Is pancreaticodoudenectomy with vascular resection a safe procedure in developing country? Early outcomes and review of national literature

Preoperative Endoscopic Biliary Stenting Before Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Does Timing Matter?

Background. The role of preoperative biliary stenting (PBS) before pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) in patients with obstructive jaundice is debatable. The objective of the current study was to assess PD outcomes after upfront surgery or PBS and determine the impact of stent to surgery duration on PD outcomes. Methods. We reviewed patients who underwent PD between 2011 and 2019. Patients were grouped based on whether they underwent upfront surgery (n = 67) or PBS (n = 66). We further assessed outcomes based on stent to surgery duration. Results. There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality (3% vs. 2.9%, P = 1), 90-day mortality (7.5% vs. 4.4%, P = .4), and Grade B-C pancreatic fistula rates (7.5% vs. 4.4%, P = .4) in the PBS and upfront surgery groups, respectively. A significant increase in wound infections (22.7% vs. 7.4%, P = .01) and readmissions (10.6% vs. 0, P = .006) was seen in the PBS group. The highest rate of wound infection was seen when stent to surgery duration was 4-6 weeks (41.6%). The wound infection rates in the upfront surgery group, high-risk PBS group (4-6 weeks), and low-risk PBS group were 5/67(7.4%), 5/12(41.6%), and 7/36(19.4%), respectively (P = .008). Conclusions. PBS increases postoperative wound infections when compared with upfront surgery. Patients operated between 4 and 6 weeks after stenting have the highest rate of wound infection.

Best achievable results need territorial familiarity: Impact of living donor liver transplant experience on outcomes after pancreaticodoudenectomy

Background

Recently, benchmarks for pancreatic surgery have been proposed. Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is thought to have a positive impact on PD outcomes. The objective of the current study was to determine if the proposed benchmark cutoffs are achievable in an LDLT program with low to medium volumes for PD.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent PD between 2011 and 2018 (N = 116). Their outcomes were assessed and compared with benchmark cutoffs for pancreatic surgery based on results from high volume centers (HVC) for PD. During the same period, 759 LDLTs were performed in our center. Outcomes were further compared based on whether PD was performed in low volume (≤76/year) (Group 1) or high volume (>76/year) (Group 2) transplant years.

Results

Out off 20 benchmarks, 15 (75%) were met while 19/20 (95%) were within range reported from HVC-PD. Benchmarks remained within range for biochemical leak (15.5% vs 13%, 1.3–22.7%), grade 4 complications (12.1% vs 5%, (0–14%), hospital mortality (3.8% vs 1.6%, 0–4%) and failure to rescue (24.4% vs 9%, 0–25%). There was a significant reduction in blood transfusion rate (69% vs 39.5%, P = 0.003) in group 2 while patients with at least one complication (45.5% vs 66.7%) (P = 0.04), median hospital stay (9 vs 11, P = 0.004), and median comprehensive complication index (CCI) (0 vs 20.9, P = 0.005) increased.

Conclusion

Best achievable results for PD can be reproduced in LDLT programs with low to moderate PD volumes. Transition to a high volume transplant center does not confer additional improvement in outcomes.

∙

This is the first study to objectively assess impact of living donor liver transplant (LDLT) experience on pancreaticdoudenectomy (PD) outcomes.

∙Even with low to moderate PD volumes, LDLT programs can achieve outcomes comparbale to high volume centers.

∙Transition from low to high annual LDLT volume does not confer any additional improvement in PD outcomes.

Extended pancreatectomy as defined by the ISGPS: useful in selected cases of pancreatic cancer but invaluable in other complex pancreatic tumors

PURPOSE

Extended pancreatectomy aimed at R0 resection of pancreatic tumors with adjacent vessel and organ involvement may be the only option for cure. This study was done with an objective to analyze the short- and long-term outcomes of extended pancreatic resections.

METHODS

All pancreatectomies performed between 2006 and 2015 were included. The pancreatectomies were classified as standard or extended, as per the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery. All surgical complications and terminologies were according to Clavien-Dindo classification and International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery guidelines. Morbidity and mortality were primary outcomes and disease-free survival was a secondary outcome.

RESULTS

Sixty-three extended and 620 standard pancreatectomies were performed. Major morbidity (Clavien grades III, IV and V) (37 vs. 29%, p = 0.21) and mortality (6 vs. 4%, p = 0.3) for extended pancreatectomies were comparable to those for standard pancreatectomies. Blood loss > 855 ml, need for blood transfusion, and tumor size were independent risk factors for morbidity, and the latter two for mortality. Standard pancreatectomies were associated with better 3-year disease-free survival than extended pancreatectomies (67 vs. 41%, p < 0.001). Extended pancreatectomies resulted in a significantly better median disease-free survival for non-pancreatic adenocarcinoma vs. pancreatic adenocarcinoma (33.3 vs. 9.5 months, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Extended pancreatectomies resulted in similar peri-operative morbidity and mortality compared to standard pancreatectomies. Although the survival of patients undergoing these complex procedures is inferior to standard pancreatectomies, they should be undertaken not only in selected cases of pancreatic cancer but even more so in other complex pancreatic tumors.

Survival advantage with para aortic lymphadenectomy in peri-ampullary cancer: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Metastatic para aortic lymph nodes (PALN) in patients with peri ampullary cancer entail poor prognosis. Role of curative surgery in these patients remains debatable. The objective of the current study was to evaluate outcome after extended pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) in patients with and without positive PALN.

METHODS

We reviewed 65 patients who underwent extended PD with PALN removal between 2011 and 2014. Patients were divided into two groups; those with positive PALN and those without. Patients were sub classified for pancreatic and non-pancreatic cancer. Outcome was determined based on median and estimated 3 year overall survival.

RESULTS

Median age was 57 (32-85) years. PALN were involved in 15 (23%) patients. Overall 3 year survival for patients with and without positive PALN was 60% and 54% (P = 0.7). Significant difference in survival was present between patients with pancreatic cancer and positive PALN [9 (3-12) months] versus non-pancreatic cancers with positive PALN [17.5 (13-38) months] (P = 0.02). Four out of five patients with pancreatic cancer and positive PALN had survival >6 months and 3 out of these 5 patients were alive at the last follow up.

CONCLUSION

Curative surgery may benefit some patients with pancreatic cancer and positive PALN and should be considered selectively.