PurposeDistal pancreatectomy (DP) is associated with a high complication rate of 30-50% with postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) as a dominant contributor. Adequate risk estimation for POPF... Show morePurposeDistal pancreatectomy (DP) is associated with a high complication rate of 30-50% with postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) as a dominant contributor. Adequate risk estimation for POPF enables surgeons to use a tailor-made approach. Assessment of the risk of POPF prior to DP can lead to the application of preventive strategies. The current study aims to validate the recently published preoperative and intraoperative distal fistula risk score (D-FRS) in a nationwide cohort.MethodsThis nationwide retrospective Dutch cohort study included all patients after DP for any indication, all of whom were registered in the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (DPCA) database between 2013 and 2021. The D-FRS was validated by filling in the probability equations with data from this cohort. The predictive capacity of the models was represented by an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve.ResultsA total of 896 patients underwent DP of which 152 (17%) developed POPF of whom 144 grade B (95%) and 8 grade C (5%). The preoperative D-FRS, consisting of the variables pancreatic neck thickness and pancreatic duct diameter, showed an AUROC of 0.73 (95%CI 0.68-0.78). The intraoperative D-FRS, comprising pancreatic neck, duct diameter, BMI, operating time, and soft pancreatic aspect, showed an AUROC of 0.69 (95%CI 0.64-0.74).ConclusionThe current study is the first nationwide validation of the preoperative and intraoperative D-FRS showing acceptable distinguishing capacity for only the preoperative D-FRS for POPF. Therefore, the preoperative score could improve prevention and mitigation strategies such as drain management, which is currently investigated in the multicenter PANDORINA trial. Show less
Zwart, M.J.W.; Broek, B. van den; Graaf, N. de; Suurmeijer, J.A.; Augustinus, S.; Riele, W.W. te; ... ; Dutch Pancreatic Canc Grp 2023
Objective: To assess the feasibility, proficiency, and mastery learning curves for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) in "second-generation" RPD centers following a multicenter training program... Show moreObjective: To assess the feasibility, proficiency, and mastery learning curves for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) in "second-generation" RPD centers following a multicenter training program adhering to the IDEAL framework.Background: The long learning curves for RPD reported from "pioneering" expert centers may discourage centers interested in starting an RPD program. However, the feasibility, proficiency, and mastery learning curves may be shorter in "second-generation" centers that participated in dedicated RPD training programs, although data are lacking. We report on the learning curves for RPD in "second-generation" centers trained in a dedicated nationwide program.Methods: Post hoc analysis of all consecutive patients undergoing RPD in 7 centers that participated in the LAELAPS-3 training program, each with a minimum annual volume of 50 pancreatoduodenectomies, using the mandatory Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (March 2016-December 2021). Cumulative sum analysis determined cutoffs for the 3 learning curves: operative time for the feasibility (1) risk-adjusted major complication (Clavien-Dindo grade >= III) for the proficiency, (2) and textbook outcome for the mastery, (3) learning curve. Outcomes before and after the cutoffs were compared for the proficiency and mastery learning curves. A survey was used to assess changes in practice and the most valued "lessons learned."Results: Overall, 635 RPD were performed by 17 trained surgeons, with a conversion rate of 6.6% (n=42). The median annual volume of RPD per center was 22.56.8. From 2016 to 2021, the nationwide annual use of RPD increased from 0% to 23% whereas the use of laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy decreased from 15% to 0%. The rate of major complications was 36.9% (n=234), surgical site infection 6.3% (n=40), postoperative pancreatic fistula (grade B/C) 26.9% (n=171), and 30-day/in-hospital mortality 3.5% (n=22). Cutoffs for the feasibility, proficiency, and mastery learning curves were reached at 15, 62, and 84 RPD. Major morbidity and 30-day/in-hospital mortality did not differ significantly before and after the cutoffs for the proficiency and mastery learning curves. Previous experience in laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy shortened the feasibility (-12 RPDs, -44%), proficiency (-32 RPDs, -34%), and mastery phase learning curve (-34 RPDs, -23%), but did not improve clinical outcome.Conclusions: The feasibility, proficiency, and mastery learning curves for RPD at 15, 62, and 84 procedures in "second-generation" centers after a multicenter training program were considerably shorter than previously reported from "pioneering" expert centers. The learning curve cutoffs and prior laparoscopic experience did not impact major morbidity and mortality. These findings demonstrate the safety and value of a nationwide training program for RPD in centers with sufficient volume. Show less
