Laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a propensity score matching analysis

Clinical-radiomics nomogram using contrast-enhanced CT to predict histological grade and survival in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Objectives

Tumor grading is important for prognosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). In this study, we developed preoperative clinical-radiomics nomograms using features from contrast-enhanced CT (CECT), to discriminate high-grade and low-grade PDAC and predict overall survival (OS).

Methods

In this single-center, retrospective study conducted from February 2014 to April 2021, consecutive PDAC patients who underwent CECT and had pathologically identified grading were randomized to training (n=200) and test (n=84) cohorts for development of model to predict histological grade based on radiomics scores from CECT (HGrad). Another 42 patients were used as external validation cohort of HGrad. A nomogram (HGnom) was constructed using radiomics score, CA12-5 and smoking to predict histological grade. A second nomogram (Pnom) was constructed using radiomics score, CA12-5, TNM, adjuvant treatment, resection margin and microvascular invasion to predict OS in radical resection patients (217 of 284).

Results

Among 326 patients, 122 were high-grade (120 poorly differentiated and 2 undifferentiated). The HGrad yielded AUCs of 0.75 (95% CI: 0.64, 0.85) and 0.76 (95% CI: 0.60, 0.91) in test and validation cohorts. The HGnom achieved AUCs of 0.77 (95% CI: 0.66, 0.87), and the predicted grades calibrated well with actual grades (P=.13). OS was different between the grades predicted by radiomics scores (P=.01). The integrated AUC of the Pnom for predicting OS was 0.80 (95% CI: 0.75, 0.88).

Conclusion

Compared with the HGrad using features from CECT, the HGnom demonstrated higher performance for predicting histological grade. The Pnom helped identify patients with high survival outcome in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: Individual patient data meta-analysis of randomized trials

OBJECTIVE

Assessment of minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is scarce and limited to non-randomized studies. This study aimed to compare oncological and surgical outcomes after MIPD compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) for patients after resectable PDAC from published randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

A systematic review was performed to identify RCTs comparing MIPD and OPD including PDAC (Jan 2015-July 2021). Individual data of patients with PDAC were requested. Primary outcomes were R0 rate and lymph node yield. Secondary outcomes were blood-loss, operation time, major complications, hospital stay and 90-day mortality.

RESULTS

Overall, 4 RCTs (all addressed laparoscopic MIPD) with 275 patients with PDAC were included. In total, 128 patients underwent laparoscopic MIPD and 147 patients underwent OPD. The R0 rate (risk difference(RD) -1%, P = 0.740) and lymph node yield (mean difference(MD) +1.55, P = 0.305) were comparable between laparoscopic MIPD and OPD. Laparoscopic MIPD was associated with less perioperative blood-loss (MD -91ml, P = 0.026), shorter length of hospital stay (MD -3.8 days, P = 0.044), while operation time was longer (MD +98.5 min, P = 0.003). Major complications (RD -11%, P = 0.302) and 90-day mortality (RD -2%, P = 0.328) were comparable between laparoscopic MIPD and OPD.

CONCLUSIONS

This individual patient data meta-analysis of MIPD versus OPD in patients with resectable PDAC suggests that laparoscopic MIPD is non-inferior regarding radicality, lymph node yield, major complications and 90-day mortality and is associated with less blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and longer operation time. The impact on long-term survival and recurrence should be studied in RCTs including robotic MIPD.

Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy with portal or superior mesenteric vein resection and reconstruction for pancreatic cancer: A single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) with portal or superior mesenteric vein resection and reconstruction has been applied in pancreatic cancer patients with tumor infiltration or adherence. However, it is controversial whether laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) with major vascular resection and reconstruction is feasible. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of LPD with major vascular resection compared with OPD with major vascular resection.

METHODS

We reviewed data for all pancreatic cancer patients undergoing LPD or OPD with vascular resection at Department of Pancreatic Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, between February 2018 and May 2022. We compared the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative clinicopathological data of the two groups to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of LPD with major vascular resection.

