yet to be validated on a nationwide scale. This study evaluated the prognostic value of biological and conditional factors for staging of patients with resectable PDAC. PATIENTS AND METHODS A nationwide observational cohort study was performed, including all consecutive patients who underwent upfront resection of National Comprehensive Cancer Network resectable PDAC in the Netherlands (2014-2019) with complete information on preoperative carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status. PDAC was considered biologically unfavorable (RB+) if CA19-9 ≥ 500 U/mL and favorable (RB-) otherwise. ECOG ≥ 2 was considered conditionally unfavorable (RC+) and favorable otherwise (RC-). Overall survival (OS) was assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox-proportional hazard analysis, presented as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS Overall, 688 patients were analyzed with a median overall survival (OS) of 20 months (95% CI 19-23). OS was 14 months (95% CI 10 months-median not reached) in 20 RB+C+ patients (3%; HR 1.61, 95% CI 0.86-2.70), 13 months (95% CI 11-15) in 156 RB+C- patients (23%; HR 1.86, 95% CI 1.50-2.31), and 21 months (95% CI 12-41) in 47 RB-C+ patients (7%; HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.80-1.62) compared with 24 months (95% CI 22-27) in 465 patients with RB-C- PDAC (68%; reference). CONCLUSIONS Survival after upfront resection of anatomically resectable PDAC is worse in patients with CA19-9 ≥ 500 U/mL, while performance status had no impact. This supports consideration of CA19-9 in preoperative staging of resectable PDAC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs J Schouten
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Iris W J M van Goor
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Galina A Dorland
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Amsterdam UMC, Department of Surgery, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, The Netherlands
| | - Lodewijk A A Brosens
- Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Amsterdam UMC, Department of Surgery, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Geert A Cirkel
- Department of Medical Oncology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, Meander Medical Center, Amersfoort, The Netherlands
| | - Ronald M van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht UMC+,, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of General and Visceral Surgery, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | | | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Ignace H J T de Hingh
- GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Martijn P W Intven
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Mike S L Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Krijn P van Lienden
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Maartje Los
- Department of Medical Oncology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Vincent E de Meijer
- Department of Surgery, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Gijs A Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala Clinics, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | | | - Martijn W J Stommel
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Geert Jan van Tienhoven
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Amsterdam UMC, Department of Radiation Oncology, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Robert C Verdonk
- Department of Gastroenterology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Helena M Verkooijen
- Imaging Division, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Lois A Daamen
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
- Imaging Division, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Korrel M, van Hilst J, Bosscha K, Busch ORC, Daams F, van Dam R, van Eijck CHJ, Festen S, Groot Koerkamp B, van der Harst E, Lips DJ, Luyer MD, de Meijer VE, Mieog JSD, Molenaar IQ, Patijn GA, van Santvoort HC, van der Schelling GP, Stommel MWJ, Besselink MG. Nationwide use and Outcome of Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy in IDEAL Stage IV following a Training Program and Randomized Trial. Ann Surg 2024; 279:323-330. [PMID: 37139822 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000005900] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/05/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess the nationwide long-term uptake and outcomes of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) after a nationwide training program and randomized trial. BACKGROUND Two randomized trials demonstrated the superiority of MIDP over open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) in terms of functional recovery and hospital stay. Data on implementation of MIDP on a nationwide level are lacking. METHODS Nationwide audit-based study including consecutive patients after MIDP and ODP in 16 centers in the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (2014 to 2021). The cohort was divided into three periods: early implementation, during the LEOPARD randomized trial, and late implementation. Primary endpoints were MIDP implementation rate and textbook outcome. RESULTS Overall, 1496 patients were included with 848 MIDP (56.5%) and 648 ODP (43.5%). From the early to the late implementation period, the use of MIDP increased from 48.6% to 63.0% and of robotic MIDP from 5.5% to 29.7% ( P <0.001). The overall use of MIDP (45% to 75%) and robotic MIDP (1% to 84%) varied widely between centers ( P <0.001). In the late implementation period, 5/16 centers performed >75% of procedures as MIDP. After MIDP, in-hospital mortality and textbook outcome remained stable over time. In the late implementation period, ODP was more often performed in ASA score III-IV (24.9% vs. 35.7%, P =0.001), pancreatic cancer (24.2% vs. 45.9%, P <0.001), vascular involvement (4.6% vs. 21.9%, P <0.001), and multivisceral involvement (10.5% vs. 25.3%, P <0.001). After MIDP, shorter hospital stay (median 7 vs. 8 d, P <0.001) and less blood loss (median 150 vs. 500 mL, P <0.001), but more grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula (24.4% vs. 17.2%, P =0.008) occurred as compared to ODP. CONCLUSION A sustained nationwide implementation of MIDP after a successful training program and randomized trial was obtained with satisfactory outcomes. Future studies should assess the considerable variation in the use of MIDP between centers and, especially, robotic MIDP.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maarten Korrel
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam
- Cancer Center Amsterdam
| | - Jony van Hilst
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam
- Department of Surgery, OLVG Oost, Amsterdam
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch
| | - Olivier R C Busch
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam
- Cancer Center Amsterdam
| | - Freek Daams
- Cancer Center Amsterdam
- Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam
| | - Ronald van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht
| | | | | | | | | | - Daan J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede
| | - Misha D Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven
| | - Vincent E de Meijer
- Department of Surgery, University of Groningen and University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen
| | - J Sven D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, UMC Utrecht Cancer Centre, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein; Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, Utrecht
| | | | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, UMC Utrecht Cancer Centre, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein; Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, Utrecht
| | | | - Martijn W J Stommel
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam
- Cancer Center Amsterdam
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Hirpara DH, Irish J, Rashid M, Martin T, Zhu A, Hunter A, Jayaraman S, Wei AC, Coburn NG, Wright FC. Defining Standards for Hepatopancreatobiliary Cancer Surgery in Ontario, Canada: A Population-Based Cohort Study of Clinical Outcomes. J Am Coll Surg 2024; 238:157-165. [PMID: 37796140 DOI: 10.1097/xcs.0000000000000885] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In 2006, Cancer Care Ontario created Surgical Oncology Standards for the delivery of hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) surgery including hepatectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Our objective was to identify the impact of standardization on outcomes after HPB surgery in Ontario, Canada. STUDY DESIGN This study was a population-level analysis of patients undergoing hepatectomy or PD (2003 to 2019). Logistic regression models were used to compare 30- and 90-day mortality and length of stay (LOS) before (2003 to 2006), during (2007 to 2011), and after (2012 to 2019) standardization. Interrupted time series models were used to co-analyze secular trends. RESULTS A total of 7,904 hepatectomies and 5,238 PDs were performed. More than 80% of all cases were performed at a designated center (DC) before standardization. This increased to >98% in the poststandardization era. Median volumes at DCs increased from 55 to 67 hepatectomies/year and from 22 to 50 PDs/year over time. In addition, 30-day mortality after hepatectomy was 2.6% before standardization and 2.3% after standardization (p = 0.9); 30-day mortality after PD was 3.6% before standardization and 2.4% after standardization (p = 0.1). Multivariable analyses revealed a significant difference in 90-day mortality following PD poststandardization (4.3% vs 6.3%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.7; p = 0.03). Median LOS was shorter for hepatectomy (6 days vs 8 days) and PD (9 days vs 14 days; p < 0.0001) after standardization. Immediate and late effects on mortality and LOS were likely attributable to secular trends, which predated standardization. CONCLUSIONS Standardization was associated with a higher volume of hepatectomy and PDs with further concentration of care at DCs. Pre-existing quality initiatives may have attenuated the effect of standardization on quality outcomes. Our data highlight the merits of a multifaceted provincial system for enabling consistent access to high quality HPB care throughout a region of 15 million people over a 16-year period.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dhruvin H Hirpara
- From the Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Hirpara, Irish, Zhu, Jayaraman, Coburn, Wright)
| | - Jonathan Irish
- From the Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Hirpara, Irish, Zhu, Jayaraman, Coburn, Wright)
- the Division of Head and Neck Oncology and Reconstructive Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Irish)
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Irish, Rashid, Martin, Hunter, Wright)
| | - Mohammed Rashid
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Irish, Rashid, Martin, Hunter, Wright)
| | - Tharsiya Martin
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Irish, Rashid, Martin, Hunter, Wright)
| | - Alice Zhu
- From the Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Hirpara, Irish, Zhu, Jayaraman, Coburn, Wright)
| | - Amber Hunter
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Irish, Rashid, Martin, Hunter, Wright)
| | - Shiva Jayaraman
- From the Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Hirpara, Irish, Zhu, Jayaraman, Coburn, Wright)
- the Division of General Surgery, Unity Health, St Joseph's Health Center, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Jayaraman)
| | - Alice C Wei
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (Wei)
| | - Natalie G Coburn
- From the Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Hirpara, Irish, Zhu, Jayaraman, Coburn, Wright)
- the Division of General Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Coburn, Wright)
| | - Frances C Wright
- From the Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Hirpara, Irish, Zhu, Jayaraman, Coburn, Wright)
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Irish, Rashid, Martin, Hunter, Wright)
- the Division of General Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Coburn, Wright)
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Zwart MJ, van den Broek B, de Graaf N, Suurmeijer JA, Augustinus S, te Riele WW, van Santvoort HC, Hagendoorn J, Borel Rinkes IH, van Dam JL, Takagi K, Tran KT, Schreinemakers J, van der Schelling G, Wijsman JH, de Wilde RF, Festen S, Daams F, Luyer MD, de Hingh IH, Mieog JS, Bonsing BA, Lips DJ, Abu Hilal M, Busch OR, Saint-Marc O, Zeh HJ, Zureikat AH, Hogg ME, Koerkamp BG, Molenaar IQ, Besselink MG. The Feasibility, Proficiency, and Mastery Learning Curves in 635 Robotic Pancreatoduodenectomies Following a Multicenter Training Program: "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants". Ann Surg 2023; 278:e1232-e1241. [PMID: 37288547 PMCID: PMC10631507 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000005928] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess the feasibility, proficiency, and mastery learning curves for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) in "second-generation" RPD centers following a multicenter training program adhering to the IDEAL framework. BACKGROUND The long learning curves for RPD reported from "pioneering" expert centers may discourage centers interested in starting an RPD program. However, the feasibility, proficiency, and mastery learning curves may be shorter in "second-generation" centers that participated in dedicated RPD training programs, although data are lacking. We report on the learning curves for RPD in "second-generation" centers trained in a dedicated nationwide program. METHODS Post hoc analysis of all consecutive patients undergoing RPD in 7 centers that participated in the LAELAPS-3 training program, each with a minimum annual volume of 50 pancreatoduodenectomies, using the mandatory Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (March 2016-December 2021). Cumulative sum analysis determined cutoffs for the 3 learning curves: operative time for the feasibility (1) risk-adjusted major complication (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III) for the proficiency, (2) and textbook outcome for the mastery, (3) learning curve. Outcomes before and after the cutoffs were compared for the proficiency and mastery learning curves. A survey was used to assess changes in practice and the most valued "lessons learned." RESULTS Overall, 635 RPD were performed by 17 trained surgeons, with a conversion rate of 6.6% (n=42). The median annual volume of RPD per center was 22.5±6.8. From 2016 to 2021, the nationwide annual use of RPD increased from 0% to 23% whereas the use of laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy decreased from 15% to 0%. The rate of major complications was 36.9% (n=234), surgical site infection 6.3% (n=40), postoperative pancreatic fistula (grade B/C) 26.9% (n=171), and 30-day/in-hospital mortality 3.5% (n=22). Cutoffs for the feasibility, proficiency, and mastery learning curves were reached at 15, 62, and 84 RPD. Major morbidity and 30-day/in-hospital mortality did not differ significantly before and after the cutoffs for the proficiency and mastery learning curves. Previous experience in laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy shortened the feasibility (-12 RPDs, -44%), proficiency (-32 RPDs, -34%), and mastery phase learning curve (-34 RPDs, -23%), but did not improve clinical outcome. CONCLUSIONS The feasibility, proficiency, and mastery learning curves for RPD at 15, 62, and 84 procedures in "second-generation" centers after a multicenter training program were considerably shorter than previously reported from "pioneering" expert centers. The learning curve cutoffs and prior laparoscopic experience did not impact major morbidity and mortality. These findings demonstrate the safety and value of a nationwide training program for RPD in centers with sufficient volume.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maurice J.W. Zwart
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Bram van den Broek
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Nine de Graaf
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza Institute, Brescia, Italy
| | - José A. Suurmeijer
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Simone Augustinus
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Wouter W. te Riele
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C. van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Inne H.M. Borel Rinkes
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Jacob L. van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Kosei Takagi
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Khé T.C. Tran
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Jan H. Wijsman
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Medical Center, Breda, the Netherlands
| | - Roeland F. de Wilde
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Freek Daams
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Misha D. Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | - Jan S.D. Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Bert A. Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Daan J. Lips
- Department of Surgery, Twente Medical Spectrum, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Mohamed Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza Institute, Brescia, Italy
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - Olivier R. Busch
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Herbert J. Zeh
- Department of Surgery, University of Texas, Southwestern, Dallas, TX
| | - Amer H. Zureikat
- Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA
| | - Melissa E. Hogg
- Department of Surgery, Northshore University HealthSystem, Chicago, IL
| | - Bas G. Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Isaac Q. Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Marc G. Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Augustinus S, Mackay TM, Andersson B, Beane JD, Busch OR, Gleeson EM, Koerkamp BG, Keck T, van Santvoort HC, Tingstedt B, Wellner UF, Williamsson C, Besselink MG, Pitt HA. Ideal Outcome After Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Transatlantic Evaluation of a Harmonized Composite Outcome Measure. Ann Surg 2023; 278:740-747. [PMID: 37476990 PMCID: PMC10549886 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000006037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/22/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim of this study is to define and assess Ideal Outcome in the national or multicenter registries of North America, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden. BACKGROUND Assessing outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy among centers and countries requires a broad evaluation that cannot be captured by a single parameter. Previously, 2 composite outcome measures (textbook outcome and optimal pancreatic surgery) for pancreatoduodenectomy have been described from Europe and the United States. These composites were harmonized into ideal outcome (IO). METHODS This analysis is a transatlantic retrospective study (2018-2020) of patients after pancreatoduodenectomy within the registries from North America, Germany, The Netherlands, and Sweden. After 3 consensus meetings, IO for pancreatoduodenectomy was defined as the absence of all 6 parameters: (1) in-hospital mortality, (2) severe complications-Clavien-Dindo ≥3, (3) postoperative pancreatic fistula-International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) grade B/C, (4) reoperation, (5) hospital stay >75th percentile, and (6) readmission. Outcomes were evaluated using relative largest difference (RLD) and absolute largest difference (ALD), and multivariate regression models. RESULTS Overall, 21,036 patients after pancreatoduodenectomy were included, of whom 11,194 (54%) reached IO. The rate of IO varied between 55% in North America, 53% in Germany, 52% in The Netherlands, and 54% in Sweden (RLD: 1.1, ALD: 3%, P <0.001). Individual components varied with an ALD of 2% length of stay, 4% for in-hospital mortality, 12% severe complications, 10% postoperative pancreatic fistula, 11% reoperation, and 9% readmission. Age, sex, absence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, body mass index, performance status, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, biliary drainage, absence of vascular resection, and histologic diagnosis were associated with IO. In the subgroup of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma, country, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy also was associated with improved IO. CONCLUSIONS The newly developed composite outcome measure "Ideal Outcome" can be used for auditing and comparing outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy. The observed differences can be used to guide collaborative initiatives to further improve the outcomes of pancreatic surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simone Augustinus
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Tara M. Mackay
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bodil Andersson
- Department of Surgery, Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden
| | - Joal D. Beane
- Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
| | - Olivier R. Busch
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Bas G. Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Tobias Keck
- DGAV StuDoQ|Pancreas and Clinic of Surgery, UKSH Campus, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Hjalmar C. van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht and St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Bobby Tingstedt
- Department of Surgery, Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden
| | - Ulrich F. Wellner
- DGAV StuDoQ|Pancreas and Clinic of Surgery, UKSH Campus, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Caroline Williamsson
- Department of Surgery, Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden
| | - Marc G. Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Henry A. Pitt
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Groen JV, Michiels N, Besselink MG, Bosscha K, Busch OR, van Dam R, van Eijck CHJ, Koerkamp BG, van der Harst E, de Hingh IH, Karsten TM, Lips DJ, de Meijer VE, Molenaar IQ, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Roos D, van Santvoort HC, Wijsman JH, Wit F, Zonderhuis BM, de Vos-Geelen J, Wasser MN, Bonsing BA, Stommel MWJ, Mieog JSD. Practice variation in venous resection during pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer: A nationwide cohort study. Surgery 2023; 174:924-933. [PMID: 37451894 DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2023.06.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/30/2022] [Revised: 04/19/2023] [Accepted: 06/18/2023] [Indexed: 07/18/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Practice variation exists in venous resection during pancreatoduodenectomy, but little is known about the potential causes and consequences as large studies are lacking. This study explores the potential causes and consequences of practice variation in venous resection during pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer in the Netherlands. METHODS This nationwide retrospective cohort study included patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer in 18 centers from 2013 through 2017. RESULTS Among 1,311 patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy, 351 (27%) had a venous resection, and the overall median annual center volume of venous resection was 4. No association was found between the center volume of pancreatoduodenectomy and the rate of venous resections, nor between patient and tumor characteristics and the rate of venous resections per center. Female sex, lower body mass index, neoadjuvant therapy, venous involvement, and stenosis on imaging were predictive for venous resection. Adjusted for these factors, 3 centers performed significantly more, and 3 centers performed significantly fewer venous resections than expected. In patients with venous resection, significantly less major morbidity (22% vs 38%) and longer overall survival (median 16 vs 12 months) were observed in centers with an above-median annual volume of venous resections (>4). CONCLUSION Patient and tumor characteristics did not explain significant practice variation between centers in the Netherlands in venous resection during pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer. The clinical outcomes of venous resection might be related to the volume of the procedure.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jesse V Groen
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands.