Background: Due to centralization of pancreatic surgery, patients with pancreatic cancer are treated in pancreatic cancer networks, composed of referring hospitals (Spokes) and an expert center ... Show moreBackground: Due to centralization of pancreatic surgery, patients with pancreatic cancer are treated in pancreatic cancer networks, composed of referring hospitals (Spokes) and an expert center (Hub). This study aimed to investigate I) how pancreatic cancer networks are organized and II) evaluated by involved clinicians.Methods: Two online surveys were sent out between January-May 2022. Part I was sent out to the surgical network directors of all hospitals of the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group (DPCG). Part II was sent out to all involved clinicians in the Hubs-and-Spokes networks. Results: There was a large variety between the 15 networks concerning number of affiliated Spokes (1-7), annual pancreatoduodenectomies (20-129), and use of a service level agreement (SLA) (40%). More Spoke clinicians considered the Spoke the best location for diagnostic workup (74% vs 36%, P < 0.001). Only 30% of Spoke clinicians attended the Hubs multidisciplinary team meeting frequently. More Hub clinicians thought that exchange of patient information should be improved (37% vs 51%, P = 0.005).Conclusion: A large variety in Dutch pancreatic cancer networks was observed concerning number of affiliated Spokes, use of SLAs, and logistic aspects of network care. Improvement of network care concern agreements on diagnostic workup, use of SLA, Spoke participation in the MDT, and patient information exchange. Show less
Objective:To develop a fistula risk score for auditing, to be able to compare postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreatoduodenectomy among hospitals. Background:For proper comparisons... Show moreObjective:To develop a fistula risk score for auditing, to be able to compare postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreatoduodenectomy among hospitals. Background:For proper comparisons of outcomes in surgical audits, case-mix variation should be accounted for. Methods:This study included consecutive patients after pancreatoduodenectomy from the mandatory nationwide Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. Derivation of the score was performed with the data from 2014 to 2018 and validation with 2019 to 2020 data. The primary endpoint of the study was POPF (grade B or C). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed for case-mix adjustment of known risk factors. Results:In the derivation cohort, 3271 patients were included, of whom 479 (14.6%) developed POPF. Male sex [odds ratio (OR)=1.34; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.09-1.66], higher body mass index (OR=1.07; 95% CI: 1.05-1.10), a final diagnosis other than pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma/pancreatitis (OR=2.41; 95% CI: 1.90-3.06), and a smaller duct diameter (OR=1.43/mm decrease; 95% CI: 1.32-1.55) were independently associated with POPF. Diabetes mellitus (OR=0.73; 95% CI: 0.55-0.98) was independently associated with a decreased risk of POPF. Model discrimination was good with a C-statistic of 0.73 in the derivation cohort and 0.75 in the validation cohort (n=913). Hospitals differed in particular in the proportion of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma/pancreatitis patients, ranging from 36.0% to 58.1%. The observed POPF risk per center ranged from 2.9% to 25.4%. The expected POPF rate based on the 5 risk factors ranged from 11.6% to 18.0% among hospitals. Conclusions:The auditing fistula risk score was successful in case-mix adjustment and enables fair comparisons of POPF rates among hospitals. Show less
In two RCTs, comparing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) with upfront surgery in patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancers, CRT was associated with better survival.... Show moreIn two RCTs, comparing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) with upfront surgery in patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancers, CRT was associated with better survival. There was no difference in treatment effect between patients with a baseline CA19-9 level higher or lower than 500 units/ml, meaning that neoadjuvant CRT should not be withheld because of a low CA19-9 concentration.Background Guidelines suggest that the serum carbohydrate antigen (CA19-9) level should be used when deciding on neoadjuvant treatment in patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (hereafter referred to as pancreatic cancer). In patients with resectable pancreatic cancer, neoadjuvant therapy is advised when the CA19-9 level is 'markedly elevated'. This study investigated the impact of baseline CA19-9 concentration on the treatment effect of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancers. Methods In this post hoc analysis, data were obtained from two RCTs that compared neoadjuvant CRT with upfront surgery in patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancers. The effect of neoadjuvant treatment on overall survival was compared