RESULTS

A total of 63 patients underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) with portal or superior mesenteric vein resection and reconstruction, including 25 LPDs and 38 OPDs. The LPD group had less intraoperative blood loss (200 vs. 400 mL, P < 0.001), lower proportion of intraoperative blood transfusion (16.0% vs. 39.5%, P = 0.047), longer operation time (390 vs. 334 min, P = 0.004) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (11 vs. 14 days, P = 0.005). There was no perioperative death in all patients. There was no significant difference in the incidence of total postoperative complications, grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula, delayed gastric emptying and abdominal infection between the two groups. No postpancreatectomy hemorrhage nor bile leakage occurred during perioperative period. There was no significant difference in R0 resection rate and number of lymph nodes harvested between the two groups. Patency of reconstructed vessels in the two groups were 96.0% and 92.1%, respectively (P = 0.927).

CONCLUSIONS

LPD with portal or superior mesenteric vein resection and reconstruction was safe, feasible and oncologically acceptable for selected patients with pancreatic cancer, and it can achieve similar or even better perioperative results compared to open approach.

The differential effects of sarcopenia and cachexia on overall survival for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients following pancreatectomy: A retrospective study based on a large population

OBJECTIVES

Both cachexia and sarcopenia have been considered adverse predictors for prognosis in patients with pancreatic cancer; although sarcopenia and cachexia share some similarities, they are still defined as distinct nutritional conditions. We aimed to explore the differential impacts of sarcopenia and cachexia on prognosis for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients following radical excision.

METHODS

From January 2015 to May 2022, 614 patients undergoing surgery for PDAC were retrospectively included. Sarcopenia was defined as the L3 total skeletal muscle index below 52.4 cm² /m² (men) and 38.5 cm² /m² (women). Cachexia was classified according to the following criteria: involuntary weight loss >5% over the past 6 months, or weight loss >2% and BMI <20 kg/m² , or weight loss >2% and sarcopenia.

RESULTS

Of the 614 patients included in the analysis, 62% and 48% were diagnosed with sarcopenia and cachexia, respectively. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that sarcopenia and/or cachexia were significantly associated with worse overall survival (OS) rather than worse recurrence-free survival (RFS). Moreover, Cox regression analysis revealed that cachexia rather than sarcopenia was an adverse factor for OS in all PDAC patients. For poorly differentiated PDAC, both cachexia and sarcopenia were significantly associated with shorter OS. However, for moderately/well-differentiated PADC, cachexia was an independent factor for adverse OS, but not sarcopenia.

CONCLUSIONS

Sarcopenia and cachexia have different effects on OS for PDAC patients undergoing radical excision. This difference may provide some important information for preoperative management.

Preliminary results of laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy in Vietnam: A retrospective analysis from a multi-center research

INTRODUCTION

The goal of this study was to compare the results of LPD with those of open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD).

METHOD

Data were retrospectively collected from a database of patients who underwent PD from January 2010 to May 2020. Intraoperative, postoperative, and follow-up assessment studies were conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 149 patients were selected. Compared with OPD, LPD was fewer intraoperative blood transfusions (p = 0.015), a longer median operative time (p < 0.001), hospital stay (p = 0.034), a higher rate of bile leakage (p = 0.02), overall morbidity (p = 0.045), and re-operation (p = 0.044). There was no difference between the two groups in severe pancreatic fistula, postoperative bleeding, delayed gastric emptying, Clavien-Dindo classification ≥ III, or 30-day mortality. LPD had a similar number of excised lymph nodes, R0 resection rate, and long-term survival cases involving malignant tumors, ampulla of Vater cancer, and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

CONCLUSION

In the early period, the benefit of LPD has not been found as there was a high rate of conversion to laparotomy, morbidity, and re-operation. Despite that, LPD is a feasible oncological approach with long-term survival comparable to OPD.

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.