| | - Nynke Michiels
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, The Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ronald van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, The Netherlands
| | | | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Ignace H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands; Department of Epidemiology, Maastricht UMC+, The Netherlands
| | - Tom M Karsten
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis (loc. Oost), Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Daan J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Vincent E de Meijer
- Department of Surgery, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Isaac Q Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein; Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Daphne Roos
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Gasthuis, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein; Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Jan H Wijsman
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands
| | - Fennie Wit
- Department of Surgery, Tjongerschans Hospital, Heerenveen, The Netherlands
| | - Babs M Zonderhuis
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Judith de Vos-Geelen
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht UMC+, The Netherlands
| | - Martin N Wasser
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands
| | - Martijn W J Stommel
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - J Sven D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Perri G, van Hilst J, Li S, Besselink MG, Hogg ME, Marchegiani G. Teaching modern pancreatic surgery: close relationship between centralization, innovation, and dissemination of care. BJS Open 2023; 7:zrad081. [PMID: 37698977 PMCID: PMC10496870 DOI: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrad081] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/10/2023] [Accepted: 07/19/2023] [Indexed: 09/14/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pancreatic surgery is increasingly moving towards centralization in high-volume centres, supported by evidence on the volume-outcome relationship. At the same time, minimally invasive pancreatic surgery is becoming more and more established worldwide, and interest in new techniques, such as robotic pancreatoduodenectomy, is growing. Such recent innovations are reshaping modern pancreatic surgery, but they also represent new challenges for surgical training in its current form. METHODS This narrative review presents a chosen selection of literature, giving a picture of the current state of training in pancreatic surgery, together with the authors' own views, and in the context of centralization and innovation towards minimally invasive techniques. RESULTS Centralization of pancreatic surgery at high-volume centres, volume-outcome relationships, innovation through minimally invasive technologies, learning curves in both traditional and minimally invasive surgery, and standardized training paths are the different, but deeply interconnected, topics of this article. Proper training is essential to ensure quality of care, but innovation and centralization may represent challenges to overcome with new training models. CONCLUSION Innovations in pancreatic surgery are introduced with the aim of increasing the quality of care. However, their successful implementation is deeply dependent on dissemination and standardization of surgical training, adapted to fit in the changing landscape of modern pancreatic surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giampaolo Perri
- Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Jony van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location VU, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Shen Li
- Department of Surgical Oncology, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location VU, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Melissa E Hogg
- Department of HPB Surgery, NorthShore Health System, Evanston, Illinois, USA
| | - Giovanni Marchegiani
- Department of Surgical, Oncological and Gastroenterological Sciences (DiSCOG), University of Padua, Padua, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Alhulaili ZM, Linnemann RJ, Dascau L, Pleijhuis RG, Klaase JM. A Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis analysis to evaluate the quality of reporting of postoperative pancreatic fistula prediction models after pancreatoduodenectomy: A systematic review. Surgery 2023; 174:684-691. [PMID: 37296054 DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2023.04.058] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/02/2022] [Revised: 03/06/2023] [Accepted: 04/27/2023] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Postoperative pancreatic fistula is a frequent and potentially lethal complication after pancreatoduodenectomy. Several models have been developed to predict postoperative pancreatic fistula risk. This study was performed to evaluate the quality of reporting of postoperative pancreatic fistula prediction models after pancreatoduodenectomy using the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) checklist that provides guidelines on reporting prediction models to enhance transparency and to help in the decision-making regarding the implementation of the appropriate risk models into clinical practice. METHODS Studies that described prediction models to predict postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy were searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The TRIPOD checklist was used to evaluate the adherence rate. The area under the curve and other performance measures were extracted if reported. A quadrant matrix chart is created to plot the area under the curve against TRIPOD adherence rate to find models with a combination of above-average TRIPOD adherence and area under the curve. RESULTS In total, 52 predictive models were included (23 development, 15 external validation, 4 incremental value, and 10 development and external validation). No risk model achieved 100% adherence to the TRIPOD. The mean adherence rate was 65%. Most authors failed to report on missing data and actions to blind assessment of predictors. Thirteen models had an above-average performance for TRIPOD checklist adherence and area under the curve. CONCLUSION Although the average TRIPOD adherence rate for postoperative pancreatic fistula models after pancreatoduodenectomy was 65%, higher compared to other published models, it does not meet TRIPOD standards for transparency. This study identified 13 models that performed above average in TRIPOD adherence and area under the curve, which could be the appropriate models to be used in clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zahraa M Alhulaili
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Ralph J Linnemann
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Larisa Dascau
- Department of Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Rick G Pleijhuis
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Joost M Klaase
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Ingwersen EW, Stam WT, Meijs BJV, Roor J, Besselink MG, Groot Koerkamp B, de Hingh IHJT, van Santvoort HC, Stommel MWJ, Daams F. Machine learning versus logistic regression for the prediction of complications after pancreatoduodenectomy. Surgery 2023; 174:435-440. [PMID: 37150712 DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2023.03.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/03/2022] [Revised: 03/02/2023] [Accepted: 03/20/2023] [Indexed: 05/09/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Machine learning is increasingly advocated to develop prediction models for postoperative complications. It is, however, unclear if machine learning is superior to logistic regression when using structured clinical data. Postoperative pancreatic fistula and delayed gastric emptying are the two most common complications with the biggest impact on patient condition and length of hospital stay after pancreatoduodenectomy. This study aimed to compare the performance of machine learning and logistic regression in predicting pancreatic fistula and delayed gastric emptying after pancreatoduodenectomy. METHODS This retrospective observational study used nationwide data from 16 centers in the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit between January 2014 and January 2021. The area under the curve of a machine learning and logistic regression model for clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula and delayed gastric emptying were compared. RESULTS Overall, 799 (16.3%) patients developed a postoperative pancreatic fistula, and 943 developed (19.2%) delayed gastric emptying. For postoperative pancreatic fistula, the area under the curve of the machine learning model was 0.74, and the area under the curve of the logistic regression model was 0.73. For delayed gastric emptying, the area under the curve of the machine learning model and logistic regression was 0.59. CONCLUSION Machine learning did not outperform logistic regression modeling in predicting postoperative complications after pancreatoduodenectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erik W Ingwersen
- Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology and Metabolism, the Netherlands
| | - Wessel T Stam
- Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology and Metabolism, the Netherlands
| | - Bono J V Meijs
- Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology and Metabolism, the Netherlands
| | - Joran Roor
- SAS institute B.V., Huizen, the Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology and Metabolism, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | - Freek Daams
- Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Droogh DHM, van Dam JL, Groen JV, de Boer MGJ, van Prehn J, van Eijck CHJ, Bonsing BA, Vahrmeijer AL, Groot Koerkamp B, Mieog JSD. Prolonged antibiotics after pancreatoduodenectomy reduce abdominal infections in patients with positive bile cultures: a dual-center cohort study. HPB (Oxford) 2023; 25:1056-1064. [PMID: 37268503 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2023.05.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2023] [Revised: 04/07/2023] [Accepted: 05/15/2023] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Abdominal infections account for substantial morbidity after pancreatoduodenectomy. Contaminated bile is the presumed main risk factor, and prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis might prevent these complications. This study compared organ/space infection (OSIs) rates in patients receiving perioperative versus prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis after pancreatoduodenectomy. METHODS Patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy in two Dutch centers between 2016 and 2019 were included. Perioperative prophylaxis was compared prolonged prophylaxis (cefuroxime and metronidazole for five days). The primary outcome was an isolated OSI: an abdominal infection without concurrent anastomotic leakage. Odds ratios (OR) were adjusted for surgical approach and pancreatic duct diameter. RESULTS OSIs occurred in 137 out of 362 patients (37.8%): 93 patients with perioperative and 44 patients with prolonged prophylaxis (42.5% versus 30.8%, P = 0.025). Isolated OSIs occurred in 38 patients (10.5%): 28 patients with perioperative and 10 patients with prolonged prophylaxis (12.8% versus 7.0%, P = 0.079). Bile cultures were obtained in 198 patients (54.7%). Patients with positive bile cultures showed higher isolated OSI rates with perioperative compared to prolonged prophylaxis (18.2% versus 6.6%, OR 5.7, 95% CI: 1.3-23.9). CONCLUSION Prolonged antibiotics after pancreatoduodenectomy are associated with fewer isolated OSIs in patients with contaminated bile and warrant confirmation in a randomised controlled trial (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT0578431).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daphne H M Droogh
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
| | - Jacob L van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jesse V Groen
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Mark G J de Boer
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Joffrey van Prehn
- Department of Medical Microbiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Alexander L Vahrmeijer
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J Sven D Mieog
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
van Dongen JC, van Dam JL, Besselink MG, Bonsing BA, Bosscha K, Busch OR, van Dam RM, Festen S, van der Harst E, de Hingh IH, Kazemier G, Liem MSL, de Meijer VE, Mieog JSD, Molenaar IQ, Patijn GA, van Santvoort HC, Wijsman JH, Stommel MWJ, Wit F, De Wilde RF, van Eijck CHJ, Groot Koerkamp B. Fistula Risk Score for Auditing Pancreatoduodenectomy: The Auditing-FRS. Ann Surg 2023; 278:e272-e277. [PMID: 35837978 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000005532] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To develop a fistula risk score for auditing, to be able to compare postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreatoduodenectomy among hospitals. BACKGROUND For proper comparisons of outcomes in surgical audits, case-mix variation should be accounted for. METHODS This study included consecutive patients after pancreatoduodenectomy from the mandatory nationwide Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. Derivation of the score was performed with the data from 2014 to 2018 and validation with 2019 to 2020 data. The primary endpoint of the study was POPF (grade B or C). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed for case-mix adjustment of known risk factors. RESULTS In the derivation cohort, 3271 patients were included, of whom 479 (14.6%) developed POPF. Male sex [odds ratio (OR)=1.34; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.09-1.66], higher body mass index (OR=1.07; 95% CI: 1.05-1.10), a final diagnosis other than pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma/pancreatitis (OR=2.41; 95% CI: 1.90-3.06), and a smaller duct diameter (OR=1.43/mm decrease; 95% CI: 1.32-1.55) were independently associated with POPF. Diabetes mellitus (OR=0.73; 95% CI: 0.55-0.98) was independently associated with a decreased risk of POPF. Model discrimination was good with a C -statistic of 0.73 in the derivation cohort and 0.75 in the validation cohort (n=913). Hospitals differed in particular in the proportion of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma/pancreatitis patients, ranging from 36.0% to 58.1%. The observed POPF risk per center ranged from 2.9% to 25.4%. The expected POPF rate based on the 5 risk factors ranged from 11.6% to 18.0% among hospitals. CONCLUSIONS The auditing fistula risk score was successful in case-mix adjustment and enables fair comparisons of POPF rates among hospitals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jelle C van Dongen
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jacob L van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ronald M van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Ignace H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Mike S L Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Vincent E de Meijer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Jan S D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Izaak Q Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein and University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Gijs A Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein and University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Jan H Wijsman
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands
| | - Martijn W J Stommel
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Fennie Wit
- Department of Surgery, Tjongerschans, Heerenveen, The Netherlands
| | - Roeland F De Wilde
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Casper H J van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Loos M, König AK, von Winkler N, Mehrabi A, Berchtold C, Müller-Stich BP, Schneider M, Hoffmann K, Kulu Y, Feisst M, Hinz U, Lang M, Goeppert B, Albrecht T, Strobel O, Büchler MW, Hackert T. Completion Pancreatectomy After Pancreatoduodenectomy: Who Needs It? Ann Surg 2023; 278:e87-e93. [PMID: 35781509 PMCID: PMC10249602 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000005494] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to identify the indications for and report the outcomes of completion pancreatectomy (CPLP) in the postoperative course after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). BACKGROUND CPLP may be considered or even inevitable for damage control after PD. METHODS A prospectively maintained database of all patients undergoing PD between 2001 and 2019 was searched for patients who underwent CPLP in the postoperative course after PD. Baseline characteristics, perioperative details, and outcomes of CPLP patients were analyzed and specific indications for CPLP were identified. RESULTS A total of 3953 consecutive patients underwent PD during the observation period. CPLP was performed in 120 patients (3%) after a median of 10 days following PD. The main indications for CPLP included postpancreatectomy acute necrotizing pancreatitis [n=47 (39%)] and postoperative pancreatic fistula complicated by hemorrhage [n=41 (34%)] or associated with uncontrollable leakage of the pancreatoenteric anastomosis [n=23 (19%)]. The overall 90-day mortality rate of all 3953 patients was 3.5% and 37% for patients undergoing CPLP. CONCLUSIONS Our finding that only very few patients (3%) need CPLP suggests that conservative, interventional, and organ-preserving surgical measures are the mainstay of complication management after PD. Postpancreatectomy acute necrotizing pancreatitis, uncontrollable postoperative pancreatic fistula, and fistula-associated hemorrhage are highly dangerous and represent the main indications for CPLP after PD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martin Loos