between patients with a serum CA19-9 level above or below 500 units/ml using the interaction test. Results Of 296 patients, 179 were eligible for analysis, 90 in the neoadjuvant CRT group and 89 in the upfront surgery group. Neoadjuvant CRT was associated with superior overall survival (HR 0.67, 95 per cent c.i. 0.48 to 0.94; P = 0.019). Among 127 patients (70, 9 per cent) with a low CA19-9 level, median overall survival was 23.5 months with neoadjuvant CRT and 16.3 months with upfront surgery (HR 0.63, 0.42 to 0.93). For 52 patients (29 per cent) with a high CA19-9 level, median overall survival was 15.5 months with neoadjuvant CRT and 12.9 months with upfront surgery (HR 0.82, 0.45 to 1.49). The interaction test for CA19-9 level exceeding 500 units/ml on the treatment effect of neoadjuvant CRT was not significant (P = 0.501). Conclusion Baseline serum CA19-9 level defined as either high or low has prognostic value, but was not associated with the treatment effect of neoadjuvant CRT in patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancers, in contrast with current guideline advice. Show less
Background: The necessity of the staging laparoscopy in patients with pancreatic cancer is still debated. The objective of this study was to assess the yield of staging laparoscopy for detecting... Show moreBackground: The necessity of the staging laparoscopy in patients with pancreatic cancer is still debated. The objective of this study was to assess the yield of staging laparoscopy for detecting occult metastases in patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.Method: This was a post-hoc analysis of the randomized controlled PREOPANC trial in which patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer were randomized between preoperative chemoradiotherapy or immediate surgery. Patients assigned to preoperative treatment underwent a staging laparoscopy prior to preoperative treatment according to protocol, to avoid unnecessary che-moradiotherapy in patients with occult metastatic disease.Results: Of the 246 included patients, 7 did not undergo surgery. A staging laparoscopy was performed in 133 patients (55.6%) and explorative laparotomy in 106 patients (4 4.4%). At staging laparoscopy, occult metastases were detected in 13 patients (9.8%); 12 liver metastases and 1 peritoneal metastasis. At direct explorative laparotomy, occult metastases were found in 9 patients (8.5%); 6 with liver metastases, 1 with peritoneal metastases, and 2 with metastases at multiple sites. One patient had peritoneal metastases at exploration after a negative staging laparoscopy. Patients with occult metastases were more likely to receive palliative chemotherapy if found with staging laparoscopy compared to laparotomy (76.9% vs. 30.0%, p 1/4 0.040).Conclusions: Staging laparoscopy detected occult metastases in about 10% of patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. These patients were more likely to receive palliative systemic chemotherapy compared to patients in whom occult metastases were detected with laparotomy. A staging laparoscopy is recommended before planned resection.(c) 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Show less
Background The causal pathway between complications after pancreatic cancer resection and impaired long-term survival remains unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of... Show moreBackground The causal pathway between complications after pancreatic cancer resection and impaired long-term survival remains unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of complications after pancreatic cancer resection on disease-free interval and overall survival, with adjuvant chemotherapy as a mediator. Methods This observational study included all patients undergoing pancreatic cancer resection in the Netherlands (2014-2017). Clinical data were extracted from the prospective Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. Recurrence and survival data were collected additionally. In causal mediation analysis, direct and indirect effect estimates via adjuvant chemotherapy were calculated. Results In total, 1071 patients were included. Major complications (hazards ratio 1.22 (95 per cent c.i. 1.04 to 1.43); P = 0.015 and hazards ratio 1.25 (95 per cent c.i. 1.08 to 1.46); P = 0.003) and organ failure (hazards ratio 1.86 (95 per cent c.i. 1.32 to 2.62); P < 0.001 and hazards ratio 1.89 (95 per cent c.i. 1.36 to 2.63); P < 0.001) were associated with shorter disease-free interval and overall survival respectively. The effects of major complications and organ failure on disease-free interval (-1.71 (95 per cent c.i. -2.27 to -1.05) and -3.05 (95 per cent c.i. -4.03 to -1.80) respectively) and overall survival (-1.92 (95 per cent c.i. -2.60 to -1.16) and -3.49 (95 per cent c.i. -4.84 to -2.03) respectively) were mediated by adjuvant chemotherapy. Additionally, organ failure directly affected disease-free interval (-5.38 (95 per cent c.i. -9.27 to -1.94)) and overall survival (-6.32 (95 per cent c.i. -10.43 to -1.99)). In subgroup analyses, the association was found in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy, but not in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy. Conclusion Major complications, including organ failure, negatively impact survival in patients after pancreatic cancer resection, largely mediated by adjuvant chemotherapy. Prevention or adequate treatment of complications and use of neoadjuvant treatment may improve oncological outcomes.This nationwide observational cohort study included 1052 patients and showed that major complications, including organ failure, have a negative impact on disease-free interval and overall survival after resection of pancreatic cancer. This effect was largely mediated by the use of adjuvant chemotherapy. Show less