Comparisons of short-term and long-term results between laparoscopic between open pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic tumors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: The efficacy of pancreaticoduodenectomy and open pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic tumors is controversial. The study aims to compare the efficacy of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) in the treatment of pancreatic tumors through systematic evaluation and meta-analysis. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of science databases were searched for clinical studies on the treatment of pancreatic tumors with LPD and OPD. The end time for the searches was 20 July 2022. Rigorous inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to screen the articles, the Cochrane manual was used to evaluate the quality of the included articles, and the stata15.0 software was used for statistical analysis of the indicators. Results: In total, 16 articles were included, including two randomized controlled trials and 14 retrospective studies. Involving a total of 4416 patients, 1275 patients were included in the LPD group and 3141 patients in the OPD group. The results of the meta-analysis showed that: the operation time of LPD was longer than that of OPD [WMD = 56.14,95% CI (38.39,73.89), p = 0.001]; the amount of intraoperative blood loss of LPD was less than that of OPD [WMD = -120.82,95% CI (-169.33, -72.30), p = 0.001]. No significant difference was observed between LPD and OPD regarding hospitalization time [WMD = -0.5,95% CI (-1.35, 0.35), p = 0.250]. No significant difference was observed regarding postoperative complications [RR = 0.96,95% CI (0.86,1.07, p = 0.463]. And there was no significant difference regarding 1-year OS and 3-year OS: 1-year OS [RR = 1.02,95% CI (0.97,1.08), p = 0.417], 3-year OS [RR = 1.10 95% CI (0.75, 1.62), p = 0.614%]. Conclusion: In comparison with OPD, LPD leads to less blood loss but longer operation time, therefore the bleeding rate per unit time of LPD is less than that of OPD. LPD has obvious advantages. With the increase of clinical application of LPD, the usage of LPD in patients with pancreatic cancer has very good prospect. Due to the limitations of this paper, in future studies, more attention should be paid to high-quality, multi-center, randomized controlled studies.

Porphyromonas gingivalis predicts local recurrence after endoscopic submucosal dissection of early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma or precancerous lesion

BACKGROUND

Porphyromonas gingivalis plays an oncogenic role in development and progression of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). However, the impact of P. gingivalis on local recurrence of early ESCC or precancerous lesion after ESD treatment remains unknown. The present study aimed to evaluate the impact of P. gingivalis on local recurrence after ESD treatment of early ESCC or high-grade dysplasia (HGD).

METHODS

The amount of P. gingivalis was assessed by immunohistochemistry in 205 patients with early ESCC or HGD. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to determine the effect of P. gingivalis on local recurrence. Propensity score matching analysis was performed to reduce the imbalance of baseline characteristics. A nomogram integrating significant prognostic factors was built for local recurrence prediction.

RESULTS

The amount of P. gingivalis increased significantly in neoplasms that invaded up to muscularis mucosa and submucosa compared with lesions confined to epithelium or lamina propria. Overabundance of P. gingivalis was positively associated with invasion depth, post-ESD stricture and local recurrence. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses revealed that P. gingivalis, longitudinal length of lesion and lymphovascular invasion were independent predictors for post-ESD recurrence. A nomogram comprising P. gingivalis, lymphovascular involvement, and lesion length performed well for prediction of post-ESD local recurrence with the concordance indices of 0.72 (95%CI, 0.62 to 0.80), 0.72 (95%CI, 0.63 to 0.80), and 0.74 (95%CI, 0.65 to 0.83) in the validation cohort, the entire cohort, and the subcohort after PSM, respectively.

CONCLUSION

P. gingivalis overabundance is a risk factor and a potential predictor for local recurrence of early ESCC or HGD after ESD treatment. Thus, clearance of P. gingivalis represents an attractive strategy for prognosis improvement and for prevention of ESCC.

Minimally Invasive Pancreatoduodenectomy: Contemporary Practice, Evidence, and Knowledge Gaps

Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy has gained popularity throughout the last decade. For laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy, some high-level evidence exists, but with conflicting results. There are currently no published randomized controlled trials comparing robotic and open pancreatoduodenectomy. Comparative long-term data for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is lacking to date. Based on the existing evidence, current observed benefits of minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy over open pancreatoduodenectomy seem scarce, but retrospective data indicate the safety of these procedures in selected patients. As familiarity with the robotic platform increases, studies have shown an expansion in indications, also including patients with vascular involvement and even indicating favorable results in patients with obesity and high-risk morphometric features. Several ongoing randomized controlled trials aim to investigate potential differences in short- and long-term outcomes between minimally invasive and open pancreatoduodenectomy. Their results are much awaited.

Laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic cancer is one of the deadliest cancers and pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is recommended as the optimal operation for resectable pancreatic head cancer. Minimally invasive surgery, which initially emerged as hybrid-laparoscopy and recently developed into total laparoscopy surgery, has been widely used for various abdominal surgeries. However, controversy persists regarding whether laparoscopic PD (LPD) is inferior to open PD (OPD) for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) treatment. Further studies, especially randomised clinical trials, are warranted to compare these two surgical techniques.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The TJDBPS07 study is designed as a prospective, randomised controlled, parallel-group, open-label, multicentre noninferiority study. All participating pancreatic surgical centres comprise specialists who have performed no less than 104 LPDs and OPDs, respectively. A total of 200 strictly selected PD candidates diagnosed with PDAC will be randomised to receive LPD or OPD. The primary outcome is the 5-year overall survival rate, whereas the secondary outcomes include overall survival, disease-free survival, 90-day mortality, complication rate, comprehensive complication index, length of stay and intraoperative indicators. We hypothesise that LPD is not inferior to OPD for the treatment of resectable PDAC. The enrolment schedule is estimated to be 2 years and follow-up for each patient will be 5 years.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study received approval from the Tongji Hospital Ethics Committee of Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, and monitor from an independent third-party organisation. Results of this trial will be presented in international meetings and published in a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03785743.

Comparison of laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: A propensity score-matching analysis of long-term survival

BACKGROUND

Many studies have shown the short-term feasibility and effectiveness of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) are comparable to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). However, the long-term oncological safety of LPD in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains to be elucidated.

METHODS

Patients who underwent LPD or OPD between July 2014 and July 2018 at our institution were identified, and those with resectable, pathologically diagnosed PDAC were analyzed. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Propensity score-matching (PSM) analysis was performed to balance the baseline characteristics between groups. Cox proportional hazards model was constructed to determine independent predictors of OS.

RESULTS

The original cohort consisted of 64 LPD and 80 OPD cases, in which, the laparoscopic group had a significantly longer median OS (25 vs. 17 months; P = 0.034). A higher proportion of laparoscopic patients received adjuvant therapy (51.6 vs. 32.5%; P = 0.021). PSM analysis identified 47 patient pairs. No significant differences in OS (21 vs. 17 months; P = 0.220) or adjuvant therapy utilization (53.2 vs. 38.3%; P = 0.248) were observed between the matched groups. Multivariate Cox analyses showed that receiving adjuvant therapy (HR = 0.44; 95% CI, 0.28-0.68), histopathological differentiation (poor vs. moderate-to-well differentiation; HR = 1.93; 95% CI, 1.26-2.95), and sex (female vs. male, HR = 0.47, 95% CI, 0.30-0.75) were independent predictors of OS.

CONCLUSIONS

LPD can be comparable to OPD in terms of long-term safety for patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma when performed in a high-volume center.

Korean Surgical Practice Guideline for Pancreatic Cancer 2021: A summary of evidence-based surgical approaches

Pancreatic cancer is the eighth most common cancer and the fifth most common cause of cancer-related deaths in Korea. Despite the increasing incidence and high mortality rate of pancreatic cancer, there are no appropriate surgical practice guidelines for the current domestic medical situation. To enable standardization of management and facilitate improvements in surgical outcome, a total of 10 pancreatic surgical experts who are members of Korean Association of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery have developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date, evidence-based research findings and expert opinions. This is an English version of the Korean Surgical Practice Guideline for Pancreatic Cancer 2021. This guideline includes 13 surgical questions and 15 statements. Due to the lack of high-level evidence, strong recommendation is almost impossible. However, we believe that this guideline will help surgeons understand the current status of evidence and suggest what to investigate further to establish more solid recommendations in the future.

Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy Versus Conventional Open Approach for Patients With Pancreatic Duct Adenocarcinoma: An Up-to-Date Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

To compare perioperative and oncological outcomes of pancreatic duct adenocarcinoma (PDAC) after laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD vs. OPD), we performed a meta-analysis of currently available propensity score matching studies and large-scale retrospective cohorts to compare the safety and overall effect of LPD to OPD for patients with PDAC.

Methods

A meta-analysis was registered at PROSPERO and the registration number is CRD42021250395. PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched based on a defined search strategy to identify eligible studies before March 2021. Data on operative times, blood loss, 30-day mortality, reoperation, length of hospital stay (LOS), overall morbidity, Clavien-Dindo ≥3 complications, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), blood transfusion, delayed gastric emptying (DGE), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), and oncologic outcomes (R0 resection, lymph node dissection, overall survival, and long-term survival) were subjected to meta-analysis.

