The Theory and Practice of Pancreatic Surgery in France

REDISCOVER International Guidelines on the Perioperative Care of Surgical Patients With Borderline-resectable and Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

OBJECTIVE

The REDISCOVER consensus conference aimed at developing and validating guidelines on the perioperative care of patients with borderline-resectable (BR-) and locally advanced (LA) pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

BACKGROUND

Coupled with improvements in chemotherapy and radiation, the contemporary approach to pancreatic surgery supports the resection of BR-PDAC and, to a lesser extent, LA-PDAC. Guidelines outlining the selection and perioperative care for these patients are lacking.

METHODS

The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology was used to develop the REDISCOVER guidelines and create recommendations. The Delphi approach was used to reach a consensus (agreement ≥80%) among experts. Recommendations were approved after a debate and vote among international experts in pancreatic surgery and pancreatic cancer management. A Validation Committee used the AGREE II-GRS tool to assess the methodological quality of the guidelines. Moreover, an independent multidisciplinary advisory group revised the statements to ensure adherence to nonsurgical guidelines.

RESULTS

Overall, 34 recommendations were created targeting centralization, training, staging, patient selection for surgery, possibility of surgery in uncommon scenarios, timing of surgery, avoidance of vascular reconstruction, details of vascular resection/reconstruction, arterial divestment, frozen section histology of perivascular tissue, extent of lymphadenectomy, anticoagulation prophylaxis, and role of minimally invasive surgery. The level of evidence was however low for 29 of 34 clinical questions. Participants agreed that the most conducive means to promptly advance our understanding in this field is to establish an international registry addressing this patient population ( https://rediscover.unipi.it/ ).

CONCLUSIONS

The REDISCOVER guidelines provide clinical recommendations pertaining to pancreatectomy with vascular resection for patients with BR-PDAC and LA-PDAC, and serve as the basis of a new international registry for this patient population.

The impact of cirrhosis on short and long postoperative outcomes after distal pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

The impact of cirrhosis on the postoperative outcomes of distal pancreatectomy is yet to be reported. We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of distal pancreatectomy in patients with cirrhosis.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, multicentric study patients with cirrhosis who underwent planned distal pancreatectomy between 2008 and 2020 in French high volume centers. Patients with cirrhosis were matched 1:4 for demographic, surgical, and histologic criteria with patients without cirrhosis. The primary endpoint was severe morbidity (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III). The secondary endpoints were postoperative complications, specifically related to cirrhosis and pancreatic surgery, and survival for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

RESULTS

Overall, 32 patients with cirrhosis were matched with 128 patients without cirrhosis. Most patients (93.5%) had Child-Pugh A cirrhosis. The severe morbidity rate after distal pancreatectomy was higher in patients with cirrhosis than in those without cirrhosis (28.13% vs 25.75%, P = .11. The operative time was significantly longer in the cirrhotic group compared with controls (P = .01). However, patients with and without cirrhosis had comparable blood loss and conversion rates. Postoperatively, the two groups had similar rates of pancreatic fistula, hemorrhage, reoperation, postoperative mortality, and survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years.

CONCLUSION

The current study suggests that distal pancreatectomy in high-volume centers is feasible for patients with compensated cirrhosis.

Short‑ and long‑term outcomes after laparoscopic and open pancreatoduodenectomy for elderly patients: a propensity score‑matched study

BACKGROUND

The feasibility and safety of laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) in elderly patients is still controversial. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of LPD and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) in elderly patients.

METHODS

Clinical and follow-up data of elderly patients (≥ 65 years) who underwent LPD or OPD between 2015 and 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. A 1:1 propensity score-matching (PSM) analysis was performed to minimize differences between groups. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis were used to select independent prognostic factors for 90-day mortality.

RESULTS

Of the 410 elderly patients, 236 underwent LPD and 174 OPD. After PSM, the LPD group had a less estimated blood loss (EBL) (100 vs. 200 mL, P < 0.001), lower rates of intraoperative transfusion (10.4% vs. 19.0%, P = 0.029), more lymph node harvest (11.0 vs. 10.0, P = 0.014) and shorter postoperative length of stay (LOS) (13.0 vs. 16.0 days, P = 0.013). There were no significant differences in serious complications, reoperation, 90-day readmission and mortality rates (all P > 0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH) was an independent risk factor for 90-day mortality. Elderly patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) who underwent LPD or OPD had similar overall survival (OS) (22.5 vs.20.4 months, P = 0.672) after PSM.

CONCLUSIONS

It is safe and feasible for elderly patients to undergo LPD with less EBL and a shorter postoperative LOS. There was no statistically significant difference in long-term survival outcomes between elderly PDAC patients who underwent LPD or OPD.

Defining Standards for Hepatopancreatobiliary Cancer Surgery in Ontario, Canada: A Population-Based Cohort Study of Clinical Outcomes

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.

The Need for Centralization for Small Intestinal Neuroendocrine Tumor Surgery: A Cohort Study from the GTE-Endocan-RENATEN Network, the CentralChirSINET Study

BACKGROUND

The concept of surgical centralization is becoming more and more accepted for specific surgical procedures.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between procedure volume and the outcomes of surgical small intestine (SI) neuroendocrine tumor (NET) resections.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective national study that included patients who underwent SI-NET resection between 2019 and 2021. A high-volume center (hvC) was defined as a center that performed more than five SI-NET resections per year. The quality of the surgical resections was evaluated between hvCs and low-volume centers (lvCs) by comparing the number of resected lymph nodes (LNs) as the primary endpoint.

RESULTS

A total of 157 patients underwent surgery in 33 centers: 90 patients in four hvCs and 67 patients in 29 lvCs. Laparotomy was more often performed in hvCs (85.6% vs. 59.7%; p < 0.001), as was right hemicolectomy (64.4% vs. 38.8%; p < 0.001), whereas limited ileocolic resection was performed in 18% of patients in lvCs versus none in hvCs. A bi-digital palpation of the entire SI length (95.6% vs. 34.3%, p < 0.001), a cholecystectomy (93.3% vs. 14.9%; p < 0.001), and a mesenteric mass resection (70% vs. 35.8%; p < 0.001) were more often performed in hvCs. The proportion of patients with ≥8 LNs resected was significantly higher (96.3% vs. 65.1%; p < 0.001) in hvCs compared with lvCs, as was the proportion of patients with ≥12 LNs resected (87.8% vs. 52.4%). Furthermore, the number of patients with multiple SI-NETs was higher in the hvC group compared with the lvC group (43.3% vs. 25.4%), as were the number of tumors in those patients (median of 7 vs. 2; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Optimal SI-NET resection was significantly more often performed in hvCs. Centralization of surgical care of SI-NETs is recommended.

Teaching modern pancreatic surgery: close relationship between centralization, innovation, and dissemination of care

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.

The influence of institutional pancreaticoduodenectomy volume on short-term outcomes in the Brazilian public health system: 2008-2021

INTRODUCTION

pancreaticoduodenectomy is a complex surgical procedure that can result in high rates of complications and morbimortality. Due to its complexity, the establishment of referral centers has increased in recent decades. This study aims to evaluate the influence of the institutional volume of pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary cancer on short-term outcomes in the Brazilian public health system.

METHODS

this study used a population-based approach and investigated the number of pancreaticoduodenectomies performed by institutions within Brazil's public health system between 2008 and 2021. High-volume institutions were defined as those that performed more than two standard deviations above the mean number of procedures per year. Specifically, if a center performed eight or more pancreaticoduodenectomies annually, it was considered a high-volume institution.

RESULTS

in Brazil, 283 public hospitals performed pancreaticoduodenectomy for cancer between 2008 and 2021. Only ten hospitals performed at least eight pancreaticoduodenectomies per year, accounting for approximately 3.5% of the institutions. High-volume institutions had a significantly lower in-hospital mortality rate than low-volume institutions (8 vs. 17%). No significant differences between groups were observed for length of stay, hospitalizations using the ICU, and ICU length of stay. The linear regression model showed that the number of hospital admissions for pancreaticoduodenectomy and age were significantly associated with hospital mortality.

CONCLUSION

institutional pancreaticoduodenectomy volume implies a lowering of in-hospital mortality. The findings of this nationwide study can affect how the public health system manages pancreaticoduodenectomy care.

Survival variability across hospitals after resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A multilevel survival analysis on a high-resolution population-based study

INTRODUCTION

Resection is the cornerstone of curative management for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Hospital surgical volume influence post-operative mortality. Few is known about impact on survival.