Vissers, F.L.; Balduzzi, A.; Bodegraven, E.A. van; Hilst, J. van; Festen, S.; Abu Hilal, M.; ... ; Dutch Pancreatic Canc Grp 2023
Background. Surgical outcome after pancreatoduodenectomy for duodenal adenocarcinoma could differ from pancreatoduodenectomy for other cancers, but large multicenter series are lacking. This study... Show moreBackground. Surgical outcome after pancreatoduodenectomy for duodenal adenocarcinoma could differ from pancreatoduodenectomy for other cancers, but large multicenter series are lacking. This study aimed to determine surgical outcome in patients after pancreatoduodenectomy for duodenal adenocarcinoma, compared with other periampullary cancers, in a nationwide multicenter cohort. Methods. After pancreatoduodenectomy for cancer between 2014 and 2019, consecutive patients were included from the nationwide, mandatory Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. Patients were stratified by diagnosis. Baseline, treatment characteristics, and postoperative outcome were compared between groups. The association between diagnosis and major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher) was assessed via multivariable regression analysis. Results. Overall, 3113 patients, after pancreatoduodenectomy for cancer, were included in this study: 264 (8.5%) patients with duodenal adenocarcinomas and 2849 (91.5%) with other cancers. After pancreatoduodenectomy for duodenal adenocarcinoma, patients had higher rates of major complications (42.8% vs. 28.6%; p < 0.001), postoperative pancreatic fistula (International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery [ISGPS] grade B/C; 23.1% vs. 13.4%; p < 0.001), complication-related intensive care admission (14.3% vs. 10.3%; p = 0.046), re-interventions (39.8% vs. 26.6%; p < 0.001), in-hospital mortality (5.7% vs. 3.1%; p = 0.025), and longer hospital stay (15 days vs. 11 days; p < 0.001) compared with pancreatoduodenectomy for other cancers. In multivariable analysis, duodenal adenocarcinoma was independently associated with major complications (odds ratio 1.14, 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.27; p = 0.011). Conclusion. Pancreatoduodenectomy for duodenal adenocarcinoma is associated with higher rates of major complications, pancreatic fistula, re-interventions, and in-hospital mortality compared with patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for other cancers. These findings should be considered in patient counseling and postoperative management. Show less
Objective:To assess feasibility and safety of a multicenter training program in robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) adhering to the IDEAL framework for implementation of surgical innovation.... Show moreObjective:To assess feasibility and safety of a multicenter training program in robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) adhering to the IDEAL framework for implementation of surgical innovation. Background: Good results for RPD have been reported from single center studies. However, data on feasibility and safety of implementation through a multicenter training program in RPD are lacking. Methods: A multicenter training program in RPD was designed together with the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, including an online video bank, robot simulation exercises, biotissue drills, and on-site proctoring. Benchmark patients were based on the criteria of Clavien. Outcomes were collected prospectively (March 2016-October 2019). Cumulative sum analysis of operative time was performed to distinguish the first and second phase of the learning curve. Outcomes were compared between both phases of the learning curve. Trends in nationwide use of robotic and laparoscopic PD were assessed in the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. Results:Overall, 275 RPD procedures were performed in seven centers by 15 trained surgeons. The recent benchmark criteria for low-risk PD were met by 125 (45.5%) patients. The conversion rate was 6.5% (n = 18) and median blood loss 250ml [interquartile range (IQR) 150-500]. The rate of Clavien-Dindo grade >= III complications was 44.4% (n = 122), postoperative pancreatic fistula (grade B/C) rate 23.6% (n = 65), 90-day complication-related mortality 2.5% (n = 7) and 90-day cancer-related mortality 2.2.% (n = 6). Median postoperative hospital stay was 12 days (IQR 8-20). In the subgroup of patients with pancreatic cancer (n = 80), the major complication rate was 31.3% and POPF rate was 10%. Cumulative sum analysis for operative time found a learning curve inflection point at 22 RPDs (IQR 10-35) with similar rates of Clavien-Dindo grade >= III complications in the first and second phase (43.4% vs 43.8%, P = 0.956, respectively). During the study period the nationwide use of laparoscopic PD reduced from 15% to 1%, whereas the use of RPD increased from 0% to 25%. Conclusions:This multicenter RPD training program in centers with sufficient surgical volume was found to be feasible without a negative impact of the learning curve on clinical outcomes. Show less