Results

Overall, we identified 10 retrospective studies enrolling a total of 11,535 patients (1,514 and 10,021 patients underwent LPD and OPD, respectively). The present meta-analysis showed that there were no significant differences in overall survival time, 1-year survival, 2-year survival, 30-day mortality, Clavien-Dindo ≥3 complications, POPF, DGE, PPH, and lymph node dissection between the LPD and OPD groups. Nevertheless, compared with the OPD group, LPD resulted in significantly higher rate of R0 resection (OR: 1.22; 95% CI 1.06-1.40; p = 0.005), longer operative time (WMD: 60.01 min; 95% CI 23.23-96.79; p = 0.001), lower Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III rate (p = 0.02), less blood loss (WMD: -96.49 ml; 95% CI -165.14 to -27.83; p = 0.006), lower overall morbidity rate (OR: 0.65; 95% CI 0.50 to 0.85; p = 0.002), shorter LOS (MD = -2.73; 95% CI -4.44 to -1.03; p = 0.002), higher 4-year survival time (p = 0.04), 5-year survival time (p = 0.001), and earlier time to starting adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery (OR: -10.86; 95% CI -19.42 to -2.30; p = 0.01).

Conclusions

LPD is a safe and feasible alternative to OPD for patients with PDAC, and compared with OPD, LPD seemed to provide a similar OS.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails.

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

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

Adverse Impact of Intraoperative Conversion on the Postoperative Course Following Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy

PURPOSE

The aim of the current study was to evaluate the adverse clinical impact of intraoperative conversion during laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The medical records of patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) were retrospectively reviewed. Perioperative clinical variables were compared between patients who underwent converted PD (cPD) and initially planned open PD (OPD) to investigate the clinical impact and predictive factors of intraoperative conversion during LPD.

RESULTS

A total of 171 patients were included. Among them, 31 patients (19.3%) were found to have intraoperative conversion during LPD. Failure of progression due to severe adhesion (12 patients, 7%) and major vessel invasion (7 patients, 4%) were the two most frequent reasons for conversion. On multivariate analysis, age [Exp(β)=1.044, p=0.044] and pancreatic texture [Expa(β)=2.431, p=0.039) were found to be independent factors for predicting intraoperative conversion during LPD. In comparative analysis with the OPD group, the cPD group had a longer operation time (516.8 min vs. 449.9 min, p=0.001), higher rate of postoperative hemorrhage (12.1% vs. 0.85%, p=0.008), higher reoperation rate (9.1% vs. 0%, p=0.01), and higher cost (21886.4 USD vs. 17168.9 USD, p=0.018).

CONCLUSION

Intraoperative conversion during LPD can have an adverse clinical impact on the postoperative course following LPD. Appropriate patients selection and improvement of surgical techniques will be crucial for unnecessary intraoperative conversion and safe LPD.

Outcomes of laparoscopic, robotic, and open pancreatoduodenectomy: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies

BACKGROUND

This network meta-analysis was performed to determine the optimal surgical approach for pancreatoduodenectomy by comparing outcomes after laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy, robotic pancreatoduodenectomy and open pancreatoduodenectomy.

METHODS

A systematic search of the PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases was conducted to identify eligible randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies.

RESULTS

Four randomized controlled trials and 23 propensity-score matched studies comprising a total of 4,945 patients were included for analysis. Operation time for open pancreatoduodenectomy was shorter than both laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (mean difference -57.35, 95% CI 26.25-88.46 minutes) and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (mean difference -91.08, 95% CI 48.61-133.56 minutes), blood loss for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy was significantly less than both laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (mean difference -112.58, 95% CI 36.95-118.20 mL) and open pancreatoduodenectomy (mean difference -209.87, 95% CI 140.39-279.36 mL), both robotic pancreatoduodenectomy and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy were associated with reduced rates of delayed gastric emptying compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy (odds ratio 0.59, 95% CI 0.39-0.90 and odds ratio 0.69, 95% CI 0.50-0.95, respectively), robotic pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with fewer wound infections compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy (odds ratio 0.35, 95% CI 0.18-0.71), and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy patients enjoyed significantly shorter length of stay compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy (odds ratio 0.43, 95% CI 0.28-0.95). There were no differences in other outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This network meta-analysis of high-quality studies suggests that when laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy are performed in high-volume centers, short-term perioperative and oncologic outcomes are largely comparable, if not slightly improved, compared with traditional open pancreatoduodenectomy. These findings should be corroborated in further prospective randomized studies.

