-
Surgery Sep 2014The lymph node (Ln) status of patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is an important predictor of survival. The survival benefit of extended...
Definition of a standard lymphadenectomy in surgery for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a consensus statement by the International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS).
BACKGROUND
The lymph node (Ln) status of patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is an important predictor of survival. The survival benefit of extended lymphadenectomy during pancreatectomy is, however, disputed, and there is no true definition of the optimal extent of the lymphadenectomy. The aim of this study was to formulate a definition for standard lymphadenectomy during pancreatectomy.
METHODS
During a consensus meeting of the International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery, pancreatic surgeons formulated a consensus statement based on available literature and their experience.
RESULTS
The nomenclature of the Japanese Pancreas Society was accepted by all participants. Extended lymphadenectomy during pancreatoduodenectomy with resection of Ln's along the left side of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) and around the celiac trunk, splenic artery, or left gastric artery showed no survival benefit compared with a standard lymphadenectomy. No level I evidence was available on prognostic impact of positive para-aortic Ln's. Consensus was reached on selectively removing suspected Ln's outside the resection area for frozen section. No consensus was reached on continuing or terminating resection in cases where these nodes were positive.
CONCLUSION
Extended lymphadenectomy cannot be recommended. Standard lymphadenectomy for pancreatoduodenectomy should strive to resect Ln stations no. 5, 6, 8a, 12b1, 12b2, 12c, 13a, 13b, 14a, 14b, 17a, and 17b. For cancers of the body and tail of the pancreas, removal of stations 10, 11, and 18 is standard. Furthermore, lymphadenectomy is important for adequate nodal staging. Both pancreatic resection in relatively fit patients or nonresectional palliative treatment were accepted as acceptable treatment in cases of positive Ln's outside the resection plane. This consensus statement could serve as a guide for surgeons and researchers in future directives and new clinical studies.
Topics: Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal; Humans; Lymph Node Excision; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Pancreaticoduodenectomy
PubMed: 25061003
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2014.06.016 -
Endocrine Reviews Apr 2019Pancreatic islet transplantation has become an established approach to β-cell replacement therapy for the treatment of insulin-deficient diabetes. Recent progress in... (Review)
Review
Pancreatic islet transplantation has become an established approach to β-cell replacement therapy for the treatment of insulin-deficient diabetes. Recent progress in techniques for islet isolation, islet culture, and peritransplant management of the islet transplant recipient has resulted in substantial improvements in metabolic and safety outcomes for patients. For patients requiring total or subtotal pancreatectomy for benign disease of the pancreas, isolation of islets from the diseased pancreas with intrahepatic transplantation of autologous islets can prevent or ameliorate postsurgical diabetes, and for patients previously experiencing painful recurrent acute or chronic pancreatitis, quality of life is substantially improved. For patients with type 1 diabetes or insulin-deficient forms of pancreatogenic (type 3c) diabetes, isolation of islets from a deceased donor pancreas with intrahepatic transplantation of allogeneic islets can ameliorate problematic hypoglycemia, stabilize glycemic lability, and maintain on-target glycemic control, consequently with improved quality of life, and often without the requirement for insulin therapy. Because the metabolic benefits are dependent on the numbers of islets transplanted that survive engraftment, recipients of autoislets are limited to receive the number of islets isolated from their own pancreas, whereas recipients of alloislets may receive islets isolated from more than one donor pancreas. The development of alternative sources of islet cells for transplantation, whether from autologous, allogeneic, or xenogeneic tissues, is an active area of investigation that promises to expand access and indications for islet transplantation in the future treatment of diabetes.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Humans; Islets of Langerhans Transplantation; Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Diseases
PubMed: 30541144
DOI: 10.1210/er.2018-00154 -
Surgery Feb 2017Recent literature suggests that chyle leak may complicate up to 10% of pancreatic resections. Treatment depends on its severity, which may include chylous ascites. No... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Recent literature suggests that chyle leak may complicate up to 10% of pancreatic resections. Treatment depends on its severity, which may include chylous ascites. No international consensus definition or grading system of chyle leak currently is available.