Vissers, F.L.; Balduzzi, A.; Bodegraven, E.A. van; Hilst, J. van; Festen, S.; Abu Hilal, M.; ... ; Dutch Pancreatic Canc Grp 2022
Background: Prophylactic abdominal drainage is current standard practice after distal pancreatectomy (DP), with the aim to divert pancreatic fluid in case of a postoperative pancreatic fistula ... Show moreBackground: Prophylactic abdominal drainage is current standard practice after distal pancreatectomy (DP), with the aim to divert pancreatic fluid in case of a postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) aimed to prevent further complications as bleeding. Whereas POPF after pancreatoduodenectomy, by definition, involves infection due to anastomotic dehiscence, a POPF after DP is essentially sterile since the bowel is not opened and no anastomoses are created. Routine drainage after DP could potentially be omitted and this could even be beneficial because of the hypothetical prevention of drain-induced infections (Fisher, Surgery 52:205-22, 2018). Abdominal drainage, moreover, should only be performed if it provides additional safety or comfort to the patient. In clinical practice, drains cause clear discomfort. One multicenter randomized controlled trial confirmed the safety of omitting abdominal drainage but did not stratify patients according to their risk of POPF and did not describe a standardized strategy for pancreatic transection. Therefore, a large pragmatic multicenter randomized controlled trial is required, with prespecified POPF risk groups and a homogeneous method of stump closure.The objective of the PANDORINA trial is to evaluate the non-inferiority of omitting routine intra-abdominal drainage after DP on postoperative morbidity (Clavien-Dindo score >= 3), and, secondarily, POPF grade B/C.Methods/design: Binational multicenter randomized controlled non-inferiority trial, stratifying patients to high and low risk for POPF grade B/C and incorporating a standardized strategy for pancreatic transection. Two groups of 141 patients (282 in total) undergoing elective DP (either open or minimally invasive, with or without splenectomy). Primary outcome is postoperative rate of morbidity (Clavien-Dindo score >= 3), and the most relevant secondary outcome is grade B/C POPF. Other secondary outcomes include surgical reintervention, percutaneous catheter drainage, endoscopic catheter drainage, abdominal collections (not requiring drainage), wound infection, delayed gastric emptying, postpancreatectomy hemorrhage as defined by the international study group for pancreatic surgery (ISGPS) (Wente et al., Surgery 142:20-5, 2007), length of stay (LOS), readmission within 90 days, in-hospital mortality, and 90-day mortality.Discussion: PANDORINA is the first binational, multicenter, randomized controlled non-inferiority trial with the primary objective to evaluate the hypothesis that omitting prophylactic abdominal drainage after DP does not worsen the risk of postoperative severe complications (Wente etal., Surgery 142:20-5, 2007; Bassi et al., Surgery 161:584-91, 2017). Most of the published studies on drain placement after pancreatectomy focus on both pancreatoduodenectomy and DP, but these two entities present are associated with different complications and therefore deserve separate evaluation (McMillan et al., Surgery 159:1013-22, 2016; Pratt et al., J Gastrointest Surg 10:1264-78, 2006). The PANDORINA trial is innovative since it takes the preoperative risk on POPF into account based on the D-FRS and it warrants homogenous stump closing by using the same graded compression technique and same stapling device (de Pastena et al., Ann Surg 2022; Asbun and Stauffer, Surg Endosc 25:2643-9, 2011). Show less
Background: The prognostic value of four proposed modifications to the 8th American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM staging system has yet to be evaluated. This study aimed to validate five... Show moreBackground: The prognostic value of four proposed modifications to the 8th American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM staging system has yet to be evaluated. This study aimed to validate five proposed modifications. Methods: Patients who underwent pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma resection (2014-2016), as registered in the prospective Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit, were included. Stratification and prognostication of TNM staging systems were assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves, Cox proportional hazard analyses, and C-indices. A new modification was composed based on overall survival (OS). Results: Overall, 750 patients with a median OS of 18 months (interquartile range 10-32) were included. The 8th edition had an increased discriminative ability compared with the 