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Anna-Katharina König
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Nikolai von Winkler
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Arianeb Mehrabi
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Christoph Berchtold
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Beat P. Müller-Stich
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Martin Schneider
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Katrin Hoffmann
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Yakup Kulu
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Manuel Feisst
- Institute of Medical Biometry, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Ulf Hinz
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Matthias Lang
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Benjamin Goeppert
- Institute of Pathology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Thomas Albrecht
- Institute of Pathology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Oliver Strobel
- Department of General Surgery, Vienna University Hospital, Vienna, Austria
| | - Markus W. Büchler
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Thilo Hackert
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Augustinus S, Latenstein AE, Bonsing BA, Busch OR, Groot Koerkamp B, de Hingh IH, de Meijer VE, Molenaar IQ, van Santvoort HC, de Vos-Geelen J, van Eijck CH, Besselink MG. Chyle Leak After Pancreatoduodenectomy: Clinical Impact and Risk Factors in a Nationwide Analysis. Ann Surg 2023; 277:e1299-e1305. [PMID: 35786606 PMCID: PMC10174101 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000005449] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to assess the clinical impact and risk factors of chyle leak (CL). BACKGROUND In 2017, the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) published the consensus definition of CL. Multicenter series validating this definition are lacking and previous studies investigating risk factors have used different definitions and showed heterogeneous results. METHODS This observational cohort study included all consecutive patients after pancreatoduodenectomy in all 19 centers in the mandatory nationwide Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (2017-2019). The primary endpoint was CL (ISGPS grade B/C). Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed. RESULTS Overall, 2159 patients after pancreatoduodenectomy were included. The rate of CL was 7.0% (n=152), including 6.9% (n=150) grade B and 0.1% (n=2) grade C. CL was independently associated with a prolonged hospital stay [odds ratio (OR)=2.84, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.85-4.36, P <0.001] but not with mortality (OR=0.3, 95% CI: 0.0-2.3, P =0.244). In multivariable analyses, independent predictors for CL were vascular resection (OR=2.1, 95% CI: 1.4-3.2, P <0.001) and open surgery (OR=3.5, 95% CI: 1.7-7.2, P =0.001). The number of resected lymph nodes and aortocaval lymph node sampling were not identified as predictors in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS In this nationwide analysis, the rate of ISGPS grade B/C CL after pancreatoduodenectomy was 7.0%. Although CL is associated with a prolonged hospital stay, the clinical impact is relatively minor in the vast majority (>98%) of patients. Vascular resection and open surgery are predictors of CL.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simone Augustinus
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Anouk E.J. Latenstein
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bert A. Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Olivier R. Busch
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Vincent E. de Meijer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen and University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - I. Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht & St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C. van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht & St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Judith de Vos-Geelen
- Department of Internal Medicine, GROW—School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Casper H. van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G. Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
de Bakker JK, Suurmeijer JA, Toennaer JGJ, Bonsing BA, Busch OR, van Eijck CH, de Hingh IH, de Meijer VE, Molenaar IQ, van Santvoort HC, Stommel MW, Festen S, van der Harst E, Patijn G, Lips DJ, Den Dulk M, Bosscha K, Besselink MG, Kazemier G. Surgical Outcome After Pancreatoduodenectomy for Duodenal Adenocarcinoma Compared with Other Periampullary Cancers: A Nationwide Audit Study. Ann Surg Oncol 2023; 30:2448-2455. [PMID: 36536196 PMCID: PMC10027630 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-022-12701-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/12/2022] [Accepted: 10/04/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jacob K de Bakker
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J Annelie Suurmeijer
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jurgen G J Toennaer
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Casper H van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ignace H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Cancer Institute, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Vincent E de Meijer
- Department of Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital and University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital and University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Martijn W Stommel
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Gijs Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala Clinics, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | - Daan J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Marcel Den Dulk
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch ziekenhuis, Den Bosch, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
21
|
Schepens MHJ, Trompert AC, van Hooff ML, van der Velde E, Kallewaard M, Verberk-Jonkers IJAM, Cense HA, Somford DM, Repping S, Tromp SC, Wouters MWJM. Using Existing Clinical Information Models for Dutch Quality Registries to Reuse Data and Follow COUMT Paradigm. Appl Clin Inform 2023; 14:326-336. [PMID: 37137338 PMCID: PMC10156444 DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1767681] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/05/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Reuse of health care data for various purposes, such as the care process, for quality measurement, research, and finance, will become increasingly important in the future; therefore, "Collect Once Use Many Times" (COUMT). Clinical information models (CIMs) can be used for content standardization. Data collection for national quality registries (NQRs) often requires manual data entry or batch processing. Preferably, NQRs collect required data by extracting data recorded during the health care process and stored in the electronic health record. OBJECTIVES The first objective of this study was to analyze the level of coverage of data elements in NQRs with developed Dutch CIMs (DCIMs). The second objective was to analyze the most predominant DCIMs, both in terms of the coverage of data elements as well as in their prevalence across existing NQRs. METHODS For the first objective, a mapping method was used which consisted of six steps, ranging from a description of the clinical pathway to a detailed mapping of data elements. For the second objective, the total number of data elements that matched with a specific DCIM was counted and divided by the total number of evaluated data elements. RESULTS An average of 83.0% (standard deviation: 11.8%) of data elements in studied NQRs could be mapped to existing DCIMs . In total, 5 out of 100 DCIMs were needed to map 48.6% of the data elements. CONCLUSION This study substantiates the potential of using existing DCIMs for data collection in Dutch NQRs and gives direction to further implementation of DCIMs. The developed method is applicable to other domains. For NQRs, implementation should start with the five DCIMs that are most prevalently used in the NQRs. Furthermore, a national agreement on the leading principle of COUMT for the use and implementation for DCIMs and (inter)national code lists is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maike H J Schepens
- Cirka BV, Healthcare Strategy and Innovation, Zeist, The Netherlands
- Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, LUMC, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | | | - Miranda L van Hooff
- Department of Orthopedics, Radboud UMC, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
- Department of Orthopedics, Sint Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Erik van der Velde
- Dutch Association of Medical Specialists, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Zorgverbeteraars, Healthcare IT Consulting, Roden, The Netherlands
| | | | - Iris J A M Verberk-Jonkers
- Dutch Association of Medical Specialists, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Nephrology, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Huib A Cense
- Department of Surgery, Rode Kruis Hospital, Beverwijk, The Netherlands
- Department of Health System Innovation. Faculty of Economics and Business, Groningen University. Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Diederik M Somford
- Department of Urology, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Sjoerd Repping
- Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Selma C Tromp
- Dutch Association of Medical Specialists, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Neurology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Michel W J M Wouters
- Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, LUMC, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Neurology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Theijse RT, Stoop TF, Geerdink NJ, Daams F, Zonderhuis BM, Erdmann JI, Swijnenburg RJ, Kazemier G, Busch OR, Besselink MG. Surgical outcome of a double versus a single pancreatoduodenectomy per operating day. Surgery 2023; 173:1263-1269. [PMID: 36842911 DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2023.01.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2022] [Revised: 12/19/2022] [Accepted: 01/17/2023] [Indexed: 02/27/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND For logistical reasons, some high-volume centers have developed surgical programs wherein 1 surgical team performs 2 pancreatoduodenectomies on a single day. It is unclear whether this practice has a negative impact on surgical outcome. METHODS We conuducted a retrospective analysis including all consecutive open pancreatoduodenectomies in a single high-volume center (2014-2021). Pancreatoduodenectomies were grouped as the first (pancreatoduodenectomy-1) or second (pancreatoduodenectomy-2) pancreatoduodenectomy on a single day (ie, paired pancreatoduodenectomies) and as pancreatoduodenectomy-3 whenever 1 pancreatoduodenectomy was performed per day (ie, unpaired). Patients undergoing minimally invasive procedures were excluded. The primary outcomes were major morbidity (ie, Clavien-Dindo grade ≥IIIa) and mortality. RESULTS Among 689 patients, 151 patients had undergone minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy, leaving 538 patients after open pancreatoduodenectomy for inclusion. The overall rate of major morbidity was 37.4% (n = 200/538) and in-hospital/30-day mortality 1.7% (n = 9/538). Overall, 136 (25.3%) patients were operated in 68 pancreatoduodenectomy-1/ pancreatoduodenectomy-2 pairs and 402 (74.7%) patients as unpaired pancreatoduodenectomy (pancreatoduodenectomy-3). No differences were found between pancreatoduodenectomy-1 and pancreatoduodenectomy-2 regarding the rates of major morbidity (35.3% vs 26.5%; P = .265) and mortality (1.5% vs 0%; P = .999). Between the 68 pancreatoduodenectomy-1/ pancreatoduodenectomy-2 pairs and the 402 unpaired pancreatoduodenectomies, the rates of major morbidity (30.9% vs 39.6%; P = .071) and mortality (0.7% vs 2.0%; P = .461) did not differ significantly. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, pancreatoduodenectomy-1 was not associated with major morbidity (odds ratio = 0.913 [95% confidence interval 0.515-1.620]; P = .756), whereas pancreatoduodenectomy-2 was associated with less major morbidity (odds ratio = 0.522 [95% confidence interval 0.277-0.983]; P = .045). CONCLUSION In a high-volume setting, performing 2 consecutive open pancreatoduodenectomies on a single operating day appears to be safe. This approach may be an option when logistically required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rutger T Theijse
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Thomas F Stoop
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Niek J Geerdink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Freek Daams
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit, The Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Babs M Zonderhuis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit, The Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Joris I Erdmann
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Rutger Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit, The Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit, The Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands. http://www.twitter.com/MarcBesselink
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Kobayashi K, Inoue Y, Omiya K, Sato S, Kato T, Oba A, Ono Y, Sato T, Ito H, Matsueda K, Saiura A, Takahashi Y. Diagnosis and management of postpancreatectomy hemorrhage: A single-center experience of consecutive 1,096 pancreatoduodenectomies. Pancreatology 2023; 23:235-244. [PMID: 36764874 DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2023.01.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/12/2022] [Revised: 12/19/2022] [Accepted: 01/10/2023] [Indexed: 02/12/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES This study aimed to assess the outcomes and characteristics of post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH) in over 1000 patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) at a high-volume hepatopancreaticobiliary center. METHODS This retrospective study analyzed consecutive patients who underwent PD from 2010 through 2021. PPH was diagnosed and managed using our algorithm based on timing of onset and location of hemorrhage. RESULTS Of 1096 patients who underwent PD, 33 patients (3.0%) had PPH; incidence of in-hospital and 90-day mortality relevant to PPH were one patient (3.0%) and zero patients, respectively. Early (≤24 h after surgery) and late (>24 h) PPH affected 9 patients and 24 patients, respectively; 16 patients experienced late-extraluminal PPH. The incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula (p < 0.001), abdominal infection (p < 0.001), highest values of drain fluid amylase (DFA) within 3 days, and highest value of C-reactive protein (CRP) within 3 days after surgery (DFA: p < 0.001) (CRP: p = 0.010) were significantly higher in the late-extraluminal-PPH group. The highest values of DFA≥10000U/l (p = 0.022), CRP≥15 mg/dl (p < 0.001), and incidence of abdominal infection (p = 0.004) were identified as independent risk factors for PPH in the multivariate analysis. Although the hospital stay was significantly longer in the late-extraluminal-PPH group (p < 0.001), discharge to patient's home (p = 0.751) and readmission rate within 30-day (p = 0.765) and 90-day (p = 0.062) did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS Standardized management of PPH according to the onset and source of hemorrhage minimizes the incidence of serious deterioration and mortality. High-risk patients with PPH can be predicted based on the DFA values, CRP levels, and incidence of abdominal infections.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kosuke Kobayashi
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan.
| | - Yosuke Inoue
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan.
