Landmark Series: Importance of Pancreatic Resection Margins

Impact of Adherence to Operative Standards and Stage-Specific Guideline-Recommended Therapy in Nonmetastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Achieving optimal surgical outcomes in pancreatic adenocarcinoma requires a combination of both curative-intent resection to oncologic standards and stage-specific neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy. This investigation sought to examine factors associated with receipt of standard-adherent surgery (SAS) and guideline-recommended therapy (GRT) and determine the impact of compliance on patient survival.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From the 2006-2016 National Cancer Database, 21,304 patients underwent resection for nonmetastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. SAS was defined as pancreatic resection with negative margins and ≥ 15 lymph nodes examined. Stage-specific GRT was defined by current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Multivariable models were used to determine predictors of adherence to SAS and GRT and prognostic impact on overall survival.

RESULTS

Overall, SAS was achieved in 39% and GRT in 65% of patients, but only 30% received both SAS and GRT. Increasing age, minority race, uninsured status, and greater comorbidities were associated with a decreased odds of receiving both SAS and GRT (all p < 0.05). SAS (HR 0.79; CI 0.76-0.81; p < 0.001) and GRT (HR 0.67; CI 0.65-0.69; p < 0.001) were each independently associated with a survival advantage. Receipt of both SAS and GRT was associated with significant improvement in median OS compared with receiving neither (2.2 years vs 1.1 years; p < 0.001) which was independently associated with a 78% increased risk of death (HR 1.78; CI 1.70-1.86; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite survival benefits associated with adherence to operative standards and receipt of guideline-recommended therapy, compliance remains poor. Future efforts must be directed toward improved education and implementation efforts around both operative standards and therapy guidelines.

Safety and efficacy of TRIANGLE operation applied in pancreatic surgery: a protocol of the systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic surgery is regarded as the only curative treatment for pancreatic cancer (PC). As the neoadjuvant therapy is applied widely nowadays, the proportion of patients with PC undergoing surgery also with locally advanced tumour findings has increased accordingly. Especially in these situations, a radical resection of all tumour tissues is challenging. A novel surgical strategy has been introduced recently to achieve this aim, namely the TRIANGLE operation which comprises the radical resection of all nerve and lymphatic tissue between coeliac artery, superior mesenteric artery and mesenteric-portal axis without including extended lymphadenectomy outside this area. Due to currently published studies, Triangle Operation is a safe and feasible procedure. However, this has not been systematically analysed to date. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate surgical and postoperative outcomes of Triangle Operation in pancreatic surgery.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Pubmed, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in the Cochrane Library will be searched from inception until 31 December 2022. This study will include all articles comparing Triangle Operation versus non-Triangle Operation in pancreatic surgery to assess outcomes. The primary endpoints will be R0 resection rate and 1-year overall survival. The secondary endpoints will be delayed gastric emptying, postoperative pancreatic fistula, post pancreatectomy haemorrhages and reoperation incidence, overall complications, mortality and 3-year overall survival. The study selection, study quality assessment, data extraction and critical appraisal will be carried out by two reviewers. Inter-reviewer disagreements will be evaluated by discussion with a third reviewer. Besides, a subgroup analysis will be conducted focused on robotic surgery, laparoscopic surgery and open surgery in detail. Additionally, the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations framework will be performed to evaluate the strength of evidence.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This systematic review and meta-analysis will not require ethical approval. Results will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021234721.