METHODS

Population included 763 patients resected for PDAC within the 4 French digestive tumor registries between 2000 and 2014. Spline method was used to determine annual surgical volume thresholds influencing survival. A multilevel survival regression model was used to study center effect.

RESULTS

Population was divided into three groups: low-volume (LVC) (<41 hepatobiliary/pancreatic procedures/year), medium-volume (MVC) (41-233) and high-volume centers (HVC) (>233). Patients in LVC were older (p = 0.02), had a lower rate of disease-free margins (76.7% vs. 77.2% and 69.5%, p = 0.028) and a higher post-operative mortality than in MVC and HVC (12.5% and 7.5% vs. 2.2%; p = 0.004). Median survival was higher in HVC than in other centers (25 vs. 15.2 months, p < 0.0001). Survival variance attributable to center effect accounted for 3.7% of total variance. In multilevel survival analysis, surgical volume explained the inter-hospital survival heterogeneity (non-significant variance after adding the volume to the model p = 0.3). Patients resected in HVC had a better survival than in LVC (HR 0.64 [0.50-0.82], p < 0.0001). There was no difference between MVC and HVC.

CONCLUSION

Regarding center effect, individual characteristics had little impact on survival variability across hospitals. Hospital volume was a major contributor to the center effect. Given the difficulty of centralizing pancreatic surgery, it would be wise to determine which factors would indicate management in a HVC.

Defining Benchmark Outcomes for Distal Pancreatectomy: Results of a French Multicentric Study

OBJECTIVE

Defining robust and standardized outcome references for distal pancreatectomy (DP) by using Benchmark analysis.

BACKGROUND

Outcomes after DP are recorded in medium or small-sized studies without standardized analysis. Therefore, the best results remain uncertain.

METHODS

This multicenter study included all patients undergoing DP for resectable benign or malignant tumors in 21 French expert centers in pancreas surgery from 2014 to 2018. A low-risk cohort defined by no significant comorbidities was analyzed to establish 18 outcome benchmarks for DP. These values were tested in high risk, minimally invasive and benign tumor cohorts.

RESULTS

A total of 1188 patients were identified and 749 low-risk patients were screened to establish Benchmark cut-offs. Therefore, Benchmark rate for mini-invasive approach was ≥36.8%. Benchmark cut-offs for postoperative mortality, major morbidity grade ≥3a and clinically significant pancreatic fistula rates were 0%, ≤27%, and ≤28%, respectively. The benchmark rate for readmission was ≤16%. For patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma, cut-offs were ≥75%, ≥69.5%, and ≥66% for free resection margins (R0), 1-year disease-free survival and 3-year overall survival, respectively. The rate of mini-invasive approach in high-risk cohort was lower than the Benchmark cut-off (34.1% vs ≥36.8%). All Benchmark cut-offs were respected for benign tumor group. The proportion of benchmark cases was correlated to outcomes of DP. Centers with a majority of low-risk patients had worse results than those operating complex cases.

CONCLUSION

This large-scale study is the first benchmark analysis of DP outcomes and provides robust and standardized data. This may allow for comparisons between surgeons, centers, studies, and surgical techniques.

Risks and benefits of pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients aged 80 years and over

PURPOSE

The frequency of pancreaticoduodenectomy is increasing in oldest old patients owing to population aging. We aimed to clarify the clinical significance of pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients aged ≥ 80 years with multiple underlying diseases.

METHODS

A total of 649 consecutive patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy from April 2010 to March 2021 in our institute were divided into two groups according to their age: ≥ 80 years (51) and ≤ 79 years (598). We compared mortality and morbidity between the groups. The age-related prognosis was analyzed in 302 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma treatment.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in morbidity (Clavien-Dindo classification grade III or higher; P = 0.1300), mortality (P = 0.0786), or postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.5763) between the groups. Patients aged ≥ 80 years, who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, had shorter overall survival than those aged ≤ 79 years (median survival time, 16.7 months vs. 32.7 months; P = 0.0206). However, the overall survival of patients aged ≥ 80 years who received perioperative chemotherapy was comparable to that of patients aged ≤ 79 years (P = 0.9795). In the multivariate analysis, the absence of perioperative chemotherapy was identified as an independent prognostic factor, while age ≥ 80 years was not. Perioperative chemotherapy was the sole independent prognostic factor in patients aged ≥ 80 years who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

CONCLUSIONS

Pancreaticoduodenectomy is safe for patients aged ≥ 80 years. The survival benefits of pancreaticoduodenectomy for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma aged ≥ 80 years might be limited to those who can receive perioperative chemotherapy.

Impact of hospital volume in liver surgery on postoperative mortality and morbidity: nationwide study

BACKGROUND

This nationwide retrospective study was undertaken to evaluate impact of hospital volume and influence of liver transplantation activity on postoperative mortality and failure to rescue after liver surgery.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of patients who underwent liver resection between 2011 and 2019 using a nationwide database. A threshold of surgical activities from which in-hospital mortality declines was calculated. Hospitals were divided into high- and low-volume centres. Main outcomes were in-hospital mortality and failure to rescue.

RESULTS

Among 39 286 patients included, the in-hospital mortality rate was 2.8 per cent. The activity volume threshold from which in-hospital mortality declined was 25 hepatectomies. High-volume centres (more than 25 resections per year) had more postoperative complications but a lower rate of in-hospital mortality (2.6 versus 3 per cent; P < 0.001) and failure to rescue (5 versus 6.3 per cent; P < 0.001), in particular related to specific complications (liver failure, biliary complications, vascular complications) (5.5 versus 7.6 per cent; P < 0.001). Liver transplantation activity did not have an impact on these outcomes.

CONCLUSION

From more than 25 liver resections per year, rates of in-hospital mortality and failure to rescue declined. Management of specific postoperative complications appeared to be better in high-volume centres.

Volume- and quality-controlled certification system promotes centralization of complex hepato-pancreatic-biliary surgery

BACKGROUND

Centralization of complex surgeries has made little progress when it only considers the minimum number of surgical procedures. We aim to assess the impact of certification system of Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery (JSHBPS) on centralization and surgical quality of advanced hepato-pancreatic-biliary (HPB) surgery.

METHODS

The National Clinical Database was used to review 20 111 patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and 9666 who underwent advanced hepatectomy defined as hepatectomy of more than one section during 2019 and 2020. JSHPBS certifies hospitals based on the annual number of advanced HPB surgeries and the surgical quality. Minimum numbers of surgeries for board-certified A and B institutions are 50 and 30, respectively. Short-term outcomes were compared among institutions.

RESULTS

In 2020, 69.4% (7007/10090) and 72.9% (3433/4710) of patients underwent PD and advanced hepatectomy at board-certified institutions. In-hospital mortality rates after PD was 0.9% at certified A institutions, 1.4% at B institutions, and 2.7% at non-certified institutions (p < .001). The odds ratio (OR) of risk-adjusted mortality after PD compared with non-certified institutions was 0.39 (confidence interval [CI]: 0.30-0.50, p < .001) at certified A institutions, and 0.54 at certified B institutions (CI: 0.40-0.73, p < .001). In-hospital mortality rates after advanced hepatectomy was 1.7% at certified A institutions, 2.3% at B institutions, and 3.2% at non-certified institutions (p < .001). The OR of risk-adjusted mortality after advanced hepatectomy compared with non-certified institutions was 0.57 at certified A institutions (CI: 0.41-0.78, p < .001).

CONCLUSION

The volume- and quality-controlled certification system of JSHBPS reduces surgical mortality after advanced HPB surgeries.

Laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic and periampullary tumor: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and non-randomized comparative studies

Objective

This meta-analysis compares the perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) to those of open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) for pancreatic and periampullary tumors.

Background

LPD has been increasingly applied in the treatment of pancreatic and periampullary tumors. However, the perioperative outcomes of LPD versus OPD are still controversial.

Methods

PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized comparative trials (NRCTs) comparing LPD versus OPD for pancreatic and periampullary tumors. The main outcomes were mortality, morbidity, serious complications, and hospital stay. The secondary outcomes were operative time, blood loss, transfusion, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), bile leak (BL), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), lymph nodes harvested, R0 resection, reoperation, and readmission. RCTs were evaluated by the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. NRCTs were assessed using a modified tool from the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies. Data were pooled as odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD). This study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022338832).

