-
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery :... Nov 2023Pancreatic benign, cystic, and neuroendocrine neoplasms are increasingly detected and recommended for surgical treatment. In multiorgan resection pancreatoduodenectomy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Pancreatic benign, cystic, and neuroendocrine neoplasms are increasingly detected and recommended for surgical treatment. In multiorgan resection pancreatoduodenectomy or parenchyma-sparing, local extirpation is a challenge for decision-making regarding surgery-related early and late postoperative morbidity.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Libraries were searched for studies reporting early surgery-related complications following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and duodenum-preserving total (DPPHRt) or partial (DPPHRp) pancreatic head resection for benign tumors. Thirty-four cohort studies comprising data from 1099 patients were analyzed. In total, 654 patients underwent DPPHR and 445 patients PD for benign tumors. This review and meta-analysis does not need ethical approval.
RESULTS
Comparing DPPHRt and PD, the need for blood transfusion (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.10-0.41, p<0.01), re-intervention for serious surgery-related complications (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.31-0.73, p<0.001), and re-operation for severe complications (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.26-0.95, p=0.04) were significantly less frequent following DPPHRt. Pancreatic fistula B+C (19.0 to 15.3%, p=0.99) and biliary fistula (6.3 to 4.3%; p=0.33) were in the same range following PD and DPPHRt. In-hospital mortality after DPPHRt was one of 350 patients (0.28%) and after PD eight of 445 patients (1.79%) (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.10-1.09, p=0.07). Following DPPHRp, there was no mortality among the 192 patients.
CONCLUSION
DPPHR for benign pancreatic tumors is associated with significantly fewer surgery-related, serious, and severe postoperative complications and lower in-hospital mortality compared to PD. Tailored use of DPPHRt or DPPHRp contributes to a reduction of surgery-related complications. DPPHR has the potential to replace PD for benign tumors and premalignant cystic and neuroendocrine neoplasms of the pancreatic head.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy; Pancreas; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Duodenum; Neuroendocrine Tumors; Pancreatic Cyst
PubMed: 37670106
DOI: 10.1007/s11605-023-05789-4 -
Annals of Surgical Oncology Jul 2024Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) has a considerable surgical risk for complications and late metabolic morbidity. Parenchyma-sparing resection of benign tumors has the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Long-Term Oncologic Outcome following Duodenum-Preserving Pancreatic Head Resection for Benign Tumors, Cystic Neoplasms, and Neuroendocrine Tumors: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) has a considerable surgical risk for complications and late metabolic morbidity. Parenchyma-sparing resection of benign tumors has the potential to cure patients associated with reduced procedure-related short- and long-term complications.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane libraries were searched for studies reporting surgery-related complications following PD and duodenum-preserving total (DPPHRt) or partial (DPPHRp) pancreatic head resection for benign tumors. A total of 38 cohort studies that included data from 1262 patients were analyzed. In total, 729 patients underwent DPPHR and 533 PD.
RESULTS
Concordance between preoperative diagnosis of benign tumors and final histopathology was 90.57% for DPPHR. Cystic and neuroendocrine neoplasms (PNETs) and periampullary tumors (PATs) were observed in 497, 89, and 31 patients, respectively. In total, 34 of 161 (21.1%) patients with intraepithelial papillar mucinous neoplasm exhibited severe dysplasia in the final histopathology. The meta-analysis, when comparing DPPHRt and PD, revealed in-hospital mortality of 1/362 (0.26%) and 8/547 (1.46%) patients, respectively [OR 0.48 (95% CI 0.15-1.58); p = 0.21], and frequency of reoperation of 3.26 % and 6.75%, respectively [OR 0.52 (95% CI 0.28-0.96); p = 0.04]. After a follow-up of 45.8 ± 26.6 months, 14/340 patients with intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms/mucinous cystic neoplasms (IPMN/MCN, 4.11%) and 2/89 patients with PNET (2.24%) exhibited tumor recurrence. Local recurrence at the resection margin and reoccurrence of tumor growth in the remnant pancreas was comparable after DPPHR or PD [OR 0.94 (95% CI 0.178-5.34); p = 0.96].
CONCLUSIONS
DPPHR for benign, premalignant neoplasms provides a cure for patients with low risk of tumor recurrence and significantly fewer early surgery-related complications compared with PD. DPPHR has the potential to replace PD for benign, premalignant cystic and neuroendocrine neoplasms.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Neuroendocrine Tumors; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Duodenum; Organ Sparing Treatments; Pancreatic Cyst; Postoperative Complications; Prognosis; Pancreatectomy
PubMed: 38578553
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-024-15222-y -
European Journal of Radiology Open Dec 2023Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm of the bile ducts (IPMN-B) is a true pre-cancerous lesion, which shares common features with pancreatic IPMN (IPMN-P). While... (Review)
Review
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES
Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm of the bile ducts (IPMN-B) is a true pre-cancerous lesion, which shares common features with pancreatic IPMN (IPMN-P). While IPMN-P is a well described entity for which guidelines were formulated and revised, IPMN-B is a poorly described entity.We carried out a systematic review to evaluate the existing literature, emphasizing the role of MRI in IPMN-B depiction.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
PubMed database was used to identify original studies and case series that reported MR Imaging features of IPMN-B. The search keywords were "IPMN OR intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm OR IPNB OR intraductal papillary neoplasm of the bile duct AND Biliary OR biliary cancer OR hepatic cystic lesions". Risk of bias and applicability were evaluated using the QUADAS-2 tool.
RESULTS
884 Records were Identified through database searching. 12 studies satisfied the inclusion criteria, resulting in MR features of 288 patients. All the studies were retrospective. Classic features of IPMN-B are under-described. Few studies note worrisome features, concerning for an underlying malignancy. 50 % of the studies had a high risk of bias and concerns regarding applicability.
CONCLUSIONS
The MRI features of IPMN-B are not well elaborated and need to be further studied. Worrisome features and guidelines regarding reporting the imaging findings should be established and published. Radiologists should be aware of IPMN-B, since malignancy diagnosis in an early stage will yield improved prognosis.
PubMed: 37609049
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejro.2023.100515 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Jan 2024Patients who undergo resection for non-invasive IPMN are at risk for long-term recurrence. Further evidence is needed to identify evidence-based surveillance strategies... (Review)
Review
Patients who undergo resection for non-invasive IPMN are at risk for long-term recurrence. Further evidence is needed to identify evidence-based surveillance strategies based on the risk of recurrence. We performed a systematic review of the current literature regarding recurrence patterns following resection of non-invasive IPMN to summarize evidence-based recommendations for surveillance. Among the 61 studies reviewed, a total of 8779 patients underwent resection for non-invasive IPMN. The pooled overall median follow-up time was 49.5 months (IQR: 38.5-57.7) and ranged between 14.1 months and 114 months. The overall median recurrence rate for patients with resected non-invasive IPMN was 8.8% (IQR: 5.0, 15.6) and ranged from 0% to 27.6%. Among the 33 studies reporting the time to recurrence, the overall median time to recurrence was 24 months (IQR: 17, 46). Existing literature on recurrence rates and post-resection surveillance strategies for patients with resected non-invasive IPMN varies greatly. Patients with resected non-invasive IPMN appear to be at risk for long-term recurrence and should undergo routine surveillance.
PubMed: 38337524
DOI: 10.3390/jcm13030830