METHODS
The International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery, an international panel of pancreatic surgeons working in well-known, high-volume centers, reviewed the literature and worked together to establish a consensus on the definition and classification of chyle leak after pancreatic operation.
RESULTS
Chyle leak was defined as output of milky-colored fluid from a drain, drain site, or wound on or after postoperative day 3, with a triglyceride content ≥110 mg/dL (≥1.2 mmol/L). Three different grades of severity were defined according to the management needed: grade A, no specific intervention other than oral dietary restrictions; grade B, prolongation of hospital stay, nasoenteral nutrition with dietary restriction, total parenteral nutrition, octreotide, maintenance of surgical drains, or placement of new percutaneous drains; and grade C, need for other more invasive in-hospital treatment, intensive care unit admission, or mortality.
CONCLUSION
This classification and grading system for chyle leak after pancreatic resection allows for comparison of outcomes between series. As with the other the International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery consensus statements, this classification should facilitate communication and evaluation of different approaches to the prevention and treatment of this complication.
Topics: Anastomosis, Surgical; Anastomotic Leak; Chylous Ascites; Consensus; Female; Humans; Internationality; Male; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Postoperative Complications; Prognosis; Risk Assessment; Severity of Illness Index; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27692778
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2016.06.058 -
Current Diabetes Reports Oct 2015A total pancreatectomy and islet autotransplant (TPIAT) offers substantial pain relief and improved quality of life for children who are severely affected by chronic or... (Review)
Review
A total pancreatectomy and islet autotransplant (TPIAT) offers substantial pain relief and improved quality of life for children who are severely affected by chronic or recurrent acute pancreatitis and for whom the usual medical and endoscopic therapies have failed. The pancreas is entirely resected, and the pancreatic islets are isolated from the pancreas and infused back into the patient's liver. Because this is an autologous transplant, no immunosuppression is required. Over several months, the islets engraft in the liver; the patient is then slowly weaned off insulin therapy. Slightly more than 40 % of patients become and remain insulin independent, yet even among patients who remain on insulin, most have some islet function, permitting easier diabetes control. The majority of patients experience pain relief, with significant improvements in health-related quality of life. A TPIAT should be considered for children who are significantly disabled by chronic pancreatitis.
Topics: Child; Diabetes Mellitus; Humans; Islets of Langerhans Transplantation; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatitis; Quality of Life; Transplantation, Autologous
PubMed: 26275441
DOI: 10.1007/s11892-015-0639-9 -
HPB : the Official Journal of the... Mar 2017The first International conference on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection was arranged in conjunction with the annual meeting of the International... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The first International conference on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection was arranged in conjunction with the annual meeting of the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (IHPBA), in Sao Paulo, Brazil on April 19th 2016. The presented evidence and outcomes resulting from the session for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is summarized and addressed perioperative outcome, the outcome for cancer and patient selection for the procedure.
METHODS
A literature search was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to compare MIDP and open distal pancreatectomy. Patient selection was discussed based on plenary talks, panel discussions and a worldwide survey on MIDP.
RESULTS
Of 582 studies, 52 (40 observational and 12 case-matched) were included in the assessment for outcome for LDP (n = 5023) vs. ODP (n = 16,306) whereas 16 observational comparative studies were identified for cancer outcome. No randomized trials were identified. MIDP resulted in similar outcome to ODP with a tendency for lower blood loss and shorter hospital stay in the MIDP group.
DISCUSSION
Available evidence for comparison of MIDP to ODP is weak, although the number of studies is high. Observed outcomes of MIDP are promising. In the absence of randomized control trials, an international registry should be established.
Topics: Congresses as Topic; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Laparoscopy; Pancreatectomy; Patient Selection; Postoperative Complications; Risk Factors; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28215903
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2017.01.009 -
Updates in Surgery Sep 2016Total pancreatectomy is associated with short- and long-term high complication rate and without evidence of oncologic advantages. Several metabolic consequences are... (Review)
Review
Total pancreatectomy is associated with short- and long-term high complication rate and without evidence of oncologic advantages. Several metabolic consequences are co-related with the apancreatic state. The unstable diabetes related to the total resection of the pancreas expose the patients to short- and long-term life-threatening complications. Severe hypoglycemia is a short-term dangerous complication that can also cause patients' death. Chronic complications of severe diabetes (cardiac and vascular diseases, neuropathy, nephropathy, and retinopathy) are also cause of morbidity, mortality and worsening of quality of life. For this reasons the number of total pancreatectomies performed has certainly decreased over time. However, today there are still some indications for this kind of procedures. Chronic pancreatitis untreatable with conventional treatments, surgical treatment of precancerous pancreatic lesions, surgical treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer and the management of patients with extraordinary high-risk pancreatic texture after pancreaticoduodenectomy represent possible indications for total pancreatectomy and are analyzed in the present paper.