Results

Four RCTs and 35 NRCTs concerning a total of 40,230 patients (4,262 LPD and 35,968 OPD) were included. Meta-analyses showed no significant differences in mortality (OR 0.91, p = 0.35), serious complications (OR 0.97, p = 0.74), POPF (OR 0.93, p = 0.29), PPH (OR 1.10, p = 0.42), BL (OR 1.28, p = 0.22), harvested lymph nodes (MD 0.66, p = 0.09), reoperation (OR 1.10, p = 0.41), and readmission (OR 0.95, p = 0.46) between LPD and OPD. Operative time was significantly longer for LPD (MD 85.59 min, p < 0.00001), whereas overall morbidity (OR 0.80, p < 0.00001), hospital stay (MD -2.32 days, p < 0.00001), blood loss (MD -173.84 ml, p < 0.00001), transfusion (OR 0.62, p = 0.0002), and DGE (OR 0.78, p = 0.002) were reduced for LPD. The R0 rate was higher for LPD (OR 1.25, p = 0.001).

Conclusions

LPD is associated with non-inferior short-term surgical outcomes and oncologic adequacy compared to OPD when performed by experienced surgeons at large centers. LPD may result in reduced overall morbidity, blood loss, transfusion, and DGE, but longer operative time. Further RCTs should address the potential advantages of LPD over OPD.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO, identifier CRD42022338832.

Pancreatic fistula and biliary fistula after laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy: 500 patients at a single institution

Background

Pancreatic fistula (PF) and biliary fistula (BF) are two major leakage complications after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). The aim of this study is to investigate the risk factors of PF and BF after laparoscopic PD (LPD).

Materials and Methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 500 patients who underwent LPD from 1 April 2015 to 31 March 2020. Clinical data from patients were analysed using multivariate logistic regression analysis.

Results

PF occurred in 86 (17.2%) patients. Univariate and multivariate analysis indicated that the soft texture of the pancreas (P = 0.001) was the independent risk factor for PF. BF occurred in 32 (6.4%) patients. Univariate and multivariate analysis indicated that history of cardiovascular disease (P < 0.001), surgical time (P = 0.005), pre-operative CA125 (P = 0.036) and pre-operative total bilirubin (P = 0.044) were independent risk factors for BF.

Conclusion

The texture of the pancreas was an independent risk factor for PF after LPD, which was consistent with the literatures. In addition, history of cardiovascular disease, surgical time, pre-operative CA125 and pre-operative total bilirubin were new independent risk factors for BF after LPD. Therefore, patients with high-risk factors of BF should be informed that they are at a high risk for this complication.

Complications of modern pancreaticoduodenectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In the past decades, the perioperative management of patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) has undergone major changes worldwide. This review aimed to systematically determine the burden of complications of PD performed in the last 10 years.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review was conducted in PubMed for randomized controlled trials and observational studies reporting postoperative complications in at least 100 PDs from January 2010 to April 2020. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB2 tool for randomized studies and the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS). Pooled complication rates were estimated using random-effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was investigated by subgroup analysis and meta-regression.

RESULTS

A total of 20 randomized and 49 observational studies reporting 63 229 PDs were reviewed. Mean MINORS score showed a high risk of bias in non-randomized studies, while one quarter of the randomized studies were assessed to have high risk of bias. Pooled incidences of 30-day mortality, overall complications and serious complications were 1.7% (95% CI: 0.9%-2.9%; I² = 95.4%), 54.7% (95% CI: 46.4%-62.8%; I² = 99.4%) and 25.5% (95% CI: 21.8%-29.4%; I²= 92.9%), respectively. Clinically-relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula risk was 14.3% (95% CI: 12.4%-16.3%; I² = 92.0%) and mean length of stay was 14.8 days (95% CI: 13.6-16.1; I² = 99.3%). Meta-regression partially attributed the observed heterogeneity to the country of origin of the study, the study design and the American Society of Anesthesiologists class.

CONCLUSIONS

Pooled complication rates estimated in this study may be used to counsel patients scheduled to undergo a PD and to set benchmarks against which centers can audit their practice. However, cautious interpretation is necessary due to substantial heterogeneity.

Average treatment effect of facility hepatopancreatobiliary cancer volume on survival of non-resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

To examine the average treatment effect of hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) cancer volume on survival outcomes of patients with non-resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

METHODS

We queried the National Cancer Database (2004-2018) for patients with HPB malignancies (PDAC, pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms, hepatocellular carcinoma, biliary tract cancers). We determined the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles based on the total annual HPB volume. We then identified patients with non-resected PDAC. We utilized inverse probability (IP)-weighted Cox regression to estimate the effect of facility volume on overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

We identified 710,988 patients with HPB malignancies. The 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles of total annual HPB volume were 32, 71, and 177 cases/year, respectively. We included a total of 196,150 patients with non-resected PDAC. Patients treated at ≥25th, ≥50th, and ≥75th percentile facilities had improved median OS compared to those treated at facilities below these thresholds (5.8 vs. 4.2months, 6.5 vs. 4.5months, 7.5 vs. 4.8months, respectively; p < 0.001 for all). Treatment at facilities ≥25th, ≥50th, and ≥75th percentile resulted in lower hazards of death than treatment at lower-percentile facilities (HR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.84-0.90; HR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.83-0.91; HR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.79-0.91, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that consolidation of care of patients with PDAC to high-volume centers may be beneficial even in the nonoperative setting.

Patient volume and clinical outcome after pancreatic cancer resection: A contemporary systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer remains a highly fatal disease with a 5-year overall survival of less than 10%. In seeking to improve clinical outcomes, there is ongoing debate about the weight that should be given to patient volume in centralization models. The aim of this systematic review is to examine the relationship between patient volume and clinical outcome after pancreatic resection for cancer in the contemporary literature.

METHODS

The Google Scholar, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched from February 2015 until June 2021 for articles reporting patient volume and outcomes after pancreatic cancer resection.

RESULTS

There were 46 eligible studies over a 6-year period comprising 526,344 patients. The median defined annual patient volume thresholds varied: low-volume 0 (range 0-9), medium-volume 9 (range 3-29), high-volume 19 (range 9-97), and very-high-volume 28 (range 17-60) patients. The latter 2 were associated with a significantly lower 30-day mortality (P < .001), 90-day mortality (P < .001), overall postoperative morbidity (P = .005), failure to rescue rate (P = .006), and R0 resection rate (P = .008) compared with very-low/low-volume hospitals. Centralization was associated with lower 30-day mortality in 3 out of 5 studies, while postoperative morbidity was similar in 4 out of 4 studies. Median survival was longer in patients traveling greater distance for pancreatic resection in 2 out of 3 studies. Median and 5-year survival did not differ between urban and rural settings.

CONCLUSION

The contemporary literature confirms a strong relationship between patient volume and clinical outcome for pancreatic cancer resection despite expected bias toward more complex surgery in high-volume centers. These outcomes include lower mortality, morbidity, failure-to-rescue, and positive resection margin rates.

Mortality factors in pancreatic surgery: A systematic review. How important is the hospital volume?

BACKGROUND

How the extent of confounding adjustment impact (hospital) volume-outcome relationships in published studies on pancreatic cancer surgery is unknown.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted for studies that investigated the relationship between volume and outcome using a risk adjustment procedure by querying the following databases: PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Livivo, Medline and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (last query: 2020/09/16). Importance of risk-adjusting covariates were assessed by effect size (odds ratio, OR) and statistical significance. The impact of covariate adjustment on hospital (or surgeon) volume effects was analyzed by regression and meta-regression models.

RESULTS

We identified 87 studies (75 based on administrative data) with nearly 1 million patients undergoing pancreatic surgery that included in total 71 covariates for risk adjustment. Of these, 33 (47%) had statistically significant effects on short-term mortality and 23 (32%) did not, while for 15 (21%) factors neither effect size nor statistical significance were reported. The most important covariates for short term mortality were patient-specific factors. Concerning the covariates, single comorbidities (OR: 4.6, 95% CI: 3.3 to 6.3) had the strongest impact on mortality followed by hospital volume (OR: 2.9, 95% CI: 2.5 to 3.3) and the procedure (OR: 2.2, 95% CI: 1.9 to 2.5). Among the single comorbidities, coagulopathy (OR: 4.5, 95% CI: 2.8 to 7.2) and dementia (OR: 4.2, 95% CI: 2.2 to 8.0) had the strongest influence on mortality. The regression analysis showed a significant decrease hospital volume effect with an increasing number of covariates considered (OR: 0.06, 95% CI: 0.10 to -0.03, P < 0.001), while such a relationship was not observed for surgeon volume (P = 0.35).