Cellular and molecular mechanisms of perineural invasion of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive malignant disease with a unique tumor microenvironment surrounded by an interlaced network of cancer and noncancerous cells. Recent works have revealed that the dynamic interaction between cancer cells and neuronal cells leads to perineural invasion (PNI), a clinical pathological feature of PDAC. The formation and function of PNI are dually regulated by molecular (e.g., involving neurotrophins, cytokines, chemokines, and neurotransmitters), metabolic (e.g., serine metabolism), and cellular mechanisms (e.g., involving Schwann cells, stromal cells, T cells, and macrophages). Such integrated mechanisms of PNI not only support tumor development, growth, invasion, and metastasis but also mediate the formation of pain, all of which are closely related to poor disease prognosis in PDAC. This review details the modulation, signaling pathways, detection, and clinical relevance of PNI and highlights the opportunities for further exploration that may benefit PDAC patients.

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A review of recent paradigms and advances in epidemiology, clinical diagnosis and management

Pancreatic cancer is one of the dreaded malignancies for both the patient and the clinician. The five-year survival rate of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDA) is as low as 2% despite multimodality treatment even in the best hands. As per the Global Cancer Observatory of the International Agency for Research in Cancer estimates of pancreatic cancer, by 2040, a 61.7% increase is expected in the total number of cases globally. With the widespread availability of next-generation sequencing, the entire genome of the tumors is being sequenced regularly, providing insight into their pathogenesis. As invasive PDA arises from pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia and mucinous neoplasm and intraductal papillary neoplasm, screening for them can be beneficial as the disease is curable with resection at an early stage. Routine preoperative biliary drainage has no role in patients suffering from PDA with obstructive jaundice. If performed, metallic stents are preferred over plastic ones. Minimally invasive procedures are preferred to open procedures as they have less morbidity. The duct-to-mucosa technique for pancreaticojejunostomy is presently widely practiced. The role of intraperitoneal drains after surgery for PDA is controversial. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy has been proven to have a significant role both in locally advanced as well as in resectable PDA. Many new regimens and drugs have been added in the arsenal of chemoradiotherapy for metastatic disease. The roles of immunotherapy and gene therapy in PDA are being investigated. This review article is intended to improve the understanding of the readers with respect to the latest updates of PDA, which may help to trigger new research ideas and make better management decisions.

The comparation of short-term outcome between laparoscopic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a propensity score matching analysis

Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is one of the most complex and delicate operations in abdominal surgery. With the development of laparoscopic techniques, more and more pancreatic experts have become skilled in laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD). However, the short-term efficacy of LPD compared to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) remains unclear. Here, we performed a propensity score matching study aiming to compare the short outcomes of patients who underwent LPD or OPD after the learning curve and established a risk model of pancreatic fistula. The data of 346 patients who had OPD or LPD from July 2015 to January 2020 were retrieved. After a 1:1 matching, 224 patients remained. The operation time was significantly longer (P = 0.001) but the amount of bleeding was significantly lower (P = 0.001) in the LPD group than in the OPD group. Patients in LPD group had fewer blood transfusions (P = 0.002) than those in OPD group. More lymph nodes (P < 0.001) were dissected in LPD group. The rate of grade B/C pancreatic fistula was significantly higher in the LPD group than in the OPD group (16.1% vs. 6.3%, P = 0.002). By multi variate Logistic regression analysis, we identified pancreatic tumor, malignancy and low body mass index were risk factors of Grade B/C pancreatic fistula after PD operation. Then, we developed a Grade B/C pancreatic fistula nomogram with the risk factors. The C-index of the nomogram was 0.836 (95% CI 0.762-0.910). In conclusion, LPD could be technically feasible, get less trauma and achieve similar short-term outcome as compared with OPD.