Topics: Decision Making; Humans; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Pancreatitis, Chronic; Quality of Life; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27605208
DOI: 10.1007/s13304-016-0388-6 -
Surgery Nov 2022This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to give an overview on the postoperative outcome after a minimally invasive (ie, laparoscopic and robot-assisted) central... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to give an overview on the postoperative outcome after a minimally invasive (ie, laparoscopic and robot-assisted) central pancreatectomy and open central pancreatectomy with a specific emphasis on the postoperative pancreatic fistula. For benign and low-grade malignant lesions in the pancreatic neck and body, central pancreatectomy may be an alternative to distal pancreatectomy. Exocrine and endocrine insufficiency occur less often after central pancreatectomy, but the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula is higher.
METHODS
An electronic search was performed for studies on elective minimally invasive central pancreatectomy and open central pancreatectomy, which reported on major morbidity and postoperative pancreatic fistula in PubMed, Cochrane Register, Embase, and Google Scholar until June 1, 2021. A review protocol was developed a priori and registered in PROSPERO as CRD42021259738. A meta-regression was performed by using a random effects model.
RESULTS
Overall, 41 studies were included involving 1,004 patients, consisting of 158 laparoscopic minimally invasive central pancreatectomies, 80 robot-assisted minimally invasive central pancreatectomies, and 766 open central pancreatectomies. The overall rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula was 14%, major morbidity 14%, and 30-day mortality 1%. The rates of postoperative pancreatic fistula (17% vs 24%, P = .194), major morbidity (17% vs 14%, P = .672), and new-onset diabetes (3% vs 6%, P = .353) did not differ significantly between minimally invasive central pancreatectomy and open central pancreatectomy, respectively. Minimally invasive central pancreatectomy was associated with significantly fewer blood transfusions, less exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, and fewer readmissions compared with open central pancreatectomy. A meta-regression was performed with a random effects model between minimally invasive central pancreatectomy and open central pancreatectomy and showed no significant difference for postoperative pancreatic fistula (random effects model 0.16 [0.10; 0.24] with P = .789), major morbidity (random effects model 0.20 [0.15; 0.25] with P = .410), and new-onset diabetes mellitus (random effects model 0.04 [0.02; 0.07] with P = .651).
CONCLUSION
In selected patients and in experienced hands, minimally invasive central pancreatectomy is a safe alternative to open central pancreatectomy for benign and low-grade malignant lesions of the neck and body. Ideally, further research should confirm this with the main focus on postoperative pancreatic fistula and endocrine and exocrine insufficiency.
Topics: Humans; Laparoscopy; Pancreas; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Postoperative Complications; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35987787
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2022.06.024 -
Pancreas Jul 2022Thrombotic complications after total pancreatectomy with islet autotransplantation (TPIAT) are common. However, the systemic changes to coagulation in the perioperative... (Observational Study)
Observational Study
OBJECTIVES
Thrombotic complications after total pancreatectomy with islet autotransplantation (TPIAT) are common. However, the systemic changes to coagulation in the perioperative period have not been well studied. Our objective was to evaluate the derangements in coagulation in the perioperative period for this procedure.
METHODS
This was a prospective observational study of patients undergoing elective TPIAT for chronic pancreatitis. Multiple methods of evaluating coagulation, including 2 viscoelastic assays and standard laboratory assays were obtained at defined intraoperative and postoperative intervals.