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis demonstrated a significant inverse relationship between the extent of risk adjustment and the volume effect, suggesting the presence of unmeasured confounding and overestimation of volume effects. However, the conclusions are limited in that only the number of included covariates was considered, but not the effect size of the non-included covariates.

Association of facility type with overall survival in patients with nonsurgically managed pancreatic cancer

Aim: To investigate the association between receiving treatment at academic centers and overall survival in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients who do not receive definitive surgery of the pancreatic tumor. Methods: Using the National Cancer Database, patients who were diagnosed with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma between 2004 to 2016 were identified. Results: Of 262,209 patients, 101,003 (38.5%) received treatment at academic centers. In the multivariable Cox regression analysis, patients who received treatment at a nonacademic facility had significantly worse overall survival compared with patients who were treated at an academic center (hazard ratio: 1.279; 95% CI: 1.268-1.290; p = 0.001). Conclusion: Compared with treatment at academic centers, treatment at nonacademic centers was associated with significantly worse overall survival in patients with nonsurgically managed pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Evolving pancreatic cancer treatment: From diagnosis to healthcare management

The prognosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is still the worst among solid tumors. In this review, a panel of experts addressed the main unanswered questions about the clinical management of this disease, with the aim of providing practical decision support for physicians. On the basis of the evidence available from the literature, the main topics concerning pancreatic cancer are discussed: the diagnosis, as the need for a pathological characterization and the role for germ-line and somatic molecular profiling; the therapeutic management of resectable disease, as the role of upfront surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the post-operative restaging and the optimal timing foradjuvant chemotherapy, the management of the borderline resectable and locally advanced disease; the metastatic disease and the role of surgery for the management of patients with isolated metastasis and the use of biomarkers of metastatic potential; the role of supportive care and the healthcare management of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Updated Principles of Surgical Management of Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumours (pNETs): What Every Surgeon Needs to Know

Simple Summary

In this narrative review, we update the surgical management of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (pNETs) and highlight key elements in view of the recent literature. These tumours are rare and suffer from a lack of data and randomized controlled trials. The pNETs management is difficult due to their heterogeneity and the risks associated with pancreatic surgery. Innovative managements such as “watch and wait” strategies, parenchymal sparing surgery and minimally invasive approach are emerging. The correct use of all these therapeutic options requires a good selection of patients but also a constant update of knowledge.

Abstract

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (pNETs) represent 1 to 2% of all pancreatic neoplasm with an increasing incidence. They have a varied clinical, biological and radiological presentation, depending on whether they are sporadic or genetic in origin, whether they are functional or non-functional, and whether there is a single or multiple lesions. These pNETs are often diagnosed at an advanced stage with locoregional lymph nodes invasion or distant metastases. In most cases, the gold standard curative treatment is surgical resection of the pancreatic tumour, but the postoperative complications and functional consequences are not negligible. Thus, these patients should be managed in specialised high-volume centres with multidisciplinary discussion involving surgeons, oncologists, radiologists and pathologists. Innovative managements such as “watch and wait” strategies, parenchymal sparing surgery and minimally invasive approach are emerging. The correct use of all these therapeutic options requires a good selection of patients but also a constant update of knowledge. The aim of this work is to update the surgical management of pNETs and to highlight key elements in view of the recent literature.

Failure to rescue in patients with distal pancreatectomy: a nationwide analysis of 10,632 patients

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.

Standardized salvage completion pancreatectomy for grade C postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy (with video)

BACKGROUND

Emergency completion pancreatectomy (CP) after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is a technically demanding procedure. We report our experiences with a four-step standardized technique used at our center since 2012.

METHODS

In the first step, the gastrojejunostomy is divided with a stapler to quickly access the pancreatic anastomosis and permit adequate exposure, especially in cases of active bleeding. Second, the bowel loops connected to the pancreatic anastomosis is divided in cases of pancreaticojejunostomy. Third, the pancreatectomy is completed with or without the splenic vessels and spleen conservation according to the local conditions. Finally, the fourth step reconstructs in a Roux-en-Y fashion and ensures drainage.

RESULTS

From January 2012 to December 2019, 450 patients underwent PD at our center. Reintervention for grade C postoperative pancreatic fistula was decided for 30 patients, and CP was performed in 21 patients. The mean intraoperative blood loss and operative duration were relatively low (600 ml and 240 min, respectively). During the perioperative period, three patients died from multiple organ failure, and two patients died intraoperatively from a cataclysmic hemorrhage originating from the superior mesenteric artery.

DISCUSSION

Our standardized procedure appears to be relatively safe, reproducible, and could be particularly useful for young surgeons.

Clinical Efficacy of the Preservation of the Hepatic Branch of the Vagus Nerve on Delayed Gastric Emptying After Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is a common complication following laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD), although it remains incompletely understood, and only few studies have investigated the clinical benefits of hepatic branch of the vagus nerve (HBVN) preservation on DGE after LPD until now. We intended to evaluate the effect of preservation of the HBVN during LPD on the incidence of DGE.

METHODS

A total of 274 consecutive LPDs performed at a single center between July 2014 and December 2019 with available videos were retrospectively reviewed. DGE was defined according to the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) criteria, and HBVN condition during the LPD procedure was evaluated through a video review. Risk factors associated with DGE were assessed by performing univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. Postoperative outcomes between the HBVN-preserved and HBVN-injury groups were compared before and after propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-six (56.93%) patients underwent LPD with HBVN-preserved and 118 (43.07%) with HBVN injury. DGE occurred in 33.2% of patients (n = 91) with grades B and C occurring at 13.9% (n = 38) and 7.7% (n = 21), respectively. Longer operative time, more EIBL, HBVN injury, POPF (grades B and C), postoperative hemorrhage, intra-abdominal infection, and Clavien-Dindo ≥III were identified as risk factors for DGE in the univariate analysis. Then, in the multivariate analysis, HBVN injury and intra-abdominal infection were found to be independent risk factors affecting the incidence of DGE (any grade) or clinically relevant DGE (grades B and C). Furthermore, the prevalence of DGE was significantly higher in the HBVN-injury group than in the HBVN-preserved group before and after PSM analysis (46.61% vs. 23.08%, P<0.001; 42.59% vs. 23.15%, P=0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

HBVN preservation during LPD might be associated with a reduced incidence of DGE as a framework for prospective quality improvement.

Root-Cause Analysis of Mortality Following Pancreatic Resection (CARE Study): A Multicenter Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES

Analyze a multicenter cohort of deceased patients after pancreatectomy in high-volume centers in France by performing a root-cause analysis (RCA) to define the avoidable mortality rate.

BACKGROUND

Despite undeniable progress in pancreatic surgery for over a century, postoperative outcome remain particularly worse and could be further improved.

METHODS

All patients undergoing pancreatectomy between January 2015 and December 2018 and died post-operatively within 90 days after were included. RCA was performed in two stages: the first being the exhaustive collection of data concerning each patient from preoperative to death and the second being blind analysis of files by an independent expert committee. A typical root cause of death was defined with the identification of avoidable death.

RESULTS

Among the 3195 patients operated on in nine participating centers, 140 (4.4%) died within 90 days after surgery. After the exclusion of 39 patients, 101 patients were analyzed. The cause of death was identified in 90% of cases. After RCA, mortality was preventable in 30% of cases, mostly consequently to a preoperative assessment (disease evaluation) or a deficient postoperative management (notably pancreatic fistula and hemorrhage). An inappropriate intraoperative decision was incriminated in 10% of cases. The comparative analysis showed that young age and arterial resection, especially unplanned, were often associated with avoidable mortality.

CONCLUSION

One third of postoperative mortality after pancreatectomy seems to be avoidable, even if the surgery is performed in high volume centers. These data suggest that improving postoperative pancreatectomy outcome requires a multidisciplinary, rigorous and personalized management.

Prospective Evaluation of Resection Margins Using Standardized Specimen Protocol Analysis among Patients with Distal Cholangiocarcinoma and Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

Using a standardized specimen protocol analysis, this study aimed to evaluate the resection margin status of patients who underwent resection for either distal cholangiocarcinoma (DC) or pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This allowed a precise millimetric analysis of each inked margin.