| | - Kojiro Omiya
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Shoki Sato
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Tomotaka Kato
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Atsushi Oba
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yoshihiro Ono
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Takafumi Sato
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Hiromichi Ito
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Kiyoshi Matsueda
- Department of Diagnostic Ultrasound, Interventional Radiology, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Akio Saiura
- Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Juntendo University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yu Takahashi
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Doppenberg D, Besselink MG, van Eijck CHJ, Intven MPW, Koerkamp BG, Kazemier G, van Laarhoven HWM, Meijerink M, Molenaar IQ, Nuyttens JJME, van Os R, van Santvoort HC, van Tienhoven G, Verkooijen HM, Versteijne E, Wilmink JW, Lagerwaard FJ, Bruynzeel AME. Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy or best supportive care in patients with localized pancreatic cancer not receiving chemotherapy and surgery (PANCOSAR): a nationwide multicenter randomized controlled trial according to a TwiCs design. BMC Cancer 2022; 22:1363. [PMID: 36581914 PMCID: PMC9801528 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-022-10419-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2022] [Accepted: 12/06/2022] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Significant comorbidities, advanced age, and a poor performance status prevent surgery and systemic treatment for many patients with localized (non-metastatic) pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). These patients are currently treated with 'best supportive care'. Therefore, it is desirable to find a treatment option which could improve both disease control and quality of life in these patients. A brief course of high-dose high-precision radiotherapy i.e. stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) may be feasible. METHODS A nationwide multicenter trial performed within a previously established large prospective cohort (the Dutch Pancreatic cancer project; PACAP) according to the 'Trial within cohorts' (TwiCs) design. Patients enrolled in the PACAP cohort routinely provide informed consent to answer quality of life questionnaires and to be randomized according to the TwiCs design when eligible for a study. Patients with localized PDAC who are unfit for chemotherapy and surgery or those who refrain from these treatments are eligible. Patients will be randomized between SABR (5 fractions of 8 Gy) with 'best supportive care' and 'best supportive care' only. The primary endpoint is overall survival from randomization. Secondary endpoints include preservation of quality of life (EORTC-QLQ-C30 and -PAN26), NRS pain score response and WHO performance scores at baseline, and, 3, 6 and 12 months. Acute and late toxicity will be scored using CTCAE criteria version 5.0: assessed at baseline, day of last fraction, at 3 and 6 weeks, and 3, 6 and 12 months following SABR. DISCUSSION The PANCOSAR trial studies the added value of SBRT as compared to 'best supportive care' in patients with localized PDAC who are medically unfit to receive chemotherapy and surgery, or refrain from these treatments. This study will assess whether SABR, in comparison to best supportive care, can relieve or delay tumor-related symptoms, enhance quality of life, and extend survival in these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinical trials, NCT05265663 , Registered March 3 2022, Retrospectively registered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D. Doppenberg
- grid.509540.d0000 0004 6880 3010Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands ,grid.7177.60000000084992262Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, The Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M. G. Besselink
- grid.7177.60000000084992262Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, The Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - C. H. J. van Eijck
- grid.508717.c0000 0004 0637 3764Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M. P. W. Intven
- grid.5477.10000000120346234Department of Radiation Oncology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - B. Groot Koerkamp
- grid.508717.c0000 0004 0637 3764Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - G. Kazemier
- grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands ,grid.509540.d0000 0004 6880 3010Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - H. W. M. van Laarhoven
- grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands ,grid.7177.60000000084992262Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M. Meijerink
- grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands ,grid.509540.d0000 0004 6880 3010Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Intervention Radiology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - I. Q. Molenaar
- grid.5477.10000000120346234Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - J. J. M. E. Nuyttens
- grid.508717.c0000 0004 0637 3764Department of Radiation Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - R. van Os
- grid.509540.d0000 0004 6880 3010Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - H. C. van Santvoort
- grid.5477.10000000120346234Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - G. van Tienhoven
- grid.509540.d0000 0004 6880 3010Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - H. M. Verkooijen
- grid.5477.10000000120346234Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - E. Versteijne
- grid.509540.d0000 0004 6880 3010Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J. W. Wilmink
- grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands ,grid.7177.60000000084992262Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - F. J. Lagerwaard
- grid.509540.d0000 0004 6880 3010Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - A. M. E. Bruynzeel
- grid.509540.d0000 0004 6880 3010Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Mehrabi A, Abbasi Dezfouli S, Schlösser F, Ramouz A, Khajeh E, Ali-Hasan-Al-Saegh S, Loos M, Strobel O, Müller-Stich B, Berchtold C, Mieth M, Klauss M, Chang DH, Wielpütz MO, Büchler MW, Hackert T. Validation of the ISGLS classification of bile leakage after pancreatic surgery: A rare but severe complication. Eur J Surg Oncol 2022; 48:2440-2447. [PMID: 35842371 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2022.06.030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/01/2022] [Revised: 06/17/2022] [Accepted: 06/20/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Hepaticoenterostomy is an important step of reconstruction during hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) surgery with a subsequent bile leakage rate of up to 5%. The International Study Group of Liver Surgery (ISGLS) proposed a severity grading system for defining bile leakage after HPB surgery, which has not been validated after pancreatic surgery in a large patient cohort. The present study aimed to validate the ISGLS definition for bile leakage in pancreatic surgery and to investigate the postoperative outcomes of bile leakage after pancreatic resections. MATERIALS AND METHODS Data from the prospectively maintained database for pancreas surgery were extracted for any type of pancreatectomy with hepaticoenterostomy between 2006 and 2019. The severity of bile leakage was graded according to the ISGLS definition. The influence of our standardized hepaticoenterostomy technique and of the complexity of the surgical procedure on the rate of clinically relevant bile leakages (B and C) were assessed in three different timeframes. RESULTS Bile leakage was detected in 152 of 5,300 patients (2.9%). Clinically relevant bile leakages included seventy patients with grade B and eighty-two patients with grade C bile leakages (46.1% and 53.9%, respectively). During the study period, the overall rate of bile leakage showed to be stable (from 3.5% to 2.4%). Patients with grade C bile leakage had a higher rate of postoperative wound infection (P < 0.001) and longer ICU stays and hospital stays compared to patients with grade B bile leakage (P = 0.03 and P < 0.001 respectively). These parameters were significantly higher in patients with late grade C bile leakage but were similar between patients with grade B bile leakage and early grade C bile leakage (<5th day POD). In the whole patients' cohort, the 90-day mortality rate was 3.2% (174/5,300), with a rate of 25% in patients with bile leakage (38/152). CONCLUSION The ISGLS classification is a valid method for classifying postoperative bile leak after pancreas surgery. Standardization of our hepaticoenterostomy technique resulted in a stable rate of bile leakage. Although rare, bile leakage following pancreas surgery is a severe complication that has a major impact on patient outcomes and contributes significantly to morbidity and mortality, even in the absence of POPF.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arianeb Mehrabi
- Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany; Liver Cancer Center Heidelberg (LCCH), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany; European Pancreas Center, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
| | - Sepehr Abbasi Dezfouli
- Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany
| | - Fabian Schlösser
- Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany
| | - Ali Ramouz
- Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany
| | - Elias Khajeh
- Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany
| | - Sadeq Ali-Hasan-Al-Saegh
- Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany
| | - Martin Loos
- Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany; European Pancreas Center, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Oliver Strobel
- Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany; European Pancreas Center, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Beat Müller-Stich
- Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany; Liver Cancer Center Heidelberg (LCCH), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Christoph Berchtold
- Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany
| | - Markus Mieth
- Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany; Liver Cancer Center Heidelberg (LCCH), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Miriam Klauss
- Liver Cancer Center Heidelberg (LCCH), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - De-Hua Chang
- Liver Cancer Center Heidelberg (LCCH), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Mark O Wielpütz
- Liver Cancer Center Heidelberg (LCCH), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Markus W Büchler
- Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany; Liver Cancer Center Heidelberg (LCCH), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany; European Pancreas Center, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Thilo Hackert
- Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany; Liver Cancer Center Heidelberg (LCCH), Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany; European Pancreas Center, Heidelberg University Hospital, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Zwart MJW, Nota CLM, de Rooij T, van Hilst J, Te Riele WW, van Santvoort HC, Hagendoorn J, Borei Rinkes IHM, van Dam JL, Latenstein AEJ, Takagi K, Tran KTC, Schreinemakers J, van der Schelling GP, Wijsman JH, Festen S, Daams F, Luyer MD, de Hingh IHJT, Mieog JSD, Bonsing BA, Lips DJ, Hilal MA, Busch OR, Saint-Marc O, Zehl HJ, Zureikat AH, Hogg ME, Molenaar IQ, Besselink MG, Koerkamp BG. Outcomes of a Multicenter Training Program in Robotic Pancreatoduodenectomy (LAELAPS-3). Ann Surg 2022; 276:e886-e895. [PMID: 33534227 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000004783] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 22.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess feasibility and safety of a multicenter training program in robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) adhering to the IDEAL framework for implementation of surgical innovation. BACKGROUND Good results for RPD have been reported from single center studies. However, data on feasibility and safety of implementation through a multicenter training program in RPD are lacking. METHODS A multicenter training program in RPD was designed together with the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, including an online video bank, robot simulation exercises, biotissue drills, and on-site proctoring. Benchmark patients were based on the criteria of Clavien. Outcomes were collected prospectively (March 2016-October 2019). Cumulative sum analysis of operative time was performed to distinguish the first and second phase of the learning curve. Outcomes were compared between both phases of the learning curve. Trends in nationwide use of robotic and laparoscopic PD were assessed in the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. RESULTS Overall, 275 RPD procedures were performed in seven centers by 15 trained surgeons. The recent benchmark criteria for low-risk PD were met by 125 (45.5%) patients. The conversion rate was 6.5% (n = 18) and median blood loss 250ml [interquartile range (IQR) 150-500]. The rate of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III complications was 44.4% (n = 122), postoperative pancreatic fistula (grade B/C) rate 23.6% (n = 65), 90-day complication-related mortality 2.5% (n = 7) and 90-day cancer-related mortality 2.2.% (n = 6). Median postoperative hospital stay was 12 days (IQR 8-20). In the subgroup of patients with pancreatic cancer (n = 80), the major complication rate was 31.3% and POPF rate was 10%. Cumulative sum analysis for operative time found a learning curve inflection point at 22 RPDs (IQR 10-35) with similar rates of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III complications in the first and second phase (43.4% vs 43.8%, P = 0.956, respectively). During the study period the nationwide use of laparoscopic PD reduced from 15% to 1%, whereas the use of RPD increased from 0% to 25%. CONCLUSIONS This multicenter RPD training program in centers with sufficient surgical volume was found to be feasible without a negative impact of the learning curve on clinical outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maurice J W Zwart
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Carolijn L M Nota
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Thijs de Rooij
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jony van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Wouter W Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Inne H M Borei Rinkes
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Jacob L van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Anouk E J Latenstein
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Kosei Takagi
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Khé T C Tran
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Jan H Wijsman
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Ziekenhuis, Breda, the Netherlands
| | | | - Freek Daams
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Misha D Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | - Jan S D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Daan J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Mohammed Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
- Department of Surgery, Istituto Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Olivier Saint-Marc
- Department of Surgery, Centre Hospitalier Regional Orleans, Orleans, France
| | - Herbert J Zehl
- Department of Surgery, University of Texas, Southwestern, Dallas, Texas
| | - Amer H Zureikat
- Department of Surgery, Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Melissa E Hogg
- Department of Surgery, Northshore University HealthSystem, Chicago, Illinois
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Lucassen CJ, Groen JV, Aziz MH, Bastiaannet E, Bonsing BA, Leistra E, Shahbazi Feshtali S, Vahrmeijer AL, Droop A, Mieog JSD. Visceral adipose tissue is a better predictor than BMI in the alternative Fistula Risk Score in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy. HPB (Oxford) 2022; 24:1679-1687. [PMID: 35527105 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2022.03.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/12/2021] [Revised: 02/25/2022] [Accepted: 03/10/2022] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Muscle attenuation (MA) and visceral adipose tissue (VAT) have not yet been included in the currently used alternative Fistula Risk Score (a-FRS). The aim of this study was to examine the added value of these parameters as predictors of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) in the a-FRS after pancreatoduodenectomy compared to Body Mass Index (BMI). METHODS A single center retrospective cohort study was performed in patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy between 2009 and 2018. The a-FRS model was reproduced, MA and VAT were both combined and separately added to the model instead of BMI using logistic regression analysis. Model discrimination was assessed by ROC-curves. RESULTS In total, 329 patients were included of which 55 (16.7%) developed CR-POPF. The a-FRS model showed an AUC of 0.74 (95%CI: 0.68-0.80). In this model, BMI was not significantly associated with CR-POPF (p = 0.16). The MA + VAT model showed an AUC of 0.81 (95%CI: 0.75-0.86). VAT was significantly associated with CR-POPF (per cm2, OR: 1.01; 95%CI: 1.00-1.01; p < 0.001). The AUC of the MA + VAT model differed significantly from the AUC of the a-FRS model (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION Visceral adipose tissue is of added value in the a-FRS compared to BMI in predicting CR-POPF in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claudia J Lucassen
- Department of Dietetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Jesse V Groen
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - M Hosein Aziz
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Esther Bastiaannet
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Eva Leistra
- Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences, VU University, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Anneke Droop
- Department of Dietetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - J Sven D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Henry AC, Schouten TJ, Daamen LA, Walma MS, Noordzij P, Cirkel GA, Los M, Besselink MG, Busch OR, Bonsing BA, Bosscha K, van Dam RM, Festen S, Groot Koerkamp B, van der Harst E, de Hingh IHJT, Kazemier G, Liem MS, de Meijer VE, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Roos D, Schreinemakers JMJ, Stommel MWJ, Molenaar IQ, van Santvoort HC. Short- and Long-Term Outcomes of Pancreatic Cancer Resection in Elderly Patients: A Nationwide Analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 2022; 29:6031-6042. [PMID: 35653069 PMCID: PMC9356963 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-022-11831-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2021] [Accepted: 04/11/2022] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The number of elderly patients with pancreatic cancer is growing, however clinical data on the short-term outcomes, rate of adjuvant chemotherapy, and survival in these patients are limited and we therefore performed a nationwide analysis. METHODS Data from the prospective Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit were analyzed, including all patients undergoing pancreatic cancer resection between January 2014 and December 2016. Patients were classified into two age groups: <75 and ≥75 years. Major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher), 90-day mortality, rates of adjuvant chemotherapy, and survival were compared between age groups. Factors associated with start of adjuvant chemotherapy and survival were evaluated with logistic regression and multivariable Cox regression analysis. RESULTS Of 836 patients, 198 were aged ≥75 years (24%) and 638 were aged <75 years (76%). Median follow-up was 38 months (interquartile range [IQR] 31-47). Major complications (31% vs. 28%; p = 0.43) and 90-day mortality (8% vs. 5%; p = 0.18) did not differ. Adjuvant chemotherapy was started in 37% of patients aged ≥75 years versus 69% of patients aged <75 years (p < 0.001). Median overall survival (OS) was 15 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 14-18) versus 21 months (95% CI 19-24; p < 0.001). Age ≥75 years was not independently associated with OS (hazard ratio 0.96, 95% CI 0.79-1.17; p = 0.71), but was associated with a lower rate of adjuvant chemotherapy (odds ratio 0.27, 95% CI 0.18-0.40; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS The rate of major complications and 90-day mortality after pancreatic resection did not differ between elderly and younger patients; however, elderly patients were less often treated with adjuvant chemotherapy and their OS was shorter.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Claire Henry
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Thijs J Schouten
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Lois A Daamen
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Marieke S Walma
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Peter Noordzij
- Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Geert A Cirkel
- Department of Medical Oncology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Meander Medical Center Amersfoort, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Maartje Los
- Department of Medical Oncology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, The Netherlands
| | - Ronald M van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Sebastiaan Festen
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwen Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Mike S Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Vincent E de Meijer
- Department of Surgery, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Daphne Roos
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Group, Delft, The Netherlands
| | | | - Martijn W J Stommel