Long-term survival after minimally invasive resection versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary cancers: a systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression

BACKGROUND

It remains unclear whether minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) influences long-term survival in periampullary cancers. This review aims evaluate long-term survival between MIPD and OPD for periampullary cancers.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed to identify studies comparing long-term survival after MIPD and OPD. The I₂ test was used to test for statistical heterogeneity and publication bias using Egger test. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed for all-cause 5-year (main outcome) and 3-year survival, and disease-specific 5-year and 3-year survival. Meta-regression was performed for the 5-year and 3-year survival outcomes with adjustment for study (region, design, case matching), hospital (centre volume), patient (ASA grade, gender, age), and tumor (stage, neoadjuvant therapy, subtype (i.e. ampullary, distal bile duct, duodenal, pancreatic)). Sensitivity analyses performed on studies including pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) only.

RESULTS

The review identified 31 relevant studies. Among all 58,622 patients, 8716 (14.9%) underwent MIPD and 49,875 (85.1%) underwent OPD. Pooled analysis revealed similar 5-year overall survival after MIPD compared with OPD (HR: 0.78, 95% CI 0.50-1.22, p = 0.2). Meta-regression indicated case matching, and ASA Grade II and III as confounding covariates. The statistical heterogeneity was limited (I₂ = 12, χ² = 0.26) and the funnel plot was symmetrical both according to visual and statistical testing (Egger test = 0.32). Sensitivity subset analyses for PDAC demonstrated similar 5-year overall survival after MIPD compared with OPD (HR 0.69, 95% CI: 0.32-1.50, p = 0.3).

CONCLUSION

Long-term survival after MIPD is non-inferior to OPD. Thus, MIPD can be recommended as a standard surgical approach for periampullary cancers.

Dynamic prediction for clinically relevant pancreatic fistula: a novel prediction model for laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy

Background

With the recent emerge of dynamic prediction model on the use of diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and renal failure, and its advantage of providing timely predicted results according to the fluctuation of the condition of the patients, we aim to develop a dynamic prediction model with its corresponding risk assessment chart for clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula after laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy by combining baseline factors and postoperative time-relevant drainage fluid amylase level and C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio.

Methods

We collected data of 251 patients undergoing LPD at West China Hospital of Sichuan University from January 2016 to April 2019. We extracted preoperative and intraoperative baseline factors and time-window of postoperative drainage fluid amylase and C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio relevant to clinically relevant pancreatic fistula by performing univariate and multivariate analyses, developing a time-relevant logistic model with the evaluation of its discrimination ability. We also established a risk assessment chart in each time-point.

Results

The proportion of the patients who developed clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula after laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy was 7.6% (19/251); preoperative albumin and creatine levels, as well as drainage fluid amylase and C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio on postoperative days 2, 3, and 5, were the independent risk factors for clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula. The cut-off points of the prediction value of each time-relevant logistic model were 14.0% (sensitivity: 81.9%, specificity: 86.5%), 8.3% (sensitivity: 85.7%, specificity: 79.1%), and 7.4% (sensitivity: 76.9%, specificity: 85.9%) on postoperative days 2, 3, and 5, respectively, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.866 (95% CI 0.737–0.996), 0.896 (95% CI 0.814–0.978), and 0.888 (95% CI 0.806–0.971), respectively.

Conclusions

The dynamic prediction model for clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula has a good to very good discriminative ability and predictive accuracy. Patients whose predictive values were above 14.0%, 8.3%, and 7.5% on postoperative days 2, 3, and 5 would be very likely to develop clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula after laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy.

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

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

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.

The Effect of Age on Short- and Long-Term Outcomes in Patients With Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Undergoing Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of age on outcomes with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) undergoing laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD).

METHODS

We retrospectively collected clinical data of consecutive patients with PDAC undergoing LPD from January 2012 to April 2019. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to age at admission for LPD: younger than 70 and 70 years or older.

RESULTS

A total of 147 patients were included (<70 years, n = 96; ≥70 years, n = 51). The elderly LPD patients had lower serum albumin levels (mean, 37.9 [standard deviation, 4.8] g/L vs 40.7 [standard deviation, 6.8] g/L, P = 0.004) and a larger frequency of comorbidities (62.7% vs 36.5%, P = 0.002) than younger patients. The short-term outcomes showed no significant differences. The median overall survival time of the younger patients was not significantly greater than that of the elderly patients (20.0 [95% confidence interval, 16.1-23.9] months vs 19.0 [95% confidence interval, 13.8-24.2] months, P = 0.902).