METHODS

From 2010 to 2018, 355 consecutively inked specimens from patients with PDAC (n = 288) or DC (n = 67) were prospectively assessed. We assessed relationships between the tumor and the following margins: transection of the pancreatic neck, bile duct, posterior surface, margin toward superior mesenteric artery, and the surface of superior mesenteric vein/portal vein groove. Resection margins were evaluated using a predefined cut-off value of 1 mm; however, clearances of 0 and 1.5 mm were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Patients with DC were mostly men (64% vs. 49%, p = 0.028), of older age (68 yo vs. 65, p = 0.033), required biliary stenting more frequently (93% vs. 77%, p < 0.01), and received less neoadjuvant treatment (p < 0.001) than patients with PDAC. The venous resection rate was higher among patients with PDAC (p = 0.028). Postoperative and 90-day mortality rates were comparable. Patients with PDAC had greater tumor size (28.6 vs. 24 mm, p = 0.01) than those with DC. The R1 resection rate was comparable between the two groups, regardless of the clearance margin. Among the three types of resection margins, a venous groove was the most frequent in both entities. In multivariate analysis, the R1 resection margin did not influence patient survival in either PDAC or DC.

CONCLUSION

Our standardized specimen protocol analysis showed that the R1 resection rate was comparable in PDAC and DC.

Management of Patients with Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma in the Real-Life Setting: Lessons from the French National Hospital Database

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains a major public health challenge, and faces disparities and delays in the diagnosis and access to care. Our purposes were to describe the medical path of PDAC patients in the real-life setting and evaluate the overall survival at 1 year. We used the national hospital discharge summaries database system to analyze the management of patients with newly diagnosed PDAC over the year 2016 in Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes region (AuRA) (France). A total of 1872 patients met inclusion criteria corresponding to an incidence of 22.6 per 100,000 person-year. Within the follow-up period, 353 (18.9%) were operated with a curative intent, 743 (39.7%) underwent chemo- and/or radiotherapy, and 776 (41.4%) did not receive any of these treatments. Less than half of patients were operated in a high-volume center, defined by more than 20 PDAC resections performed annually, mainly university hospitals. The 1-year survival rate was 47% in the overall population. This study highlights that a significant number of patients with PDAC are still operated in low-volume centers or do not receive any specific oncological treatment. A detailed analysis of the medical pathways is necessary in order to identify the medical and territorial determinants and their impact on the patient's outcome.

A four-step method to centralize pancreatic surgery, accounting for volume, performance and access to care

BACKGROUND

Adequate criteria for pancreatic surgery centralization are debated. This retrospective study aimed to define a reproducible method for complex care centralization, accounting for hospital performance and access to care.

METHODS

The method consisted in: 1. Analysis of overall outcome and mortality-related factors. 2. Assessment of volume and adjusted mortality of each hospital. 3. Definition of different centralization models. 4. Final adjustments to guarantee access to care, evaluating travel times and waiting lists. This method was tested on Lombardy, the most populous Italian region (about 10 million inhabitants, 24 000 km²).

RESULTS

According to Ministry of Health data, 79 hospitals performed 3037 resections in 2014-2016. Mean overall mortality was 5.0%, increasing from 2.3%, of seven high-volume facilities (>30 resections/year) to 10.7% of 56 low-volume facilities (<10 resections/year). Five centralization models were tested (range: 7-23 hospitals): the best performing model included seven high-volume facilities, providing both low mortality (<2%), and easy access to care, namely reasonable travel time (≤60 min for >90% of the population), and limited impact on waiting list (1.1 extra-resection/hospital/week).

CONCLUSION

The four-step method appears as a flexible tool to centralize pancreatic surgery, allowing regulatory institutions to estimate the effect of different models.

Pancreatoduodenectomy for Neuroendocrine Tumors in Patients with Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Type 1: An AFCE (Association Francophone de Chirurgie Endocrinienne) and GTE (Groupe d'étude des Tumeurs Endocrines) Study

Aim

To assess postoperative complications and control of hormone secretions following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) performed on multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) patients with duodenopancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (DP-NETs).

Background

The use of PD to treat MEN1 remains controversial, and evaluating the right place of PD in MEN1 disease makes sense.

Methods

Thirty-one MEN1 patients from the Groupe d’étude des Tumeurs Endocrines MEN1 cohort who underwent PD for DP-NETs between 1971 and 2013 were included. Early and late postoperative complications, secretory control and overall survival were analyzed.

Results

Indication for surgery was: Zollinger–Ellison syndrome (n = 18; 58%), nonfunctioning tumor (n = 9; 29%), insulinoma (n = 2; 7%), VIPoma (n = 1; 3%) and glucagonoma (n = 1; 3%). Mean follow-up was 141 months (range 0–433). Pancreatic fistulas occurred in 5 patients (16.1%), distant metastases in 6 (mean onset of 43 months; range 13–110 months), postoperative diabetes mellitus in 7 (22%), and pancreatic exocrine insufficiency in 6 (19%). Five-year overall survival was 93.3% [CI 75.8–98.3] and ten-year overall survival was 89.1% [CI 69.6–96.4]. After a mean follow-up of 151 months (range 0–433), the biochemical cure rate for MEN-1 related gastrinomas was 61%.

Conclusion

In MEN1 patients, pancreatoduodenectomy can be used to control hormone secretions (gastrin, glucagon, VIP) and to remove large NETs. PD was found to control gastrin secretions in about 60% of cases.

Pancreatic neck transection using a harmonic scalpel increases risk of biochemical leak but not postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

The effect of a harmonic scalpel on postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) has not been addressed. This study assessed the effect of pancreatic neck transection using a harmonic scalpel on rate and severity of POPF after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD).

METHODS

This retrospective analysis included patients who underwent PD at National Taiwan University Hospital between July 2015 and March 2019. We compared rate and severity of POPF between patients who underwent pancreatic neck transection using a harmonic scalpel versus electrosurgical unit.

RESULTS

Of 422 consecutive PDs, the pancreatic neck was transected using a harmonic scalpel or electrosurgical unit in 144 and 278 patients, respectively. Use of a harmonic scalpel significantly increased risk of biochemical leak (25.7% versus [vs] 10.8%; P < 0.05) but not clinically relevant POPF (CR-POPF; 30.2% vs 26.4%; P = 0.41). Harmonic transection was an independent predictor of biochemical leak (odds ratio [OR] = 2.93; P < 0.05) but not CR-POPF (OR = 0.83; P = 0.41) or other major complications (OR = 0.72; P = 0.27). There was no significant intergroup difference in postoperative hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

Pancreatic neck transection using a harmonic scalpel increased risk of biochemical leak but not CR-POPF or other major complications.

High incidence of postoperative infections after pancreaticoduodenectomy: A need for perioperative anti-infectious strategies

OBJECTIVES

Postoperative infections occur frequently after pancreaticoduodenectomy, especially in patients with bile colonization. Recommendations for perioperative anti-infectious treatment are lacking, and clinical practice is heterogenous. We have analyzed the effects of bile colonization and antibiotic prophylaxis on postoperative infection rates, types and therapeutic consequences.

METHODS

Retrospective observational study in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy with intraoperative bile culture. Data on postoperative infections and non-infectious complications, bile cultures and antibiotic prophylaxis adequacy to biliary bacteria were collected.

RESULTS

Among 129 patients, 53% had a positive bile culture and 23% had received appropriate antibiotic prophylaxis. Postoperative documented infection rate was over 40% in patients with or without bile colonization, but antibiotic therapy was more frequent in positive bile culture patients (77% vs. 57%, P=0,008). The median duration of antibiotic therapy was 11 days and included a broad-spectrum molecule in 42% of cases. Two-thirds of documented postoperative infections involved one or more bacteria isolated in bile cultures, which was associated with a higher complication rate. While bile culture yielded Gram-negative bacilli (57%) and Gram-positive cocci (43%), fungal microorganisms were scarce. Adequate preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis according to bile culture was not associated with reduced infectious or non-infectious complication rates.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy experience a high rate of postoperative infections, often involving bacteria from perioperative bile culture when positive, with no preventive effect of an adequate preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis. Increased postoperative complications in patients with bile colonization may render necessary a perioperative antibiotic treatment targeting bile microorganisms. Further prospective studies are needed to improve the anti-infectious strategy in these patients.

Management and Prognosis of Localized Duodenal Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

INTRODUCTION

The characteristics, prognostic factors, and management of duodenal neuroendocrine neoplasms (dNEN) are ill-defined, given their rarity. Whether nonsurgical management might be appropriate for patients with nonmetastatic dNEN and a good prognosis, as is the case for pancreatic NEN (pNEN), is unknown. We aimed to describe the management and prognosis of nonmetastatic dNEN patients.