RESULTS
Fifteen patients were enrolled. Laboratory values demonstrated initial intraoperative hypercoagulability before significant systemic anticoagulation after islet infusion with heparin. Hypercoagulability is again seen at postoperative days 3 and 7. Subgroup analysis did not identify any major coagulation parameters associated with portal vein thrombosis formation.
CONCLUSIONS
Apart from the immediate period after islet cell and heparin infusion, patients undergoing TPIAT are generally hypercoagulable leading to a high rate of thrombotic complications. Portal vein thrombosis development had minimal association with systemic derangements in coagulation as it is likely driven by localized inflammation at the time of islet cell infusion. This study may provide the groundwork for future studies to identify improvements in thrombotic complications.
Topics: Anticoagulants; Heparin; Humans; Islets of Langerhans Transplantation; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatitis, Chronic; Thrombophilia; Transplantation, Autologous; Treatment Outcome; Venous Thrombosis
PubMed: 36099513
DOI: 10.1097/MPA.0000000000002085 -
Islets Dec 2023Patients with chronic pancreatitis (CP) often have severe and intractable abdominal pain, leading to decreased quality of life (QOL), inability to work or attend school,...
BACKGROUND
Patients with chronic pancreatitis (CP) often have severe and intractable abdominal pain, leading to decreased quality of life (QOL), inability to work or attend school, and increased health care costs due to repeated emergency room visits and hospitalizations.
METHODS
We evaluated the efficacy of total pancreatectomy and islet autotransplantation (TPIAT) in terms of pain control and QOL in CP patients treated at our center in Japan. To evaluate QOL, we used the Short-Form 36 Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2 Standard, Japanese), European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), and Quality of Life Questionnaire-Pancreatic Modification (QLQ-PAN28).
RESULTS
Between August 2016 and June 2019, we performed this procedure in 5 patients. All patients were followed up for 12 months and all transplanted islets were still functioning at the 1-year follow-up. The major adverse events were abdominal wall hemorrhage, intestinal obstruction, intra-abdominal abscess, and abdominal pain requiring hospitalization; no case had sequelae. No major complications were due to islet transplantation. Pain scores improved postoperatively in all patients. Three QOL item dimensions role-physical ( = 0.03125), general health perception ( = 0.03125) and vitality ( = 0.03125) in the SF-36 were significantly improved 12 months after TPIAT. Mean values of many other QOL items improved, though not significantly.
CONCLUSION
The QOL improvement after TPIAT for CP suggests its effectiveness in the Japanese population.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy; Transplantation, Autologous; Quality of Life; Japan; Treatment Outcome; Pancreatitis, Chronic; Islets of Langerhans Transplantation; Abdominal Pain
PubMed: 37087752
DOI: 10.1080/19382014.2023.2202092 -
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Aug 2023The systematic review is aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open distal pancreatectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The systematic review is aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open distal pancreatectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy.
METHOD
The MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, and clinical trial registries were systematically searched using the PRISMA framework. Studies of adults aged ≥ 18 year comparing laparoscopic and/or robotic versus open DP and/or PD that reported cost of operation or index admission, and cost-effectiveness outcomes were included. The risk of bias of non-randomised studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, while the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB2) tool was used for randomised studies. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for continuous variables.
RESULTS
Twenty-two studies (152,651 patients) were included in the systematic review and 15 studies in the meta-analysis (3 RCTs; 3 case-controlled; 9 retrospective studies). Of these, 1845 patients underwent MIS (1686 laparoscopic and 159 robotic) and 150,806 patients open surgery. The cost of surgical procedure (SMD 0.89; 95% CI 0.35 to 1.43; I = 91%; P = 0.001), equipment (SMD 3.73; 95% CI 1.55 to 5.91; I = 98%; P = 0.0008), and operating room occupation (SMD 1.17, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.24; I = 95%; P = 0.03) was higher with MIS. However, overall index hospitalisation costs trended lower with MIS (SMD - 0.13; 95% CI - 0.35 to 0.06; I = 80%; P = 0.17). There was significant heterogeneity among the studies.
CONCLUSION
Minimally invasive major pancreatic surgery entailed higher intraoperative but similar overall index hospitalisation costs.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Pancreatectomy; Retrospective Studies; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Pancreas; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Laparoscopy
PubMed: 37572127
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-03017-w