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Schouten TJ, Daamen LA, Dorland G, van Roessel SR, Groot VP, Besselink MG, Bonsing BA, Bosscha K, Brosens LAA, Busch OR, van Dam RM, Fariña Sarasqueta A, Festen S, Groot Koerkamp B, van der Harst E, de Hingh IHJT, Intven M, Kazemier G, de Meijer VE, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Raicu GM, Roos D, Schreinemakers JMJ, Stommel MWJ, van Velthuysen MF, Verdonk RC, Verheij J, Verkooijen HM, van Santvoort HC, Molenaar IQ. Nationwide Validation of the 8th American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM Staging System and Five Proposed Modifications for Resected Pancreatic Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2022; 29:5988-5999. [PMID: 35469113 PMCID: PMC9356941 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-022-11664-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/18/2021] [Accepted: 03/06/2022] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The prognostic value of four proposed modifications to the 8th American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM staging system has yet to be evaluated. This study aimed to validate five proposed modifications. METHODS Patients who underwent pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma resection (2014-2016), as registered in the prospective Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit, were included. Stratification and prognostication of TNM staging systems were assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves, Cox proportional hazard analyses, and C-indices. A new modification was composed based on overall survival (OS). RESULTS Overall, 750 patients with a median OS of 18 months (interquartile range 10-32) were included. The 8th edition had an increased discriminative ability compared with the 7th edition {C-index 0.59 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-0.61) vs. 0.56 (95% CI 0.54-0.58)}. Although the 8th edition showed a stepwise decrease in OS with increasing stage, no differences could be demonstrated between all substages; stage IIA vs. IB (hazard ratio [HR] 1.30, 95% CI 0.80-2.09; p = 0.29) and stage IIB vs. IIA (HR 1.17, 95% CI 0.75-1.83; p = 0.48). The four modifications showed comparable prognostic accuracy (C-index 0.59-0.60); however, OS did not differ between all modified TNM stages (ns). The new modification, migrating T3N1 patients to stage III, showed a C-index of 0.59, but did detect significant survival differences between all TNM stages (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS The 8th TNM staging system still lacks prognostic value for some categories of patients, which was not clearly improved by four previously proposed modifications. The modification suggested in this study allows for better prognostication in patients with all stages of disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs J. Schouten
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Lois A. Daamen
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Galina Dorland
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Stijn R. van Roessel
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Vincent P. Groot
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G. Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bert A. Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, The Netherlands
| | | | - Olivier R. Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ronald M. van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- GROW - School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of General and Visceral Surgery, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - Arantza Fariña Sarasqueta
- Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Ignace H. J. T. de Hingh
- GROW - School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Martijn Intven
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, VU Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Vincent E. de Meijer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | | | - G. Mihaela Raicu
- Department of Pathology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Daphne Roos
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Group, Delft, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Robert C. Verdonk
- Department of Gastroenterology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Joanne Verheij
- Department of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Helena M. Verkooijen
- Imaging Division, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C. van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - I. Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - The Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiation Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- GROW - School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of General and Visceral Surgery, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany
- Department of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, VU Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Isala, Zwolle, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Group, Delft, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, Netherlands
- Department of Gastroenterology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Imaging Division, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
van Beek DJ, Takkenkamp TJ, Wong-Lun-Hing EM, de Kleine RHJ, Walenkamp AME, Klaase JM, Nijkamp MW, Valk GD, Molenaar IQ, Hagendoorn J, van Santvoort HC, Borel Rinkes IHM, Hoogwater FJH, Vriens MR. Risk factors for complications after surgery for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Surgery 2022; 172:127-136. [PMID: 35341591 DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2022.02.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/26/2021] [Revised: 01/03/2022] [Accepted: 02/09/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Surgical resection is the only potentially curative treatment for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. The choice for the type of procedure is influenced by the expected oncological benefit and the anticipated risk of procedure-specific complications. Few studies have focused on complications in these patients. This cohort study aimed to assess complications and risk factors after resections of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. METHODS Patients undergoing resection of a pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor were identified within 2 centers of excellence. Complications were assessed according to the Clavien-Dindo classification and the comprehensive complication index. Logistic regression was performed to compare surgical procedures with adjustment for potential confounders (Clavien-Dindo ≥3). RESULTS The cohort comprised 123 patients, including 12 enucleations, 50 distal pancreatectomies, 51 pancreatoduodenectomies, and 10 total/combined pancreatectomies. Mortality was 0.8%, a severe complication occurred in 41.5%, and the failure-to-rescue rate was 2.0%. The median comprehensive complication index was 22.6 (0-100); the comprehensive complication index increased after more extensive resections. After adjustment, a pancreatoduodenectomy, as compared to a distal pancreatectomy, increased the risk for a severe complication (odds ratio 3.13 [95% confidence interval 1.32-7.41]). Of the patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 or von Hippel-Lindau, 51.9% developed a severe complication vs 38.5% with sporadic disease. After major resections, morbidity was significantly higher in patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1/von Hippel-Lindau (comprehensive complication index 45.1 vs 28.9, P = .029). CONCLUSION Surgery for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors is associated with a high rate of complications but low failure-to-rescue in centers of excellence. Complications are procedure-specific. Major resections in patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1/von Hippel-Lindau appear to increase the risk of complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dirk-Jan van Beek
- Department of Endocrine Surgical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Tim J Takkenkamp
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Edgar M Wong-Lun-Hing
- Department of Endocrine Surgical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Ruben H J de Kleine
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Annemiek M E Walenkamp
- Department of Oncology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Joost M Klaase
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Maarten W Nijkamp
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Gerlof D Valk
- Department of Endocrine Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Inne H M Borel Rinkes
- Department of Endocrine Surgical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Frederik J H Hoogwater
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Menno R Vriens
- Department of Endocrine Surgical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Watanabe Y, Nakazawa K, Takase K, Watanabe Y, Okada K, Aikawa M, Okamoto K, Koyama I. Outcomes of Arterial Embolization vs Covered Stents for Delayed Massive Hemorrhage After Pancreatic or Biliary Surgery. J Gastrointest Surg 2022; 26:1187-1197. [PMID: 35091861 DOI: 10.1007/s11605-022-05259-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2021] [Accepted: 01/22/2022] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Covered stent placement (CSP) is gaining popularity for the management of delayed massive hemorrhage (DMH) after pancreatic or biliary surgery. However, early studies have produced conflicting results regarding the potential advantages of the procedure. We aimed to compare the short- and medium-term outcomes of arterial embolization (AE) and CSP for DMH. METHODS We analyzed data for patients who underwent AE or CSP as an endovascular treatment (EVT) for DMH from the common hepatic artery (CHA) and its distal arteries between January 2009 and December 2019. We evaluated the major hepatic complications, in-hospital mortality, and 1-year mortality associated with the procedures, according to age, sex, reintervention, arterial variant, interval between surgery and EVT, and portal vein stenosis. RESULTS All hemorrhages were treated using AE (n = 50) or CSP (n = 20). CSP was associated with no in-hospital mortality (32% vs. 0%, p = 0.003), and lower incidences of major hepatic complications (44% vs. 10%, p = 0.011) and 1-year mortality (54% vs. 25%, p = 0.035) compared with AE, respectively. There was no significant difference in technical success and reintervention rates. Compared with AE, the risk-adjusted odds ratios for CSP (95% confidence intervals) for major hepatic complications and 1-year mortality were 0.06 (0.01-0.39) and 0.19 (0.05-0.71), respectively. CONCLUSIONS CSP is superior to AE regarding major hepatic complications and in-hospital- and 1-year mortality in patients with DMH from hepatic arteries.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yukihiro Watanabe
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Saitama, 1397-1 Yamane350-1298, Japan.
| | - Ken Nakazawa
- Department of Radiology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Saitama, Japan
| | - Kenichiro Takase
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Saitama, 1397-1 Yamane350-1298, Japan
| | - Yuichiro Watanabe
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Saitama, 1397-1 Yamane350-1298, Japan
| | - Katsuya Okada
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Saitama, 1397-1 Yamane350-1298, Japan
| | - Masayasu Aikawa
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Saitama, 1397-1 Yamane350-1298, Japan
| | - Kojun Okamoto
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Saitama, 1397-1 Yamane350-1298, Japan
| | - Isamu Koyama
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Saitama, 1397-1 Yamane350-1298, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Seufferlein T, Mayerle J, Blödt S, Derenz S, Follmann M, Kestler A, Köster MJ, Langer T, Rütters D, Wesselmann S, Lorenz P. Leitlinienreport der S3-Leitlinie zum exokrinen Pankreaskarzinom. ZEITSCHRIFT FUR GASTROENTEROLOGIE 2022; 60:288-391. [PMID: 35700969 DOI: 10.1055/a-1771-6893] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/13/2023]
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Susanne Blödt
- AWMF-Institut für Medizinisches Wissensmanagement, Berlin, Germany
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Dana Rütters
- Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft (DKG), Berlin, Germany
| | | | - Pia Lorenz
- Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gastroneterologie, Verdauungs- und Stoffwechselkrankheiten (DGVS), Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Smits FJ, Henry AC, Besselink MG, Busch OR, van Eijck CH, Arntz M, Bollen TL, van Delden OM, van den Heuvel D, van der Leij C, van Lienden KP, Moelker A, Bonsing BA, Borel Rinkes IH, Bosscha K, van Dam RM, Derksen WJM, den Dulk M, Festen S, Groot Koerkamp B, de Haas RJ, Hagendoorn J, van der Harst E, de Hingh IH, Kazemier G, van der Kolk M, Liem M, Lips DJ, Luyer MD, de Meijer VE, Mieog JS, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Patijn GA, Te Riele WW, Roos D, Schreinemakers JM, Stommel MWJ, Wit F, Zonderhuis BA, Daamen LA, van Werkhoven CH, Molenaar IQ, van Santvoort HC. Algorithm-based care versus usual care for the early recognition and management of complications after pancreatic resection in the Netherlands: an open-label, nationwide, stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial. Lancet 2022; 399:1867-1875. [PMID: 35490691 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(22)00182-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 26.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2021] [Revised: 12/09/2021] [Accepted: 12/16/2021] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Early recognition and management of postoperative complications, before they become clinically relevant, can improve postoperative outcomes for patients, especially for high-risk procedures such as pancreatic resection. METHODS We did an open-label, nationwide, stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial that included all patients having pancreatic resection during a 22-month period in the Netherlands. In this trial design, all 17 centres that did pancreatic surgery were randomly allocated for the timing of the crossover from usual care (the control group) to treatment given in accordance with a multimodal, multidisciplinary algorithm for the early recognition and minimally invasive management of postoperative complications (the intervention group). Randomisation was done by an independent statistician using a computer-generated scheme, stratified to ensure that low-medium-volume centres alternated with high-volume centres. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment. A smartphone app was designed that incorporated the algorithm and included the daily evaluation of clinical and biochemical markers. The algorithm determined when to do abdominal CT, radiological drainage, start antibiotic treatment, and remove abdominal drains. After crossover, clinicians were trained in how to use the algorithm during a 4-week wash-in period; analyses comparing outcomes between the control group and the intervention group included all patients other than those having pancreatic resection during this wash-in period. The primary outcome was a composite of bleeding that required invasive intervention, organ failure, and 90-day mortality, and was assessed by a masked adjudication committee. This trial was registered in the Netherlands Trial Register, NL6671. FINDINGS From Jan 8, 2018, to Nov 9, 2019, all 1805 patients who had pancreatic resection in the Netherlands were eligible for and included in this study. 57 patients who underwent resection during the wash-in phase were excluded from the primary analysis. 1748 patients (885 receiving usual care and 863 receiving algorithm-centred care) were included. The primary outcome occurred in fewer patients in the algorithm-centred care group than in the usual care group (73 [8%] of 863 patients vs 124 [14%] of 885 patients; adjusted risk ratio [RR] 0·48, 95% CI 0·38-0·61; p<0·0001). Among patients treated according to the algorithm, compared with patients who received usual care there was a decrease in bleeding that required intervention (47 [5%] patients vs 51 [6%] patients; RR 0·65, 0·42-0·99; p=0·046), organ failure (39 [5%] patients vs 92 [10%] patients; 0·35, 0·20-0·60; p=0·0001), and 90-day mortality (23 [3%] patients vs 44 [5%] patients; 0·42, 0·19-0·92; p=0·029). INTERPRETATION The algorithm for the early recognition and minimally invasive management of complications after pancreatic resection considerably improved clinical outcomes compared with usual care. This difference included an approximate 50% reduction in mortality at 90 days. FUNDING The Dutch Cancer Society and UMC Utrecht.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Jasmijn Smits
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Anne Claire Henry
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Casper H van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Mark Arntz
- Department of Radiology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | - Thomas L Bollen
- Department of Radiology, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Otto M van Delden
- Department of Radiology, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Daniel van den Heuvel
- Department of Radiology, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | | | - Krijn P van Lienden
- Department of Radiology, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Adriaan Moelker
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, Netherlands
| | - Inne H Borel Rinkes
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, Netherlands
| | - Ronald M van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Wouter J M Derksen
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Marcel den Dulk
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Sebastiaan Festen
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Robbert J de Haas
- Department of Radiology, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | | | - Ignace H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven and GROW-School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Marion van der Kolk
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | - Mike Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, Netherlands
| | - Daan J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, Netherlands
| | - Misha D Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven and GROW-School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Vincent E de Meijer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
| | - J Sven Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, Netherlands
| | | | | | - Wouter W Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Daphne Roos
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Hospital, Delft, Netherlands
| | | | - Martijn W J Stommel
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | - Fennie Wit
- Department of Surgery, Tjongerschans Hospital, Heerenveen, Netherlands
| | - Babs A Zonderhuis
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Lois A Daamen
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - C Henri van Werkhoven
- Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Versteijne E, Suker M, Groen JV, Besselink MG, Bonsing BA, Bosscha K, Busch OR, de Hingh IHJT, de Jong KP, Molenaar IQ, van Santvoort HC, Verkooijen HM, Van Eijck CH, van Tienhoven G. External Validity of the Multicenter Randomized PREOPANC Trial on Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Pancreatic Cancer: Outcome of Eligible but Nonrandomized Patients. Ann Surg 2022; 275:972-978. [PMID: 33273349 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000004364] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/28/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To investigate the accrual proportion and patients' reasons for not participating in the PREOPANC trial on neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus immediate surgery in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, and to compare these patients' outcomes with those of patients who had been randomized in the trial. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA The external validity of multicenter randomized trials in cancer treatment has been criticized for suboptimal non-representative inclusion. In trials, it is unclear how outcomes compare between randomized and nonrandomized patients. METHODS At 8 of 16 participant centers, this multicenter observational study identified validation patients, who had been eligible but not randomized during recruitment for the PREOPANC trial. We assessed the accrual proportion, investigated their most common reasons for not participating in the trial, and compared resection rates, radical (R0) resection rates, and overall survival between the validation patients and PREOPANC patients, who had been randomized in the trial to immediate surgery. RESULTS In total, 455 patients had been eligible during the recruitment period, 151 of whom (33%) had been randomized. Fifty-five percent of the 304 validation patients had refused to participate. Median overall survival in the validation group was 15.2 months, against 15.5 months in the PREOPANC group (P = 1.00). The respective resection rates (76% vs 73%) and R0 resection rates (51% vs 46%) did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSIONS The PREOPANC trial included a reasonable percentage of 33% of eligible patients. In terms of the outcomes survival, resection rate, and R0 resection rate, this appeared to be a representative group.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eva Versteijne
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Mustafa Suker
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jesse V Groen
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, the Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Koert P de Jong
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, RAKU, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Helena M Verkooijen
- Imaging Division, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Casper H Van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Geertjan van Tienhoven
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Somatostatin analogues for the prevention of pancreatic fistula after open pancreatoduodenectomy: A nationwide analysis. Pancreatology 2022; 22:421-426. [PMID: 35304104 DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2022.03.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/29/2021] [Revised: 02/02/2022] [Accepted: 03/07/2022] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Somatostatin analogues (SA) are currently used to prevent postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) development. However, its use is controversial. This study investigated the effect of different SA protocols on the incidence of POPF after pancreatoduodenectomy in a nationwide population. METHODS All patients undergoing elective open pancreatoduodenectomy were included from the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (2014-2017). Patients were divided into six groups: no SA, octreotide, lanreotide, pasireotide, octreotide only in high-risk (HR) patients and lanreotide only in HR patients. Primary endpoint was POPF grade B/C. The updated alternative Fistula Risk Score was used to compare POPF rates across various risk scenarios. RESULTS 1992 patients were included. Overall POPF rate was 13.1%. Lanreotide (10.0%), octreotide-HR (9.4%) and no protocol (12.7%) POPF rates were lower compared to the other protocols (varying from 15.1 to 19.1%, p = 0.001) in crude analysis. Sub-analysis in patients with HR of POPF showed a significantly lower rate of POPF when treated with lanreotide (10.0%) compared to no protocol, octreotide and pasireotide protocol (21.6-26.9%, p = 0.006). Octreotide-HR and lanreotide-HR protocol POPF rates were comparable to lanreotide protocol, however not significantly different from the other protocols. Multivariable regression analysis demonstrated lanreotide protocol to be positively associated with a low odds-ratio (OR) for POPF (OR 0.387, 95% CI 0.180-0.834, p = 0.015). In-hospital mortality rates were not affected. CONCLUSION Use of lanreotide in all patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy has a potential protective effect on POPF development. Protocols for HR patients only might be favorable too. However, future studies are warranted to confirm these findings.