CONCLUSIONS

The short- and long-term outcomes of elderly patients with PDAC after LPD were similar to those of younger patients, despite a higher prevalence of multiple chronic illnesses and poorer nutritional conditioning among the elderly patients. These results show that LPD can be applied safely to elderly patients.

Minimally invasive surgery for pancreatic cancer

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

Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery in laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: A single-center case series

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy is an appealing and minimally invasive method for pancreaticoduodenal tumors. However, an abdominal incision is still required to extract the specimen. We used the natural orifice specimen extraction technique in laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy to accomplish specimen retraction in 8 female patients and summarized the clinical results.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 8 female patients with periampullary carcinoma or duodenal cancer who underwent laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy were enrolled in our study between April 2018 and October 2019. A 4-cm transverse incision was made in the posterior vaginal wall, and the specimen was extracted via the vagina. Age, operative time, intraoperative hemorrhage, pathological data of the tumor, postoperative hospital stay, and postoperative complications were recorded and analyzed. All operations were performed laparoscopically, by the same team of surgeons.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 67.5 ± 7.7 years. Mean BMI was 23.7 ± 1.7 kg/m². The operative time ranged between 312 and 460 min. The intraoperative blood loss ranged from 100 to 600 ml. The average hospital stay of all patients was 9.9 ± 2.2 days; 5 out of 8 patients (62.5%) had postoperative complications, including postoperative pancreatic fistula, delayed gastric emptying, and postpancreatectomy hemorrhage. No patient developed short-term complications due to vaginal extraction of specimens. All patients underwent R0 resection.

CONCLUSION

Transvaginal specimen extraction is a practicable method for laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy. By adhering to correct operation specifications and selecting patients with appropriate indications for natural orifice specimen extraction, this technique was safe and beneficial to selected female patients with pancreaticoduodenal tumors.

Comparison of Perioperative and Oncological Outcomes of Hybrid and Totally Laparoscopic Pancreatoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) is a complicated procedure accompanied with high morbidity. Hybrid LPD is usually used as an alternative/transitional approach. This study aimed to prove whether the hybrid procedure is a safe procedure during a surgeon's learning curve of LPD. MATERIAL AND METHODS There were 48 hybrid LPD patients and 62 TLPD patients selected from January 2016 to December 2018; their demographics, surgical outcomes, and oncological data were retrospectively collected. Patient follow-up for the study continued until February 2020. RESULTS Patient demographics and baseline parameters were well balanced between the 2 groups. Intraoperative conditions, overall operation time was shorter for TLPD compared to hybrid LPD (407.79 minutes versus 453.29 minutes, respectively; P=0.035) and blood loss was less in TLPD patients compared to hybrid LPD patients (100.00 mL versus 300.00 mL, respectively; P<0.001). There was no difference in transfusion rates between the 2 groups (hybrid LPD 16.7% versus TLPD 4.8%; P=0.084). Postoperative outcomes and intensive care unit (ICU) stay was longer in the hybrid LPD patient group (hybrid LPD 1-day versus TLPD 0-day, P=0.002) and postoperative hospital stay was similar between the 2 groups (P=0.503). Reoperation rates, in-hospital, 30-day mortality, and 90-day mortality rates were comparable between the 2 groups (P=0.276, 1.000, 1.000, 0.884, respectively). Surgical site infection, bile leak, Clavien-Dindo classification (CDC) ≥3, delayed gastric emptying, grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistulae, and grade B/C post pancreatectomy hemorrhage were not different between the 2 groups (P=0.526, 0.463, 0.220, 0.089, 0.165, 0.757, respectively). The tumor size, margin status, lymph nodes harvested, and metastasis were similar in the 2 groups (P=0.767, 0.438, 0.414, 0.424, respectively). In addition, the median overall survival rates were comparable between the 2 groups (hybrid LPD 29.0 months versus TLPD 30.0 months, P=0.996) as were the progression-free survival rates (hybrid LPD 11.0 months versus TLPD 12.0 months, P=0.373) CONCLUSIONS Hybrid LPD was comparable to TLPD. Hybrid LPD could be performed safely when some surgeons first started LPD (during the operative learning curve), while for skilled surgeons, TLPD could be applied initially.