7th edition {C-index 0.59 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-0.61) vs. 0.56 (95% CI 0.54-0.58)}. Although the 8th edition showed a stepwise decrease in OS with increasing stage, no differences could be demonstrated between all substages; stage IIA vs. IB (hazard ratio [HR] 1.30, 95% CI 0.80-2.09; p = 0.29) and stage IIB vs. IIA (HR 1.17, 95% CI 0.75-1.83; p = 0.48). The four modifications showed comparable prognostic accuracy (C-index 0.59-0.60); however, OS did not differ between all modified TNM stages (ns). The new modification, migrating T3N1 patients to stage III, showed a C-index of 0.59, but did detect significant survival differences between all TNM stages (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The 8th TNM staging system still lacks prognostic value for some categories of patients, which was not clearly improved by four previously proposed modifications. The modification suggested in this study allows for better prognostication in patients with all stages of disease. Show less
Background The number of elderly patients with pancreatic cancer is growing, however clinical data on the short-term outcomes, rate of adjuvant chemotherapy, and survival in these patients are... Show moreBackground The number of elderly patients with pancreatic cancer is growing, however clinical data on the short-term outcomes, rate of adjuvant chemotherapy, and survival in these patients are limited and we therefore performed a nationwide analysis. Methods Data from the prospective Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit were analyzed, including all patients undergoing pancreatic cancer resection between January 2014 and December 2016. Patients were classified into two age groups: <75 and >= 75 years. Major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher), 90-day mortality, rates of adjuvant chemotherapy, and survival were compared between age groups. Factors associated with start of adjuvant chemotherapy and survival were evaluated with logistic regression and multivariable Cox regression analysis. Results Of 836 patients, 198 were aged >= 75 years (24%) and 638 were aged <75 years (76%). Median follow-up was 38 months (interquartile range [IQR] 31-47). Major complications (31% vs. 28%; p = 0.43) and 90-day mortality (8% vs. 5%; p = 0.18) did not differ. Adjuvant chemotherapy was started in 37% of patients aged >= 75 years versus 69% of patients aged <75 years (p < 0.001). Median overall survival (OS) was 15 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 14-18) versus 21 months (95% CI 19-24; p < 0.001). Age >= 75 years was not independently associated with OS (hazard ratio 0.96, 95% CI 0.79-1.17; p = 0.71), but was associated with a lower rate of adjuvant chemotherapy (odds ratio 0.27, 95% CI 0.18-0.40; p < 0.001). Conclusions The rate of major complications and 90-day mortality after pancreatic resection did not differ between elderly and younger patients; however, elderly patients were less often treated with adjuvant chemotherapy and their OS was shorter. Show less
Smits, F.J.; Henry, A.C.; Besselink, M.G.; Busch, O.R.; Eijck, C.H. van; Arntz, M.; ... ; Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group 2022
Background: Early recognition and management of postoperative complications, before they become clinically relevant, can improve postoperative outcomes for patients, especially for high-risk... Show moreBackground: Early recognition and management of postoperative complications, before they become clinically relevant, can improve postoperative outcomes for patients, especially for high-risk procedures such as pancreatic resection. Methods: We did an open-label, nationwide, stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial that included all patients having pancreatic resection during a 22-month period in the Netherlands. In this trial design, all 17 centres that did pancreatic surgery were randomly allocated for the timing of the crossover from usual care (the control group) to treatment given in accordance with a multimodal, multidisciplinary algorithm for the early recognition and minimally invasive management of postoperative complications (the intervention group). Randomisation was done by an independent statistician using a computer-generated scheme, stratified to ensure that low-medium-volume centres alternated with high-volume centres. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment. A smartphone app was designed that incorporated the algorithm and included the daily evaluation of clinical and biochemical markers. The algorithm determined when to do abdominal CT, radiological drainage, start antibiotic treatment, and remove abdominal drains. After crossover, clinicians were trained in how to use the algorithm during a 4-week wash-in period; analyses comparing outcomes between the control group and the intervention group included all patients other than those having pancreatic resection during this wash-in period. The primary outcome was a composite of bleeding that required invasive intervention, organ failure, and 90-day mortality, and was assessed by a masked adjudication committee. This trial was registered in the Netherlands Trial Register, NL6671. Findings: From Jan 8, 2018, to Nov 9, 2019, all 1805 patients who had pancreatic resection in the Netherlands were eligible for and included in this study. 