Collapse
|
36
|
Daamen LA, Dorland G, Brada LJH, Groot VP, van Oosten AF, Besselink MG, Bosscha K, Bonsing BA, Busch OR, Cirkel GA, van Dam RM, Festen S, Groot Koerkamp B, Haj Mohammad N, van der Harst E, de Hingh IHJT, Intven MPW, Kazemier G, Los M, de Meijer VE, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Roos D, Schreinemakers JMJ, Stommel MWJ, Verdonk RC, Verkooijen HM, Molenaar IQ, van Santvoort HC. Preoperative predictors for early and very early disease recurrence in patients undergoing resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. HPB (Oxford) 2022; 24:535-546. [PMID: 34642090 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2021.09.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/04/2020] [Revised: 07/02/2021] [Accepted: 09/06/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study aimed to identify predictors for early and very early disease recurrence in patients undergoing resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) resection with and without neoadjuvant therapy. METHODS Included were patients who underwent PDAC resection (2014-2016). Multivariable multinomial regression was performed to identify preoperative predictors for manifestation of recurrence within 3, 6 and 12 months after PDAC resection. RESULTS 836 patients with a median follow-up of 37 (interquartile range [IQR] 30-48) months and overall survival of 18 (IQR 10-32) months were analyzed. 670 patients (80%) developed recurrence: 82 patients (10%) <3 months, 96 patients (11%) within 3-6 months and 226 patients (27%) within 6-12 months. LogCA 19-9 (OR 1.25 [95% CI 1.10-1.41]; P < 0.001) and neoadjuvant treatment (OR 0.09 [95% CI 0.01-0.68]; P = 0.02) were associated with recurrence <3 months. LogCA 19-9 (OR 1.23 [95% CI 1.10-1.38]; P < 0.001) and 0-90° venous involvement on CT imaging (OR 2.93 [95% CI 1.60-5.37]; P < 0.001) were associated with recurrence within 3-6 months. A Charlson Age Comorbidity Index ≥4 (OR 1.53 [95% CI 1.09-2.16]; P = 0.02) and logCA 19-9 (OR 1.24 [95% CI 1.14-1.35]; P < 0.001) were related to recurrence within 6-12 months. CONCLUSION This study demonstrates preoperative predictors that are associated with the manifestation of early and very early recurrence after PDAC resection. Knowledge of these predictors can be used to guide individualized surveillance and treatment strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lois A Daamen
- Dept. of Surgery, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Dept. of Radiation Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
| | - Galina Dorland
- Dept. of Surgery, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Dept. of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Lilly J H Brada
- Dept. of Surgery, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Dept. of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Vincent P Groot
- Dept. of Surgery, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - A Floortje van Oosten
- Dept. of Surgery, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Dept. of Surgery, The Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Dept. of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Dept. of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, the Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Dept. of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Dept. of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Geert A Cirkel
- Dept. of Medical Oncology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, the Netherlands; Dept. of Medical Oncology, Meander Medical Center, Amersfoort, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Nadia Haj Mohammad
- Dept. of Medical Oncology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Martijn P W Intven
- Dept. of Radiation Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Dept. of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Maartje Los
- Dept. of Medical Oncology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, the Netherlands
| | - Vincent E de Meijer
- Dept. of Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | | | - Daphne Roos
- Dept. of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Group, Delft, the Netherlands
| | | | - Martijn W J Stommel
- Dept. of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Robert C Verdonk
- Dept. of Gastroenterology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Helena M Verkooijen
- Imaging Division, University Medical Centre Utrecht, the Netherlands; Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Dept. of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, the Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Dept. of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Bolm L, Zemskov S, Zeller M, Baba T, Roldan J, Harrison JM, Petruch N, Sato H, Petrova E, Lapshyn H, Braun R, Honselmann KC, Hummel R, Dronov O, Kirichenko AV, Klinkhammer-Schalke M, Kleihues-van Tol K, Zeissig SR, Rades D, Keck T, Fernandez-del Castillo C, Wellner UF, Wegner RE. Concepts and Outcomes of Perioperative Therapy in Stage IA-III Pancreatic Cancer-A Cross-Validation of the National Cancer Database (NCDB) and the German Cancer Registry Group of the Society of German Tumor Centers (GCRG/ADT). Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14040868. [PMID: 35205616 PMCID: PMC8870242 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14040868] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/07/2022] [Revised: 02/01/2022] [Accepted: 02/05/2022] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
(1) Background: The aim of this study is to assess perioperative therapy in stage IA-III pancreatic cancer cross-validating the German Cancer Registry Group of the Society of German Tumor Centers-Network for Care, Quality, and Research in Oncology, Berlin (GCRG/ADT) and the National Cancer Database (NCDB). (2) Methods: Patients with clinical stage IA-III PDAC undergoing surgery alone (OP), neoadjuvant therapy (TX) + surgery (neo + OP), surgery+adjuvantTX (OP + adj) and neoadjuvantTX + surgery + adjuvantTX (neo + OP + adj) were identified. Baseline characteristics, histopathological parameters, and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. (3) Results: 1392 patients from the GCRG/ADT and 29,081 patients from the NCDB were included. Patient selection and strategies of perioperative therapy remained consistent across the registries for stage IA-III pancreatic cancer. Combined neo + OP + adj was associated with prolonged OS as compared to neo + OP alone (17.8 m vs. 21.3 m, p = 0.012) across all stages in the GCRG/ADT registry. Similarly, OS with neo + OP + adj was improved as compared to neo + OP in the NCDB registry (26.4 m vs. 35.4 m, p < 0.001). (4) Conclusion: The cross-validation study demonstrated similar concepts and patient selection criteria of perioperative therapy across clinical stages of PDAC. Neoadjuvant therapy combined with adjuvant therapy is associated with improved overall survival as compared to either therapy alone.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Louisa Bolm
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA; (T.B.); (J.R.); (J.M.H.); (N.P.); (H.S.); (C.F.-d.C.)
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck, 23562 Luebeck, Germany; (M.Z.); (E.P.); (H.L.); (R.B.); (K.C.H.); (R.H.); (T.K.); (U.F.W.)
- Correspondence:
| | - Sergii Zemskov
- Department of General Surgery, Bogomolets National Medical Unoversity, 01601 Kyiv, Ukraine; (S.Z.); (O.D.)
| | - Maria Zeller
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck, 23562 Luebeck, Germany; (M.Z.); (E.P.); (H.L.); (R.B.); (K.C.H.); (R.H.); (T.K.); (U.F.W.)
| | - Taisuke Baba
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA; (T.B.); (J.R.); (J.M.H.); (N.P.); (H.S.); (C.F.-d.C.)
| | - Jorge Roldan
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA; (T.B.); (J.R.); (J.M.H.); (N.P.); (H.S.); (C.F.-d.C.)
| | - Jon M. Harrison
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA; (T.B.); (J.R.); (J.M.H.); (N.P.); (H.S.); (C.F.-d.C.)
| | - Natalie Petruch
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA; (T.B.); (J.R.); (J.M.H.); (N.P.); (H.S.); (C.F.-d.C.)
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck, 23562 Luebeck, Germany; (M.Z.); (E.P.); (H.L.); (R.B.); (K.C.H.); (R.H.); (T.K.); (U.F.W.)
| | - Hiroki Sato
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA; (T.B.); (J.R.); (J.M.H.); (N.P.); (H.S.); (C.F.-d.C.)
| | - Ekaterina Petrova
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck, 23562 Luebeck, Germany; (M.Z.); (E.P.); (H.L.); (R.B.); (K.C.H.); (R.H.); (T.K.); (U.F.W.)
| | - Hryhoriy Lapshyn
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck, 23562 Luebeck, Germany; (M.Z.); (E.P.); (H.L.); (R.B.); (K.C.H.); (R.H.); (T.K.); (U.F.W.)
| | - Ruediger Braun
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck, 23562 Luebeck, Germany; (M.Z.); (E.P.); (H.L.); (R.B.); (K.C.H.); (R.H.); (T.K.); (U.F.W.)
| | - Kim C. Honselmann
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck, 23562 Luebeck, Germany; (M.Z.); (E.P.); (H.L.); (R.B.); (K.C.H.); (R.H.); (T.K.); (U.F.W.)
| | - Richard Hummel
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck, 23562 Luebeck, Germany; (M.Z.); (E.P.); (H.L.); (R.B.); (K.C.H.); (R.H.); (T.K.); (U.F.W.)
| | - Oleksii Dronov
- Department of General Surgery, Bogomolets National Medical Unoversity, 01601 Kyiv, Ukraine; (S.Z.); (O.D.)
| | - Alexander V. Kirichenko
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA 15224, USA; (A.V.K.); (R.E.W.)
| | - Monika Klinkhammer-Schalke
- German Cancer Registry Group, Society of German Tumor Centers—Network for Care, Quality and Research in Oncology, 14057 Berlin, Germany; (M.K.-S.); (K.K.-v.T.)
| | - Kees Kleihues-van Tol
- German Cancer Registry Group, Society of German Tumor Centers—Network for Care, Quality and Research in Oncology, 14057 Berlin, Germany; (M.K.-S.); (K.K.-v.T.)
| | - Sylke R. Zeissig
- Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biometry, University of Wuerzburg, 97070 Wuerzburg, Germany;
| | - Dirk Rades
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck, 23538 Luebeck, Germany;
| | - Tobias Keck
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck, 23562 Luebeck, Germany; (M.Z.); (E.P.); (H.L.); (R.B.); (K.C.H.); (R.H.); (T.K.); (U.F.W.)
| | - Carlos Fernandez-del Castillo
- Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA; (T.B.); (J.R.); (J.M.H.); (N.P.); (H.S.); (C.F.-d.C.)
| | - Ulrich F. Wellner
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck, 23562 Luebeck, Germany; (M.Z.); (E.P.); (H.L.); (R.B.); (K.C.H.); (R.H.); (T.K.); (U.F.W.)
| | - Rodney E. Wegner
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA 15224, USA; (A.V.K.); (R.E.W.)