METHODS

All consecutive patients with nonmetastatic dNEN managed between 1981 and 2018 in 2 expert centers were included. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and factors associated with recurrence were estimated.

RESULTS

A total of 145 patients with dNEN were included. Twenty-eight patients with sporadic, nonfunctioning, small (median 7 mm) dNEN underwent endoscopic resection, with a 5-year RFS rate of 89.4%. Local recurrence occurred in 2 patients, who underwent surgery with no new events. The 5-year RFS rate was 87.9% in patients who underwent surgery. Upon univariate analysis, age, size, Ki67 index, and lymph node involvement (LN+) were significantly associated with worse RFS for all dNEN treated (endoscopy/surgery); multivariate analysis found that age, size, and LN+ were associated with worse RFS.

CONCLUSION

Selected nonmetastatic dNEN had a favorable outcome, and a less invasive therapeutic strategy appeared more suitable than oncological surgery.

Centralization and Oncologic Training Reduce Postoperative Morbidity and Failure-to-rescue Rates After Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Peritoneal Surface Malignancies: Study on a 10-year National French Practice

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate at a national level the postoperative mortality (POM), major morbidity (MM) and failure-to-rescue (FTR) after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) across time and according to hospital-volume.

BACKGROUND

CRS/HIPEC is an effective therapeutic strategy commonly used to treat peritoneal surface malignancies. However, this aggressive approach has the reputation to be associated with a high POM and MM.

METHODS

All patients treated with CRS/HIPEC between 2009 and 2018 in France were identified through a national medical database. Patients and perioperative outcomes were analyzed. A cut-off value of the annual CRS/HIPEC caseload affecting the 90-day POM was calculated using the Chi-squared Automatic Interaction Detector method. A multivariable logistic model was used to identify factors mediating 90-day POM.

RESULTS

A total of 7476 CRS/HIPEC were analyzed. Median age was 59 years with a mean Elixhauser comorbidity index of 3.1, both increasing over time (P < 0.001). Ninety-day POM was 2.6%. MM occurred in 44.2% with a FTR rate of 5.1%. The threshold of CRS/HIPEC number per center per year above which the 90-day POM was significantly reduced was 45 (3.2% vs 1.9%, P = 0.01). High-volume centers had more extended surgery (P < 0.001) with increased MM (55.8% vs 40.4%, P < 0.001) but lower FTR (3.1% vs 6.3%, P = 0.001). After multivariate analysis, independent factors associated with 90-day POM were: age >70 years (P = 0.002), Elixhauser comorbidity index ≥8 (P = 0.006), lower gastro-intestinal origin, (P < 0.010), MM (P < 0.001), and <45 procedures/yr (P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

In France, CRS/HIPEC is a safe procedure with an acceptable 90-day POM that could even be improved through centralization in high-volume centers.

Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis: Endoscopic and Surgical Resection for Ampullary Lesions

Ampullary lesions (ALs) can be treated by endoscopic (EA) or surgical ampullectomy (SA) or pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). However, EA carries significant risk of incomplete resection while surgical interventions can lead to substantial morbidity. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis for R0, adverse-events (AEs) and recurrence between EA, SA and PD. Electronic databases were searched from 1990 to 2018. Outcomes were calculated as pooled means using fixed and random-effects models and the Freeman-Tukey-Double-Arcsine-Proportion-model. We identified 59 independent studies. The pooled R0 rate was 76.6% (71.8–81.4%, I² = 91.38%) for EA, 96.4% (93.6–99.2%, I² = 37.8%) for SA and 98.9% (98.0–99.7%, I² = 0%) for PD. AEs were 24.7% (19.8–29.6%, I² = 86.4%), 28.3% (19.0–37.7%, I² = 76.8%) and 44.7% (37.9–51.4%, I² = 0%), respectively. Recurrences were registered in 13.0% (10.2–15.6%, I² = 91.3%), 9.4% (4.8–14%, I² = 57.3%) and 14.2% (9.5–18.9%, I² = 0%). Differences between proportions were significant in R0 for EA compared to SA (p = 0.007) and PD (p = 0.022). AEs were statistically different only between EA and PD (p = 0.049) and recurrence showed no significance for EA/SA or EA/PD. Our data indicate an increased rate of complete resection in surgical interventions accompanied with a higher risk of complications. However, studies showed various sources of bias, limited quality of data and a significant heterogeneity, particularly in EA studies.

The experience of the minimally invasive (MI) fellowship-trained (FT) hepatic-pancreatic and biliary (HPB) surgeon: could the outcome of MI pancreatoduodenectomy for peri-ampullary tumors be better than open?

BACKGROUND

Although early series focused on benign disease, minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) might be particularly suited for malignancy. Unlike their predecessors, fellowship-trained (FT) Hepatic-Pancreatic and Biliary (HPB) surgeons usually have equal skills in approaching peri-ampullary tumors (PT) either openly or via minimally invasive (MI) techniques.

METHOD

We retrospectively reviewed a MI-HPB-FT surgeon's 10-year experience with PD. A sub-analysis of malignant PT was also done (MIPD-PT vs. OPD-PT). The primary endpoint was to assess postoperative mortality and morbidity. Secondary endpoints included operative parameters, length of hospital stay, and survival analysis. Moreover, we addressed practice pattern changes for a surgeon straight out of training with no previous experience of independent surgery.

RESULTS

From December 2007-February 2018, one MI-HPB-FT performed a total of 100 PDs, including 57 MIPDs and 43 open PDs (OPDs). In both groups, over 70% of PDs were undertaken for malignancy. Eight patients with borderline resectable pancreatic ductal cancer (PDC) were in the OPD-PT group (as compared to only 2 in the MIPD-PT group) (p = 0.07). Estimated mean blood loss and length of stay were less in the MIPD-PT group (345 mL and 12 days) as compared to the OPD-PT group (971 mL and 16 days), p < 0.001 and p = 0.007, respectively. However, the mean operative time was longer for the MIPD-PT (456 min) as compared to the OPD-PT (371 min), p < 0.001. Thirty and 90-day mortality was 2.6%/5.1% after MIPD-PT compared to 0%/3.2% after OPD-PT, respectively, p = 1. Overall 30-/90-day morbidity rates were similar at 41.0%/43.6% after MIPD-PT and 35.5%/41.9% after OPD-PT, respectively, p = 0.8 and 1. Complete resection (R0) rates were not statistically different, 97.4% after MIPD-PT compared to 87.0% after OPD-PT (p = 0.2). After MIPD and OPD for malignant PT, overall 1, 3 and 5-year survival rates, and median survival were 82.5%, 59.6% and 46.3% and 38 months as compared to 52.5%, 15.7% and 10.5% and 13 months, respectively (p = 0.01). In the MIDP-PT group, recurrence free survival (RFS) at 1, 3 and 5 years and median RFS were 69.1%, 41.9% and 33.5% and 26 months as compared to 50.4%, 6.3% and 6.3% and 13 months, in the OPD-PT group, respectively (p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

FT HPB Surgeons who begin their practice with the ability to do both MI and OPD may preferentially approach resectable peri-ampullary tumors minimally invasively. This may result in decreased blood loss decreased length of hospital stays. Despite longer operative time, the improved visualization of MI techniques may enable superior R0 rates when compared to historical open controls. Moreover, combined with quicker initiation of adjuvant chemotherapeutic treatments, this may eventually result in improved survival.

Totally laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: A propensity score matching analysis of short-term outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) is a demanding operation that has not yet gained popularity. Safety, feasibility, and clinical advantages of LPD in comparison with open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) have not been clearly demonstrated. The aim of this study was to compare the short term outcomes of LPD with those of OPD.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Data from a prospectively collected database of patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy at our institution between January 2013 and March 2020 were retrieved and analyzed, comparing the short-term postoperative outcomes of LPD and OPD, using a propensity score matching analysis.

RESULTS

In the study period, 177 patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy were selected, 52 of these were LPD. In the LPD group, the conversion rate to OPD was 3.8%. After matching, a total of 50 LPD and 50 OPD were compared. LPD was associated with a shorter length of stay (14 vs 20 days, p = 0.011), decreased blood loss (255 vs 350 ml, p = 0.022), but longer median operative time (590 vs 382.5 min; p < 0.001). No significant difference was found between LPD and OPD in terms of overall complications (56% vs 62%, p = 0.542), severe complications (26% vs 22%, p = 0.640), and postoperative mortality (4% vs 6%, p = 0.646). The groups had similar reoperation rate, pancreatic-specific complications, and readmission rate.

