Enucleation for branch duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Minimally invasive enucleation of pancreatic tumors: The main pancreatic duct is no longer a restricted area

Background

Tumors involving the main pancreatic duct (MPD) used to be a contraindication for enucleation.

Methods

Clinical data of consecutive patients with pancreatic tumors who received laparoscopic or robotic enucleation (LEN or REN) between January 2019 and December 2021 at Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center were analyzed.

Results

Ninety-six patients were included in the analysis, with 55 in the LEN group and 41 in the REN group, and no conversion to laparotomy. Most tumors were located in the head of pancreas (71.9 %). The tumor diameter (3.1 vs. 1.9 cm) was larger, and more cystic tumors (92.7 % vs. 56.4 %) and more tumors involving the MPD (34.1 % vs. 3.6 %) were observed in the REN group. MPD support tube insertion was performed in 15 cases, with 11 in the REN group and 4 in the LEN group. The incidence of biochemical and grade B postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) was both 46.9 %, and no grade C POPF occurred. Among the 45 patients with grade B POPF, 28 cases (62.2 %) were due to carrying drainage tube >3 weeks without additional treatment, and only 4 cases required invasive treatment. For patients with MPD support tube implantation (n = 15), support tube fall-offs were observed in 12 cases, 2 patients had MPD dilatation, and no MPD stricture, stone formation or pancreatic atrophy was observed during follow-up.

Conclusions

The incidence of POPF was high but still controllable without serious complications after minimally invasive enucleation. The MPD is no longer a restricted area, and the robotic system has advantages in handling complex enucleations.

Innovation in the Surgical Management of Pancreatic Cystic Neoplasms: Same Operations, Narrower Indications, and an Individualized Approach to Decision-Making

Historically, the management of pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCN) has been operative. Early intervention for premalignant lesions, including intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN) and mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCN), offers an opportunity to prevent pancreatic cancer-with potential decrement to patients' short-term and long-term health. The operations performed have remained fundamentally the same, with most patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy or distal pancreatectomy using oncologic principles. The role of parenchymal-sparing resection and total pancreatectomy remains controversial. We review innovations in the surgical management of PCN, focusing on the evolution of evidence-based guidelines, short-term and long-term outcomes, and individualized risk-benefit assessment.

Resektionsstrategien beim BD-IPMN - Enukleation oder onkologische Resektion?

Hintergrund Das maligne Potenzial und die chirurgische Behandlung intraduktaler papillärer muzinöser Neoplasien der Seitengänge der Bauchspeicheldrüse (BD-IPMNs) bleiben umstritten. Die Enukleation (EN) als parenchymsparende Resektion des Pankreas kann eine wertvolle Alternative zu Standardresektionen (SR), z. B. Whipple oder distale Pankreatektomie, für die Behandlung von BD-IPMNs darstellen, ihre Rolle ist jedoch noch unzureichend definiert. Ziel dieser Übersichtsarbeit ist es, Indikationen und postoperative Ergebnisse nach Pankreas-Enukleation im Vergleich zur Standardresektion (SR) zu vergleichen.

Methoden Es wurde eine selektive Literaturrecherche durchgeführt. Die postoperativen Kurz- und Langzeitergebnisse beider Operationsverfahren wurden ausgewertet.

Ergebnisse Die EN ist im Vergleich zur SR mit einer kürzeren Operationszeit und einem geringeren Blutverlust verbunden. Die chirurgische Gesamtmorbidität unterscheidet sich nicht zwischen den beiden Verfahren. Obwohl die EN weniger invasiv ist, stellt die Entwicklung einer Pankreasfistel die häufigste Komplikation nach EN dar, und in mehreren Studien wird über eine höhere Rate an Pankreasfisteln nach EN als nach SR berichtet. Die Unterschiede, bezogen auf die Pankreasfistel, werden zwischen den beiden Verfahren in High-Volume-Zentren abgemildert. Die EN ermöglicht im Vergleich zur SR öfter den Erhalt der exokrinen und endokrinen Funktion der Bauchspeicheldrüse, dies ist der wichtigste Vorteil dieses Verfahrens.

Schlussfolgerungen Die EN scheint eine sichere und wirksame Alternative in der Behandlung der Seitengang-IPMN mit geringem Risiko zu sein, die den Erhalt der endokrinen und exokrinen Funktion ermöglicht. Außerdem sind die postoperativen Komplikationen und Rezidivraten nach EN vergleichbar mit den wesentlich umfangreicheren chirurgischen Verfahren. Die EN der Bauchspeicheldrüse sollte jedoch von erfahrenen Chirurgen durchgeführt werden. Da es sich um ein nicht onkologisches Verfahren handelt, muss die Auswahl der Patienten sehr genau erfolgen, was die Bedeutung der Behandlung in Einrichtungen mit hohem Patientenaufkommen unterstreicht.

Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms of the Pancreas: A Review of Their Genetic Characteristics and Mouse Models

Simple Summary

Pancreatic cancer is one of the deadliest cancers with the lowest survival rate. Little progress has been achieved in prolonging the survival for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Hence, special attention should be paid to pre-cancerous lesions, for instance, an intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN). Here, we reviewed its genetic characteristics and the mouse models involving mutations in specific pathways, and updated our current perception of how this lesion develops into a precursor of invasive cancer.

Abstract

The intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) is attracting research attention because of its increasing incidence and proven potential to progress into invasive pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). In this review, we summarized the key signaling pathways or protein complexes (GPCR, TGF, SWI/SNF, WNT, and PI3K) that appear to be involved in IPMN pathogenesis. In addition, we collected information regarding all the genetic mouse models that mimic the human IPMN phenotype with specific immunohistochemistry techniques. The mouse models enable us to gain insight into the complex mechanism of the origin of IPMN, revealing that it can be developed from both acinar cells and duct cells according to different models. Furthermore, recent genomic studies describe the potential mechanism by which heterogeneous IPMN gives rise to malignant carcinoma through sequential, branch-off, or de novo approaches. The most intractable problem is that the risk of malignancy persists to some extent even if the primary IPMN is excised with a perfect margin, calling for the re-evaluation and improvement of diagnostic, pre-emptive, and therapeutic measures.

Risk of the Watch-and-Wait Concept in Surgical Treatment of Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasm

Importance

The natural history of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) remains uncertain. The inconsistencies among published guidelines preclude accurate decision-making. The outcomes and potential risks of a conservative watch-and-wait approach vs a surgical approach must be compared.

Objective

To provide an overview of the surgical management of IPMNs, focusing on the time of resection.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study was conducted in a single referral center; all patients with pathologically proven IPMN who received a pancreatic resection at the institution between October 2001 and December 2019 were analyzed. Preoperatively obtained images and the medical history were scrutinized for signs of progression and/or malignant features. The timeliness of resection was stratified into too early (adenoma and low-grade dysplasia), timely (intermediate-grade dysplasia and in situ carcinoma), and too late (invasive cancer). The perioperative characteristics and outcomes were compared between these groups.

Exposures

Timeliness of resection according to the final pathological findings.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The risk of malignant transformation at the final pathology.

Results

Of 1439 patients, 438 (30.4%) were assigned to the too early group, 504 (35.1%) to the timely group, and 497 (34.5%) to the too late group. Radiological criteria for malignant conditions were detected in 53 of 382 patients (13.9%), 149 of 432 patients (34.5%), and 341 of 385 patients (88.6%) in the too early, timely, and too late groups, respectively (P < .001). Patients in the too early group underwent more parenchyma-sparing resections (too early group, 123 of 438 [28.1%]; timely group, 40 of 504 [7.9%]; too late group, 5 of 497 [1.0%]; P < .001), while morbidity (too early group, 112 of 438 [25.6%]; timely group, 117 of 504 [23.2%]; too late group, 158 of 497 [31.8%]; P = .002) and mortality (too early group, 4 patients [0.9%]; timely, 4 [0.8%]; too late, 13 [2.6%]; P = .03) were highest in the too late group. Of the 497 patients in the too late group, 124 (24.9%) had a previous history of watch-and-wait care.

Conclusions and Relevance

Until the biology and progression patterns of IPMN are clarified and accurate guidelines established, a watch-and-wait policy should be applied with caution, especially in IPMN bearing a main-duct component. One-third of IPMNs reach the cancer stage before resection. At specialized referral centers, the risks of surgical morbidity and mortality are justifiable.

Central pancreatectomy: a comprehensive, up-to-date meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Central pancreatectomy (CP) is the alternative to distal pancreatectomy (DP) for specific pathologies of the mid-pancreas. However, the benefits of CP over DP remain controversial. This study aims to compare the two procedures by conducting a meta-analysis of all published papers.

METHODS

A systematic search of original studies comparing CP vs. DP was performed using PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases up to June 2018. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) checklist was followed.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were included (596 patients with CP and 1070 patients with DP). Compared to DP, CP was associated with significantly higher rates of overall and severe morbidity (p < 0.0001), overall and clinically relevant pancreatic fistula (p < 0.0001), postoperative hemorrhage (p = 0.02), but with significantly lower incidences of new-onset (p < 0.0001) and worsening diabetes mellitus (p = 0.004). Furthermore, significantly longer length of hospital stay (p < 0.0001) was observed for CP patients.

CONCLUSIONS

CP is superior to DP regarding the preservation of pancreatic functions, but at the expense of significantly higher complication rates and longer hospital stay. Proper selection of patients is of utmost importance to maximize the benefits and mitigate the risks of CP.