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Wijnen MH, Hulscher JB. Centralization of pediatric surgical care in the Netherlands: Lessons learned. J Pediatr Surg 2022; 57:178-181. [PMID: 34836641 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2021.10.023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/08/2021] [Accepted: 10/22/2021] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
Centralization of care is a difficult process, as there are several stakeholders that are involved and should be heard. What can be the best option for a small group of patients may be detrimental to a larger group of patients that cannot be adequately treated close to home. The weighing of these factors is different in every environment. One universal rule however is: if you don't do it yourselves, others will do it for you. In the Netherlands, pediatric oncology, including surgery, is centralized in one center (Utrecht) with the help of several shared care centers scattered throughout the country for things that can be managed close to home.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marc Hwa Wijnen
- Department of Surgery, Princess Maxima Center, Heidelberglaan 25, Utrecht 3584 CS, the Netherland.
| | - Jan Bf Hulscher
- President of the Netherlands Society of Pediatric Surgeons, UMC Groningen, Groningen, the Netherland
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Marchegiani G, Crippa S, Perri G, Rancoita PMV, Caravati A, Belfiori G, Dall'Olio T, Aleotti F, Partelli S, Bassi C, Falconi M, Salvia R. Surgery for Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms of the Pancreas: Preoperative Factors Tipping the Scale of Decision-Making. Ann Surg Oncol 2022; 29:3206-3214. [PMID: 35072863 PMCID: PMC8989932 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-022-11326-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/02/2021] [Accepted: 12/27/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Background Decision-making in intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) of the pancreas depends on scaling the risk of malignancy with the surgical burden of a pancreatectomy. This study aimed to develop a preoperative, disease-specific tool to predict surgical morbidity for IPMNs. Methods Based on preoperative variables of resected IPMNs at two high-volume institutions, classification tree analysis was applied to derive a predictive model identifying the risk factors for major morbidity (Clavien–Dindo ≥3) and postoperative pancreatic insufficiency. Results Among 524 patients, 289 (55.2%) underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), 144 (27.5%) underwent distal pancreatectomy (DP), and 91 (17.4%) underwent total pancreatectomy (TP) for main-duct (18.7%), branch-duct (12.6%), or mixed-type (68.7%) IPMN. For 98 (18.7%) of the patients, major morbidity developed. The classification tree distinguished different probabilities of major complications based on the type of surgery (area under the surve [AUC] 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63–0.77). Among the DP patients, the presence of preoperative diabetes identified two risk classes with respective probabilities of 5% and 25% for the development of major morbidity, whereas among the PD/TP patients, three different classes with respective probabilities of 15%, 20%, and 36% were identified according to age and body mass index (BMI). Overall, history of diabetes, age, and cyst size segregated three different risk classes for new-onset/worsening diabetes. Conclusions In presumed IPMNs, the disease-specific risk of major morbidity and pancreatic insufficiency can be determined in the preoperative setting and used to personalize the possible surgical indication. Age and overweight status in case of PD/TP and diabetes in case of DP tip the scale toward less aggressive clinical management in the absence of features suggestive for malignancy. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-022-11326-5.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giovanni Marchegiani
- Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, Verona University Hospital, Università degli Studi di Verona, Verona, Italy.
| | - Stefano Crippa
- Division of Pancreatic Surgery, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Università Vita-Salute, Milan, Italy
| | - Giampaolo Perri
- Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, Verona University Hospital, Università degli Studi di Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Paola M V Rancoita
- University Centre of Statistics in the Biomedical Sciences, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Andrea Caravati
- Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, Verona University Hospital, Università degli Studi di Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Giulio Belfiori
- Division of Pancreatic Surgery, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Università Vita-Salute, Milan, Italy
| | - Tommaso Dall'Olio
- Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, Verona University Hospital, Università degli Studi di Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Francesca Aleotti
- Division of Pancreatic Surgery, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Università Vita-Salute, Milan, Italy
| | - Stefano Partelli
- Division of Pancreatic Surgery, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Università Vita-Salute, Milan, Italy
| | - Claudio Bassi
- Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, Verona University Hospital, Università degli Studi di Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Massimo Falconi
- Division of Pancreatic Surgery, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Università Vita-Salute, Milan, Italy
| | - Roberto Salvia
- Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, Verona University Hospital, Università degli Studi di Verona, Verona, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Groen JV, Michiels N, van Roessel S, Besselink MG, Bosscha K, Busch OR, van Dam R, van Eijck CHJ, Koerkamp BG, van der Harst E, de Hingh IH, Karsten TM, Lips DJ, de Meijer VE, Molenaar IQ, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Roos D, van Santvoort HC, Wijsman JH, Wit F, Zonderhuis BM, de Vos-Geelen J, Wasser MN, Bonsing BA, Stommel MWJ, Mieog JSD. Venous wedge and segment resection during pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer: impact on short- and long-term outcomes in a nationwide cohort analysis. Br J Surg 2021; 109:96-104. [PMID: 34791069 PMCID: PMC10364765 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znab345] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/30/2020] [Accepted: 09/03/2021] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Venous resection of the superior mesenteric or portal vein is increasingly performed in pancreatic cancer surgery, whereas results of studies on short- and long-term outcomes are contradictory. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the type of venous resection in pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer on postoperative morbidity and overall survival. METHODS This nationwide retrospective cohort study included all patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer in 18 centres (2013-2017). RESULTS A total of 1311 patients were included, of whom 17 per cent underwent wedge resection and 10 per cent segmental resection. Patients with segmental resection had higher rates of major morbidity (39 versus 20 versus 23 per cent, respectively; P < 0.001) and portal or superior mesenteric vein thrombosis (18 versus 5 versus 1 per cent, respectively; P < 0.001) and worse overall survival (median 12 versus 16 versus 20 months, respectively; P < 0.001), compared to patients with wedge resection and those without venous resection. Multivariable analysis showed patients with segmental resection, but not those who had wedge resection, had higher rates of major morbidity (odds ratio = 1.93, 95 per cent c.i. 1.20 to 3.11) and worse overall survival (hazard ratio = 1.40, 95 per cent c.i. 1.10 to 1.78), compared to patients without venous resection. Among patients who received neoadjuvant therapy, there was no difference in overall survival among patients with segmental and wedge resection and those without venous resection (median 32 versus 25 versus 33 months, respectively; P = 0.470), although there was a difference in major morbidity rates (52 versus 19 versus 21 per cent, respectively; P = 0.012). CONCLUSION In pancreatic surgery, the short- and long-term outcomes are worse in patients with venous segmental resection, compared to patients with wedge resection and those without venous resection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jesse V Groen
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Nynke Michiels
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Stijn van Roessel
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, the Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Ronald van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Ignace H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
- Department of Epidemiology, GROW—School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Tom M Karsten
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis (loc. Oost), Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Daan J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Vincent E de Meijer
- Department of Surgery, University of Groningen and University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Isaac Q Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, UMC Utrecht Cancer Centre, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein; Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Daphne Roos
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Gasthuis, Delft, the Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, UMC Utrecht Cancer Centre, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein; Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Jan H Wijsman
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, the Netherlands
| | - Fennie Wit
- Department of Surgery, Tjongerschans Hospital, Heerenveen, the Netherlands
| | - Babs M Zonderhuis
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Judith de Vos-Geelen
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, GROW—School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Martin N Wasser
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Martijn W J Stommel
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - J Sven D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
41
|
Linnemann RJA, Kooijman BJL, van der Hilst CS, Sprakel J, Buis CI, Kruijff S, Klaase JM. The Costs of Complications and Unplanned Readmissions after Pancreatoduodenectomy for Pancreatic and Periampullary Tumors: Results from a Single Academic Center. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13246271. [PMID: 34944890 PMCID: PMC8699101 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13246271] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2021] [Revised: 11/29/2021] [Accepted: 12/07/2021] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Complications lead to unplanned readmissions (UR) and are reported to be associated with a two- to threefold increase in hospital admission costs. Since healthcare costs are increasing worldwide, cost containment is the major challenge for future healthcare. In the literature, there are only a few studies that analysed hospital costs after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). In this study, we aimed to create an understanding of the costs of complications and UR in patients who underwent a PD. Abstract Background/Objectives: Complications after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) lead to unplanned readmissions (UR), with a two- to threefold increase in admission costs. In this study, we aimed to create an understanding of the costs of complications and UR in this patient group. Furthermore, we aimed to generate a detailed cost overview that can be used to build a theoretical model to calculate the cost efficacy for prehabilitation. Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed using the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (DPCA) database of patients who underwent a PD at our institute between 2013 and 2017. The total costs of the index hospital admission and UR related to the PD were collected. Results: Of the 160 patients; 35 patients (22%) had an uncomplicated course; 87 patients (54%) had minor complications, and 38 patients (24%) had severe complications. Median costs for an uncomplicated course were EUR 25.682, and for a complicated course, EUR 32.958 (p = 0.001). The median costs for minor complications were EUR 30.316, and for major complications, EUR 42.664 (p = 0.001). Costs were related to the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI). The median costs of patients with one or more UR were EUR 41.199. Conclusions: Complications after PD led to a EUR 4.634–EUR 16.982 (18–66%) increase in hospital costs. A UR led to a cost increase of EUR 12.567 (44%). Since hospital costs are directly related to the CCI, reduction in complications will lead to cost-effectiveness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ralph J. A. Linnemann
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Billiary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands; (R.J.A.L.); (B.J.L.K.); (J.S.); (C.I.B.)
| | - Bob J. L. Kooijman
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Billiary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands; (R.J.A.L.); (B.J.L.K.); (J.S.); (C.I.B.)
| | - Christian S. van der Hilst
- Department of Strategic Analytics, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands;
| | - Joost Sprakel
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Billiary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands; (R.J.A.L.); (B.J.L.K.); (J.S.); (C.I.B.)
| | - Carlijn I. Buis
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Billiary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands; (R.J.A.L.); (B.J.L.K.); (J.S.); (C.I.B.)
| | - Schelto Kruijff
- Department of Surgical Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands;
| | - Joost M. Klaase
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Billiary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands; (R.J.A.L.); (B.J.L.K.); (J.S.); (C.I.B.)
- Correspondence:
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Strijker M, van der Sijde F, Suker M, Boermeester MA, Bonsing BA, Bruno MJ, Busch OR, Doukas M, van Eijck CH, Gerritsen A, Groot Koerkamp B, Haj Mohammad N, van Hilst J, de Hingh IH, van Hooft JE, Luyer MD, Quintus Molenaar I, Verheij J, Waasdorp C, Wilmink JW, Besselink MG, van Laarhoven HW, Bijlsma MF. Preoperative serum ADAM12 levels as a stromal marker for overall survival and benefit of adjuvant therapy in patients with resected pancreatic and periampullary cancer. HPB (Oxford) 2021; 23:1886-1896. [PMID: 34103247 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2021.05.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2020] [Revised: 05/09/2021] [Accepted: 05/11/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND We evaluated the stroma marker A Disintegrin And Metalloprotease 12 (ADAM12) as a preoperative prognostic and treatment-predictive marker for overall survival (OS) in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and periampullary cancers. METHODS Materials were derived from the prospective nationwide Dutch Pancreas Biobank (2015-2017). We included patients who underwent resection because of PDAC/periampullary cancer or non-invasive IPMN (control group) and had a preoperative serum sample available. ADAM12 levels were dichotomized using a pre-defined cut-off (316 pg/mL). Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses (backward selection) were performed. RESULTS Median ADAM12 levels were 161 (IQR 79-352) pg/mL in 215 PDAC and periampullary adenocarcinomas. High ADAM12 levels (>316 pg/mL) predicted poor OS in the total group of pancreatic and periampullary adenocarcinomas (P = 0.04), but not after adjustment. In distal cholangiocarcinoma (n = 33), high ADAM12 levels predicted poor OS in univariable analysis (P = 0.02), but not in PDAC (P = 0.63). PDAC patients (n = 135) with high ADAM12 levels benefited from adjuvant treatment (median OS 27 vs 14 months, P = 0.02), whereas those with low levels did not (21 vs 21 months, P = 0.87). CONCLUSION High circulating ADAM12 levels, as a proxy for activated stroma, predict survival benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy in PDAC, requiring validation in future studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marin Strijker
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Fleur van der Sijde
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Mustafa Suker
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marja A Boermeester
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Marco J Bruno
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Michail Doukas
- Department of Pathology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Casper H van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Arja Gerritsen
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Nadia Haj Mohammad
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Jony van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Ignace H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Jeanin E van Hooft
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Misha D Luyer
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Joanne Verheij
- Department of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Cynthia Waasdorp
- Laboratory for Experimental Oncology and Radiobiology, Center for Experimental and Molecular Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Johanna W Wilmink
- Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Hanneke W van Laarhoven
- Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Maarten F Bijlsma
- Laboratory for Experimental Oncology and Radiobiology, Center for Experimental and Molecular Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
43
|
Groen JV, Smits FJ, Koole D, Besselink MG, Busch OR, den Dulk M, van Eijck CHJ, Groot Koerkamp B, van der Harst E, de Hingh IH, Karsten TM, de Meijer VE, Pranger BK, Molenaar IQ, Bonsing BA, van Santvoort HC, Mieog JSD. Completion pancreatectomy or a pancreas-preserving procedure during relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy: a multicentre cohort study and meta-analysis. Br J Surg 2021; 108:1371-1379. [PMID: 34608941 PMCID: PMC10364904 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znab273] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2020] [Accepted: 06/30/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite the fact that primary percutaneous catheter drainage has become standard practice, some patients with pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy ultimately undergo a relaparotomy. The aim of this study was to compare completion pancreatectomy with a pancreas-preserving procedure in patients undergoing relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. METHODS This retrospective cohort study of nine institutions included patients who underwent relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy from 2005-2018. Furthermore, a systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS From 4877 patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy, 786 (16 per cent) developed a pancreatic fistula grade B/C and 162 (3 per cent) underwent a relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula. Of these patients, 36 (22 per cent) underwent a completion pancreatectomy and 126 (78 per cent) a pancreas-preserving procedure. Mortality was higher after completion pancreatectomy (20 (56 per cent) versus 40 patients (32 per cent); P = 0.009), which remained after adjusting for sex, age, BMI, ASA score, previous reintervention, and organ failure in the 24 h before relaparotomy (adjusted odds ratio 2.55, 95 per cent c.i. 1.07 to 6.08). The proportion of additional reinterventions was not different between groups (23 (64 per cent) versus 84 patients (67 per cent); P = 0.756). The meta-analysis including 33 studies evaluating 745 patients, confirmed the association between completion pancreatectomy and mortality (Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model: odds ratio 1.99, 95 per cent c.i. 1.03 to 3.84). CONCLUSION Based on the current data, a pancreas-preserving procedure seems preferable to completion pancreatectomy in patients in whom a relaparotomy is deemed necessary for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J V Groen
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - F J Smits
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, University Medical Centre Utrecht, and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - D Koole
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - O R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M den Dulk
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - C H J van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - B Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - E van der Harst
- Department of Surgery, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - I H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.,Department of Epidemiology, GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - T M Karsten
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis (loc. Oost), Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - V E de Meijer
- Department of Surgery, University of Groningen and University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - B K Pranger
- Department of Surgery, University of Groningen and University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - I Q Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, University Medical Centre Utrecht, and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - B A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - H C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, University Medical Centre Utrecht, and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - J S D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
44
|
Surgery for chronic pancreatitis: the comparison of two high-volume centers reveals lack of a uniform operative management. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2021; 406:2669-2677. [PMID: 34596765 PMCID: PMC8803624 DOI: 10.1007/s00423-021-02335-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/14/2021] [Accepted: 09/17/2021] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
Purpose Many aspects of surgical therapy for chronic pancreatitis (CP), including the correct indication and timing, as well as the most appropriate operative techniques, are still a matter of debate in the surgical community and vary widely across different centers. The aim of the present study was to uncover and analyze these differences by comparing the experiences of two specialized surgical units in Italy and Austria. Methods All patients operated for CP between 2000 and 2018 at the two centers involved were included in this retrospective analysis. Data regarding the clinical history and the pre- and perioperative surgical course were analyzed and compared between the two institutions. Results Our analysis showed a progressive decrease in the annual rate of pancreatic surgical procedures performed for CP in Verona (no. = 91) over the last two decades (from 3% to less than 1%); by contrast, this percentage increased from 3 to 9% in Vienna (no. = 77) during the same time frame. Considerable differences were also detected with regard to the timing of surgery from the first diagnosis of CP — 4 years (IQR 5.5) in the Austrian series vs two (IQR 4.0) in the Italian series -, and of indications for surgery, with a 12% higher prevalence of groove pancreatitis among patients in the Verona cohort. Conclusion The comparison of the surgical attitude towards CP between two surgical centers proved that a consistent approach to this pathology still is lacking. The identification of common guidelines and labels of surgical eligibility is advisable in order to avoid interinstitutional treatment disparities.