CONCLUSIONS

In comparison with the open approach, LPD seems associated to with improved short-term outcomes in terms of hospital stay and blood loss, but with a longer operative time. No difference in morbidity and mortality rate were found in our series.

Centralizing a national pancreatoduodenectomy service: striking the right balance

Background

Centralization of pancreatic surgery is currently called for owing to superior outcomes in higher‐volume centres. Conversely, organizational and patient concerns speak for a moderation in centralization. Consensus on the optimal balance has not yet been reached. This observational study presents a volume–outcome analysis of a complete national cohort in a health system with long‐standing centralization.

Methods

Data for all pancreatoduodenectomies in Norway in 2015 and 2016 were identified through a national quality registry and completed through electronic patient journals. Hospitals were dichotomized (high‐volume (40 or more procedures/year) or medium–low‐volume).

Results

Some 394 procedures were performed (201 in high‐volume and 193 in medium–low‐volume units). Major postoperative complications occurred in 125 patients (31·7 per cent). A clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula occurred in 66 patients (16·8 per cent). Some 17 patients (4·3 per cent) died within 90 days, and the failure‐to‐rescue rate was 13·6 per cent (17 of 125 patients). In multivariable comparison with the high‐volume centre, medium–low‐volume units had similar overall complication rates, lower 90‐day mortality (odds ratio 0·24, 95 per cent c.i. 0·07 to 0·82) and no tendency for a higher failure‐to‐rescue rate.

Conclusion

Centralization beyond medium volume will probably not improve on 90‐day mortality or failure‐to‐rescue rates after pancreatoduodenectomy.

Neck transection level and postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy: A retrospective cohort study of 195 patients

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the level of neck transection on clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) after standard pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) with pancreaticojejunostomy.

METHOD

A total of 195 patients with an early postoperative CT scan were retrospectively analyzed and divided into 2 groups (CR-POPF and No CR-POPF) in order to seek potential risk factors for CR-POPF. We focused our analysis on the relationship between CR-POPF and the level of neck transection, defined by measuring the distance between the left side of the portal vein and the remnant pancreatic stump on the postoperative CT scan.

RESULT

CR-POPF occurred in 58 out of 195 PD (29.7%); grade B (17%) and grade C (12.7%). The Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3 morbidity rate was 33% (65/195) and the mortality rate was 2.5% (5/195). Multivariate analysis indicated that a 'right-sided' level of neck transection (P = 0.007), a firm pancreatic texture (P = 0.001), and a PD for non-pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma histology (P = 0.032) were independent risk factors for CR-POPF. A full neck resection with systematic transection ≥7 mm at the left side of the portal vein seems to prevent CR-POPF harboring a protective effect (OR 0.056; 95% CI 0.003 to 0.978; P = 0.039).

CONCLUSION

Here we further consolidate the concept describing the pancreatic neck as a vascular watershed, showing that a long remnant pancreatic neck could be an independent risk factor for CR-POPF after PD (NCT03850236).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND AGENCY

The present study was approved by our local ethics committee and was declared on ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT03850236).

One-Year Postoperative Mortality in MEN1 Patients Operated on Gastric and Duodenopancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: An AFCE and GTE Cohort Study

IMPORTANCE

In MEN1 patients with gastric and duodenopancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GPD-NET), surgery aims to control secretions or to prevent metastatic spread, but after GPD-NET resection, postoperative mortality may be related to the surgery itself or to other associated MEN1 lesions with their own uncontrolled secretions or metastatic behavior.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the causes of death within 1 year following a GPD-NET resection in MEN1 patients.

DESIGN

An observational study collecting data from the Groupe d'étude des Tumeurs Endocrines (GTE) database. The analysis considered the time between surgery and death (early deaths [<1 month after surgery] versus delayed deaths [beyond 1 month after surgery]) and the period (before 1990 vs after 1990). Causes of death were classified as related to GDP surgery, related to surgery for other MEN1 lesions or not related to MEN1 causes.

SETTING

GTE database which includes 1220 MEN1 patients and 441 GPD-NET resections.

PARTICIPANTS

Four hundred and forty-one GPD-NET resections.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary end point was postoperative mortality within 1 year after surgery.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients met the inclusion criteria (2%). Median age at death was 50.5 years. Sixteen deaths occurred in the 30-day postoperative period (76%). Among the 8 delayed deaths, 3 occurred as a result of medical complications between 30 and 90 postoperative days. After 1990, mean age at death increased from 48 to 58 years (p = 0.09), deaths related to uncontrolled acid secretion disappeared (p < 0.001) and deaths related to associated MEN1 lesions increased from 8 to 54% (p = 0.16).

CONCLUSION

Surgery and uncontrolled secretions remain the two main causes of death in MEN1 patients operated for a GPD-NET tumor. Improving the prognosis of these patients requires a strict evaluation of the secretory syndrome and MEN1 aggressiveness before GDP surgery.

Modelling centralization of pancreatic surgery in a nationwide analysis

Background

The benefits of centralization of pancreatic surgery have been documented, but policy differs between countries. This study aimed to model various centralization criteria for their effect on a nationwide cohort.

Methods

Data on all pancreatic resections performed between 2014 and 2016 were obtained from the Italian Ministry of Health. Mortality was assessed for different hospital volume categories and for each individual facility. Observed mortality and risk-standardized mortality rate (RSMR) were calculated. Various models of centralization were tested by applying volume criteria alone or in combination with mortality thresholds.

Results

A total of 395 hospitals performed 12 662 resections; 305 hospitals were in the very low-volume category (mean 2·6 resections per year). The nationwide mortality rate was 6·2 per cent, increasing progressively from 3·1 per cent in very high-volume to 10·6 per cent in very low-volume hospitals. For the purposes of centralization, applying a minimum volume threshold of at least ten resections per year would lead to selection of 92 facilities, with an overall mortality rate of 5·3 per cent. However, the mortality rate would exceed 5 per cent in 48 hospitals and be greater than 10 per cent in 17. If the minimum volume were 25 resections per year, the overall mortality rate would be 4·7 per cent in 38 facilities, but still over 5 per cent in 17 centres and more than 10 per cent in five. The combination of a volume requirement (at least 10 resections per year) with a mortality threshold (maximum RSMR 5 or 10 per cent) would allow exclusion of facilities with unacceptable results, yielding a lower overall mortality rate (2·7 per cent in 45 hospitals or 4·2 per cent in 76 respectively).

Conclusion

The best performance model for centralization involved a threshold for volume combined with a mortality threshold.

Predictive factors for utilization of a low-volume center in pancreatic surgery: A nationwide study

STUDY OBJECTIVE

It has been demonstrated that mortality following pancreatectomy is correlated with surgical volume. However, up until now, no French study has focused on predictive factors to undergo pancreatectomy in low-volume centers. The objective of this study is to analyze the clinical characteristics, socio-economic status and medical density according to surgical volume and to analyze predictive factors for undergoing pancreatectomy in low-volume centers.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients who underwent pancreatectomy in France from 2012 to 2015 were identified fromthe PMSI database. Hopsitals were classified as low, intermediate and high volume (<10, 11-19, ≥20 resections/year, respectively). Clinical and socioeconomic data, travel distance and rurality were assesed to identify factors associated with undergoing pancreatectomy at low-volume hospitals.

RESULTS

In overall, 12,333 patients were included. Those who underwent pancreatectomy in low-volume centers were more likely older, had high Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), had low socioeconomic status, and resided in rural locations.distance traveled by patients operated on in low-volume centers was significantly shorter (23 vs. 61km, P<0.001). In multivariable analysis, older age (P=0.04), CCI≥4 (P=0.008), short travel distance (P<0.001), low socio-economic status (P<0.001) and rurality (P<0.001) were associated withundergoing pancreatectomy in low-volume centers.

CONCLUSION

Patients continue to undergo pancreatectomy at low-volume hospitals is due not only to clinical parameters, but also to socioeconomic and environmental factors. These factors should be taken into account in process of pancreatic surgery centralization.

Pancreatectomy With Arterial Resection for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: How Can It Be Done Safely and With Which Outcomes?: A Single Institution's Experience With 118 Patients

OBJECTIVE

This study assesses the safety and outcomes of the largest cohort of pancreatectomy with arterial resection (P-AR).

BACKGROUND

A high postoperative mortality rate and uncertain oncologic benefits have limited the use of P-AR for locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed a prospectively maintained database of patients who underwent P-AR between January 1990 and November 2017. Univariate and multivariate Cox analyses were used to assess prognostic factors for survival.