57 patients who underwent resection during the wash-in phase were excluded from the primary analysis. 1748 patients (885 receiving usual care and 863 receiving algorithm-centred care) were included. The primary outcome occurred in fewer patients in the algorithm-centred care group than in the usual care group (73 [8%] of 863 patients vs 124 [14%] of 885 patients; adjusted risk ratio [RR] 0middot48, 95% CI 0middot38-0middot61; p<0middot0001). Among patients treated according to the algorithm, compared with patients who received usual care there was a decrease in bleeding that required intervention (47 [5%] patients vs 51 [6%] patients; RR 0middot65, 0middot42-0middot99; p=0middot046), organ failure (39 [5%] patients vs 92 [10%] patients; 0middot35, 0middot20-0middot60; p=0middot0001), and 90-day mortality (23 [3%] patients vs 44 [5%] patients; 0middot42, 0middot19-0middot92; p=0middot029). Interpretation: The algorithm for the early recognition and minimally invasive management of complications after pancreatic resection considerably improved clinical outcomes compared with usual care. This difference included an approximate 50% reduction in mortality at 90 days. Show less
Objectives: To investigate the effect of preoperative chemoradiotherapy on surgical complications in patients after pancreatic resection for (borderline-)resectable pancreatic cancer. Summary of... Show moreObjectives: To investigate the effect of preoperative chemoradiotherapy on surgical complications in patients after pancreatic resection for (borderline-)resectable pancreatic cancer. Summary of Background Data: Preoperative chemoradiotherapy is increasingly used in patients with (borderline-)resectable pancreatic cancer. concerns have been raised about the potential harmful effect of any preoperative therapy on the surgical complication rate after pancreatic resection. Methods: An observational analysis was performed within the multicenter randomized controlled PREOPANC trial (April 2013-July 2017). The trial randomly assigned (1:1) patients to preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery and the remaining adjuvant chemotherapy or to immediate surgery, followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. The main analysis consisted of a per-protocol approach. The endpoints of the present analyses were the rate of postoperative complications. Results: This study included 246 patients from 16 centers, of whom 66 patients underwent resection after preoperative therapy and 98 patients after immediate surgery. No differences were found regarding major complications (37.9% vs 30.6%, P=0.400), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (9.1% vs 5.1%, P=0.352), delayed gastric emptying (21.2% vs 22.4%, P=0.930), bile leakage (4.5% vs 3.1%, P=0.686), intra-abdominal infections (12.1% vs 10.2%, P=0.800), and mortality (3.0% vs 4.1%, P=1.000). There was a significant lower incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula in patients who received preoperative chemoradiotherapy (0% vs 9.2%, P=0.011). Conclusions: Preoperative chemoradiotherapy did not increase the incidence of surgical complications or mortality and reduced the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula after resection in patients with (borderline-)resectable pancreatic cancer. Show less
Background: This study aimed to identify predictors for early and very early disease recurrence in patients undergoing resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) resection with and... Show moreBackground: This study aimed to identify predictors for early and very early disease recurrence in patients undergoing resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) resection with and without neoadjuvant therapy. Methods: Included were patients who underwent PDAC resection (2014-2016). Multivariable multinomial regression was performed to identify preoperative predictors for manifestation of recurrence within 3, 6 and 12 months after PDAC resection. Results: 836 patients with a median follow-up of 37 (interquartile range [IQR] 30-48) months and overall survival of 18 (IQR 10-32) months were analyzed. 670 patients (80%) developed recurrence: 82 patients (10%) < 3 months, 96 patients (11%) within 3-6 months and 226 patients (27%) within 6-12 months. LogCA 19-9 (OR 1.25 [95% CI 1.10-1.41]; P < 0.001) and neoadjuvant treatment (OR 0.09 [95% CI 0.01-0.68]; P = 0.02) were associated with recurrence < 3 months. LogCA 19-9 (OR 1.23 [95% CI 1.10-1.38]; P < 0.001) and 0-90 degrees venous involvement on CT imaging (OR 2.93 [95% CI 1.60-5.37]; P < 0.001) were associated with recurrence within 3-6 months. A Charlson Age Comorbidity Index > 4 (OR 1.53 [95% CI 1.09-2.16]; P = 0.02) and logCA 19-9 (OR 1.24 [95% CI 1.14-1.35]; P < 0.001) were related to recurrence within 6-12 months. Conclusion: This study demonstrates preoperative predictors that are associated with the manifestation of early and very early recurrence after PDAC resection. Knowledge of these predictors can be used to guide individualized surveillance and treatment strategies. Show less