Collapse
|
45
|
Shi J, Yi Z, Jin L, Zhao L, Raskind A, Yeomans L, Nwosu ZC, Simeone DM, Lyssiotis CA, Stringer KA, Kwon RS. Cyst fluid metabolites distinguish malignant from benign pancreatic cysts. Neoplasia 2021; 23:1078-1088. [PMID: 34583246 PMCID: PMC8479274 DOI: 10.1016/j.neo.2021.09.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/03/2021] [Revised: 09/01/2021] [Accepted: 09/02/2021] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Current standard of care imaging, cytology, or cystic fluid analysis cannot reliably differentiate malignant from benign pancreatic cystic neoplasms. This study sought to determine if the metabolic profile of cystic fluid could distinguish benign and malignant lesions, as well as mucinous and non-mucinous lesions. Methods Metabolic profiling by untargeted mass spectrometry and quantitative nuclear magnetic resonance was performed in 24 pancreatic cyst fluid from surgically resected samples with pathological diagnoses and clinicopathological correlation. Results (Iso)-butyrylcarnitine distinguished malignant from benign pancreatic cysts, with a diagnostic accuracy of 89%. (Iso)-butyrylcarnitine was 28-fold more abundant in malignant cyst fluid compared with benign cyst fluid (P=.048). Furthermore, 5-oxoproline (P=.01) differentiated mucinous from non-mucinous cysts with a diagnostic accuracy of 90%, better than glucose (82% accuracy), a previously described metabolite that distinguishes mucinous from non-mucinous cysts. Combined analysis of glucose and 5-oxoproline did not improve the diagnostic accuracy. In comparison, standard of care cyst fluid carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and cytology had a diagnostic accuracy of 40% and 60% respectively for mucinous cysts. (Iso)-butyrylcarnitine and 5-oxoproline correlated with cyst fluid CEA levels (P<.0001 and P<.05 respectively). For diagnosing malignant pancreatic cysts, the diagnostic accuracies of cyst size > 3 cm, ≥ 1 high-risk features, cyst fluid CEA, and cytology are 38%, 75%, 80%, and 75%, respectively. Conclusions (Iso)-butyrylcarnitine has potential clinical application for accurately distinguishing malignant from benign pancreatic cysts, and 5-oxoproline for distinguishing mucinous from non-mucinous cysts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jiaqi Shi
- Department of Pathology & Clinical Labs, Rogel Cancer Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
| | - Zhujun Yi
- Department of Pathology & Clinical Labs, Rogel Cancer Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China
| | - Lin Jin
- Department of Pathology & Clinical Labs, Rogel Cancer Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China
| | - Lili Zhao
- Department of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | | | - Larisa Yeomans
- NMR Metabolomics Laboratory, Department of Clinical Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Zeribe C Nwosu
- Department of Molecular & Integrative Physiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Rogel Cancer Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Diane M Simeone
- Perlmutter Cancer Center, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
| | - Costas A Lyssiotis
- Department of Molecular & Integrative Physiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Rogel Cancer Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Kathleen A Stringer
- NMR Metabolomics Laboratory, Department of Clinical Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Richard S Kwon
- Internal Medicine, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Lequeu JB, Cottenet J, Facy O, Perrin T, Bernard A, Quantin C. Failure to rescue in patients with distal pancreatectomy: a nationwide analysis of 10,632 patients. HPB (Oxford) 2021; 23:1410-1417. [PMID: 33622649 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2021.02.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/12/2020] [Revised: 02/01/2021] [Accepted: 02/02/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND FTR appears as a major cause of postoperative mortality (POM). Hospital volume has an impact on FTR in pancreatic surgery but no study has investigated this relationship more specifically in DP. METHODS We analysed patients with DP between 2009 and 2018 through a nationwide database. FTR definition was mortality among patients who experiment major complications. The cutoff between high and low volume centers was 20 pancreatectomies per year. RESULTS Some 10,632 patients underwent DP, 5048 (47.5%) were operated in 602 (95.4%) low volume centers and 5584 (52.5%) in 29 (4.6%) high volume centers. Overall FTR occurred in 11.2% of patients and was significantly reduced in high volume centers compared to low volume centers (10.2% vs 12.5%, p = 0.047). In multivariate analysis, surgery in a high volume center was a protective factor for POM (OR = 0.570, CI95% [0.505-0.643], p < 0.001) and also for FTR (OR = 0.550, CI95% [0.486-0.630], p < 0.001). CONCLUSION Hospital volume has a positive impact on FTR in DP. Patients with higher risk of FTR are men, with high modified Charlson comorbidity index, malignant conditions and open procedures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jean-Baptiste Lequeu
- Dijon University Hospital, Department of Digestive Surgical Oncology, Dijon F-21000, France.
| | - Jonathan Cottenet
- Dijon University Hospital, Clinical Epidemiology/Clinical Trials Unit, Clinical Investigation Center, Dijon F-21000, France
| | - Olivier Facy
- Dijon University Hospital, Department of Digestive Surgical Oncology, Dijon F-21000, France
| | - Thomas Perrin
- Dijon University Hospital, Department of Digestive Surgical Oncology, Dijon F-21000, France
| | - Alain Bernard
- Dijon University Hospital, Department of Thoracic Surgery, Dijon F-21000, France
| | - Catherine Quantin
- Dijon University Hospital, Clinical Epidemiology/Clinical Trials Unit, Clinical Investigation Center, Dijon F-21000, France
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Outcome of pancreatic anastomoses during pancreatoduodenectomy in two national audits. Surgery 2021; 170:1799-1806. [PMID: 34373107 DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2021.06.042] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2021] [Revised: 06/10/2021] [Accepted: 06/24/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Evidence on the optimal pancreatic anastomosis during pancreatoduodenectomy is inconclusive. Large multicenter and nationwide registries may provide additional insights. The study compared the practice and outcome of different pancreatic anastomoses during pancreatoduodenectomy, focusing on the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula, in two large audits of pancreatic surgery. METHODS Posthoc analysis of patients after pancreatoduodenectomy in the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit and the German DGAV StuDoQ|Pancreas registries (January 2014 to December 2017). Postoperative pancreatic fistula (International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery B/C), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery B/C) and Clavien-Dindo ≥3 complications rates were compared for the three most common anastomoses: duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy, non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy, and non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatogastrostomy. Multivariable adjustment for potential confounders was performed. RESULTS Overall, 6,149 patients were included. The most common anastomosis was duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy (duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy 59.8%, non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy 21.1%, non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatogastrostomy 12.4%). The overall postoperative pancreatic fistula rate was 14%: duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy 12.9%, non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy 14.4% (P = .162), non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatogastrostomy 18.3% (P < .001). The rate of postpancreatectomy hemorrhage was the lowest after duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy: duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy 6.9%, non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy 10% (P < .001), non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatogastrostomy 17.9% (P < .001). The rate of Clavien-Dindo ≥3 complications was the lowest after duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy: duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy 28%, non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy 32.7% (P = .002), non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatogastrostomy 43.1% (P < .001). In the multivariable analysis, the risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula did not differ significantly between the three anastomoses. The risk of hemorrhage (odds ratio 2.4, 95% confidence interval 1.6-3.5, P < .001) and Clavien-Dindo ≥3 (odds ratio 1.6, 95% confidence interval 1.2-2.1, P = .001) remained significantly higher only for non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatogastrostomy. CONCLUSION Data from two national audits showed no difference in the risk-adjusted postoperative pancreatic fistula rate among the three most used pancreatic anastomoses during pancreatoduodenectomy. Pancreatogastrostomy was inferior to pancreatojejunostomy regarding bleeding and overall major complications.
Collapse
|
48
|
Pancreatic resection in the pediatric, adolescent and young adult population: nationwide analysis on complications. HPB (Oxford) 2021; 23:1175-1184. [PMID: 33281080 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2020.10.029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/03/2020] [Revised: 10/09/2020] [Accepted: 10/14/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to determine pancreatic surgery specific short- and long-term complications of pediatric, adolescent and young adult (PAYA) patients who underwent pancreatic resection, as compared to a comparator cohort of adults. METHODS A nationwide retrospective cohort study was performed in PAYA patients who underwent pancreatic resection between 2007 and 2016. PAYA was defined as all patients <40 years at time of surgery. Pancreatic surgery-specific complications were assessed according to international definitions and textbook outcome was determined. RESULTS A total of 230 patients were included in the PAYA cohort (112 distal pancreatectomies, 99 pancreatoduodenectomies), and 2526 patients in the comparator cohort. For pancreatoduodenectomy, severe morbidity (29.3% vs. 28.6%; P = 0.881), in-hospital mortality (1% vs. 4%; P = 0.179) and textbook outcome (62% vs. 58%; P = 0.572) were comparable between the PAYA and the comparator cohort. These outcomes were also similar for distal pancreatectomy. After pancreatoduodenectomy, new-onset diabetes mellitus (8% vs. 16%) and exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (27% vs. 73%) were lower in the PAYA cohort when compared to adult literature. CONCLUSION Pancreatic surgery-specific complications were comparable with patients ≥40 years. Development of endocrine and exocrine insufficiency in PAYA patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy, however, was substantially lower compared to adult literature.
Collapse
|
49
|
Yonkus JA, Alva-Ruiz R, Abdelrahman AM, Horsman SE, Cunningham SA, Grotz TE, Smoot RL, Cleary SP, Nagorney DM, Kendrick ML, Truty MJ. Intraoperative bile duct cultures in patients undergoing pancreatic head resection: Prospective comparison of bile duct swab versus bile duct aspiration. Surgery 2021; 170:1794-1798. [PMID: 34226042 DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2021.06.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2021] [Revised: 06/08/2021] [Accepted: 06/10/2021] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Postoperative surgical site infection is a major source of morbidity after pancreatic head resections, and data suggest bacterobilia as a leading cause. Some centers use intraoperative bile duct cultures to guide postoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis. This prospective study evaluates culture differences between traditional bile duct swab versus bile duct aspiration intraoperative samples. METHODS Prospective patients undergoing pancreatic head resection with both bile duct swab and bile duct aspiration were included. Cultures were reviewed for organism characteristics. Any growth of organisms was considered a positive culture. Bile duct swab yield and characteristics were compared with bile duct aspiration. Postoperative surgical site infection complications were compared to bile duct culture results. RESULTS Fifty patients were included. Bile duct aspiration resulted in a significantly higher median number of organisms compared to bile duct swab (6 vs 3; P < .001). There were no differences in the number of patients (37 vs 33) having positive bile duct aspiration and bile duct swab cultures (P = .385). Anaerobic cultures (not possible with bile duct swab) were positive in 21 patients with bile duct aspiration. A total of 37 (74%) patients had preoperative biliary stenting, which highly associated (P < .001) with positive cultures. Bile duct culture organisms correlated with postoperative surgical site infection in 12/17 (71%) patients. CONCLUSION Use of bile duct aspiration improves intraoperative bile duct culture organism yield over bile duct swab and may improve tailoring of antibiotics in patients undergoing pancreatic head resection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer A Yonkus
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreas Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Roberto Alva-Ruiz
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreas Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Amro M Abdelrahman
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreas Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Susan E Horsman
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreas Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Scott A Cunningham
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Travis E Grotz
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreas Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Rory L Smoot
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreas Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Sean P Cleary
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreas Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - David M Nagorney
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreas Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Michael L Kendrick
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreas Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Mark J Truty
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreas Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Groen JV, Droogh DHM, de Boer MGJ, van Asten SAV, van Prehn J, Inderson A, Vahrmeijer AL, Bonsing BA, Mieog JSD. Clinical implications of bile cultures obtained during pancreatoduodenectomy: a cohort study and meta-analysis. HPB (Oxford) 2021; 23:1123-1133. [PMID: 33309165 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2020.10.028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/07/2020] [Revised: 10/19/2020] [Accepted: 10/29/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The association between intraoperative bile cultures and infectious complications after pancreatoduodenectomy remains unclear. This cohort study and meta-analysis aimed to determine the predictive role of intraoperative bile cultures in abdominal infectious complications after pancreatoduodenectomy. METHODS The cohort study included 114 patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy. Regression analyses were used to estimate the odds to develop an organ space infection (OSI) or isolated OSI (OSIs without a simultaneous complication potentially contaminating the intraabdominal space) after a positive bile culture. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed on abdominal infectious complications (Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model). RESULTS The positive bile culture rate was 61%, predominantly in patients after preoperative biliary drainage (98% vs 26%, p < 0.001). OSIs occurred in 35 patients (31%) and isolated OSIs in nine patients (8%) and were not associated with positive bile cultures (OSIs: odds ratio = 0.6, 95% CI = 0.25-1.23, isolated OSIs: odds ratio = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.20-3.04). In the meta-analysis, 15 studies reporting on 2047 patients showed no association between positive bile cultures and abdominal infectious complications (pooled odds ratio = 1.3, 95% CI = 0.98-1.65). CONCLUSION Given the rare occurrence of isolated OSIs and similar odds for patients with positive and negative bile cultures to develop abdominal infectious complications, routine performance of bile cultures should be reconsidered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jesse V Groen
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Daphne H M Droogh
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Mark G J de Boer
- Department of Infectious Diseases, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Suzanne A V van Asten
- Department of Medical Microbiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Joffrey van Prehn
- Department of Medical Microbiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Akin Inderson
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - J Sven D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|