RESULTS

There were 118 consecutive resections (51 pancreaticoduodenectomies, 18 total pancreatectomies, and 49 distal splenopancreatectomies). Resected arterial segments included the coeliac trunk (50), hepatic artery (29), superior mesenteric artery (35), and other segments (4). The overall mortality and morbidity were 5.1% and 41.5%, respectively. There were 84 (75.4%) patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 105 (89%) simultaneous venous resections, and 101 (85.5%) arterial reconstructions. The rates of R0 resection and pathologic invasion of venous and arterial walls were 52.4%, 74.2%, and 58%, respectively. The overall survival was 59%, 13%, and 11.8% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. The median overall survival after resection was 13.70 months (CI 95%:11-18.5 mo). In multivariate analysis, R0 resection (HR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.38-0.96; P = 0.01) and venous invasion (HR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.01-2.63; P = 0.04) were independent prognostic factors.

CONCLUSION

In a specialized setting, P-AR for locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma can be performed safely with limited mortality and morbidity. Negative resection margin and the absence of associated venous invasion might predict favorable long-term outcomes.

Pancreatic cancer in Australia: is not it time we address the inequitable resource problem?

The present study reviewed the geographical variations in the delivery of pancreatic cancer therapy and whether this impacts overall survival. The evidence suggests a difference in the accessibility of pancreatic cancer care to patients in rural as compared with urban Australia. While centralization of pancreatic surgery is essential to deliver high quality care to patients, it may be interfering with the ease of access of this form of care to patients in regional areas. Access to chemotherapy in regional Australia is also limited. There is need for a concerted effort to improve the overall care and uptake of medical services to patients in metropolitan and remote Australia with the overarching aim of improving survival and meaningful quality of life.

Study Protocol of the ESAP Study: Endoscopic Papillectomy vs. Surgical Ampullectomy vs. Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Ampullary Neoplasm-A Pancreas2000/EPC Study

Background: Lesions of the Ampulla of Vater are a rare condition and represent <10% of peri-ampullary neoplasms. Nevertheless, ampullary adenomas have the potential for malignant transformation to ampullary carcinomas by an adenoma-to-carcinoma sequence. Thus, adequate patient selection and complete resection (R0) of non-invasive ampullary lesions either by endoscopic papillectomy (EP), surgical ampullectomy (SA), or pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is essential. Although PD was traditionally performed, recent studies reported considerable efficacy and fewer complications following EP and SA. Since consistent comparative data are lacking, the Endoscopic Papillectomy vs. Surgical Ampullectomy vs. Pancreaticoduodectomy (ESAP) study will provide evidence for a therapeutic standard and post procedure morbidity in ampullary lesions. Methods: International multicenter retrospective study. Adult patients (>18 years of age) who underwent SA or PD for ampullary neoplasm between 2004 and 2018 or EP between 2007 and 2018 will be evaluated. Main inclusion criteria are ampullary lesions strictly located to the ampulla. This includes adenoma, adenocarcinoma (T1 and T2), neuroendocrine tumors, gastrointestinal stroma tumors and other rare conditions. Exclusion criteria are peri-ampullary lesions, e.g., from the duodenal wall or the head of the pancreas, and interventions for tumor stages higher than T2. The main objective of this study is to analyze rates of complete resection (R0), recurrence and necessity for complementary interventions following EP, SA, and PD. Treatment-quality for each procedure will be defined by morbidity, mortality and complication rates and will be compared between EP, SA, and PD. Secondary objectives include outcome for patients with incomplete resection or initially understated tumors, lesions of the minor papilla, hereditary syndromes, neuroendocrine tumors, mesenchymal lesions, and other rare conditions. Additionally, we will analyze therapy by argon plasma coagulation and radiofrequency ablation. Furthermore, outcome in curative and palliative interventions can be distinguished. Conclusion: The ESAP study will provide evidence for therapeutic algorithms and data for the implementation of guidelines in the treatment of different types of ampullary tumors, including recurrent, or incomplete resected lesions.

Prospective study on predictability of complications by pancreatic surgeons

PURPOSE

We evaluated the intuition of expert pancreatic surgeons, in predicting the associated risk of pancreatic resection and compared this "intuition" to actual operative follow-up. The objective was to avoid major complications following pancreatic resection, which remains a challenge.

METHODS

From January 2015 to February 2018, all patients who were 18 years old or more undergoing a pancreatic resection (pancreaticoduodenectomy [PD], distal pancreatectomy [DP], or central pancreatectomy [CP]) for pancreatic lesions were included. Preoperatively and postoperatively, all surgeons completed a form assessing the expected potential occurrence of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF: grade B or C), postoperative hemorrhage, and length of stay.

RESULTS

Preoperative intuition was assessed for 101 patients for 52 PD, 44 DP, and 5 CP cases. Overall mortality and morbidity rates were 6.9% (n = 7) and 67.3% (n = 68), respectively, and 38 patients (37.6%) developed a POPF, including 27 (26.7%) CR-POPF. Concordance between preoperative intuition of CR-POPF occurrence and reality was minimal, with a Cohen's kappa coefficient (κ) of 0.175 (P value = 0.009), and the same result was obtained between postoperative intuition and reality (κ = 0.351; P < 0.001). When the pancreatic parenchyma was hard, surgeons predicted the absence of CR-POPF with a negative predictive value of 91.3%. However, they were not able to predict the occurrence of CR-POPF when the pancreas was soft (positive predictive value 48%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study assessed for the first time the surgeon's intuition in pancreatic surgery, and demonstrated that pancreatic surgeons cannot accurately assess outcomes except when the pancreatic parenchyma is hard.

Adrenalectomy Risk Score: An Original Preoperative Surgical Scoring System to Reduce Mortality and Morbidity After Adrenalectomy

OBJECTIVE

To explore the determinants of postoperative outcomes of adrenal surgery in order to build a proposition for healthcare improvement.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Adrenalectomy is the recommended treatment for many benign and malignant adrenal diseases. Postoperative outcomes vary widely in the literature and their determinants remain ill-defined.

METHODS

We based this retrospective cohort study on the "Programme de médicalisation des systèmes d'information" (PMSI), a national database that compiles discharge abstracts for every admission to French acute health care facilities. Diagnoses identified during the admission were coded according to the French adaptation of the 10th edition of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10). PMSI abstracts for all patients discharged between January 2012 and December 2017 were extracted. We built an Adrenalectomy-risk score (ARS) from logistic regression and calculated operative volume and ARS thresholds defining high-volume centers and high-risk patients with the CHAID method.

RESULTS

During the 6-year period of the study, 9820 patients (age: 55 ± 14; F/M = 1.1) were operated upon for adrenal disease. The global 90-day mortality rate was 1.5% (n = 147). In multivariate analysis, postoperative mortality was independently associated with age ≥75 years [odds ratio (OR): 5.3; P < 0.001], malignancy (OR: 2.5; P < 0.001), Charlson score ≥2 (OR: 3.6; P < 0.001), open procedure (OR: 3.2; P < 0.001), reoperation (OR: 4.5; P < 0.001), and low hospital caseload (OR: 1.8; P = 0.010). We determined that a caseload of 32 patients/year was the best threshold to define high-volume centers and 20 ARS points the best threshold to define high-risk patients.

CONCLUSION

High-risk patients should be referred to high-volume centers for adrenal surgery.

Update on the Surgical Treatment of Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNET) arise from uncontrolled proliferation of neuroendocrine cell and further genetic alterations that may induce hormone secretion such as glucagon/insulin/gastrin/VIP. Their incidence is rapidelly growing, especially because of the frequent incidental diagnosis of small asymptomatic non-functionnal neuroendocrine tumors with the widespread use of cross-sectional imaging. The vast majority of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors are sporadic but up to 5%-10% of them arise from genetic syndromes, the main one being Multiple Endocrine Neopalsm type 1 (MEN1). Appropriate management of patients with PNET is a complex challenge for surgeons, and require extensive medical collaboration. This review aims to summarize major and recent updates regarding the medico-surgical management of PNETs.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Review of pertinent English language literature.

RESULTS

This article provides a concise summary of the clinical presentation, diagnosis, surgical management, alternative treatments and follow up of PNETs.

CONCLUSION

PNET are a rare, heterogeneous group of neoplasms with a generally favorable prognosis at least compared to pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Surgical resection is the cornerstone of their management, particularly for localized disease, and should always be discussed in multidisciplinary tumor board.