Top

Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology

Published in:

01-12-2017 | Pancreas (V Chandrasekhara, Section Editor)

Recent Advances in Pancreatic Cancer Surgery

Authors: Laura Maggino, MD, Charles M. Vollmer Jr., MD

Published in: Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology | Issue 4/2017

Opinion statement

Pancreatic cancer surgery is a continuously evolving field. Despite tremendous advances in perioperative outcomes, pancreatic resection is still associated with substantial morbidity, and mortality is not nil. Institutional caseload is a well-established determinant of patient outcomes, and centralization to experienced centers is essential to the safety and oncological appropriateness of the resection. Minimally invasive approaches are increasingly applied for pancreatic resection, even in cancer patients. Nevertheless, the level of evidence in this field remains low. Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy appears potentially beneficial towards some perioperative outcomes, although its oncological results remain incompletely studied. Data regarding perioperative and oncologic outcomes for minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (Whipple’s resection) is even less mature, but suggest that similar results as the open approach can be achieved in selected, high-volume centers. Conversely, its indiscriminate adoption by inexperienced surgeons and institutions has potential deleterious effects given its steep learning curve. Newer neoadjuvant treatment protocols display enhanced ability to downstage advanced tumors, increasing candidates for potentially curative surgery. Conversely, putative benefits of neoadjuvant treatment in patients with technically resectable tumors have not been reliably demonstrated and its optimal indications remain highly controversial.

• McMillan MT, Allegrini V, Asbun HJ, Ball CG, Bassi C, Beane JD, et al. Incorporation of procedure-specific risk into the ACS-NSQIP surgical risk calculator improves the prediction of morbidity and mortality after Pancreatoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 2017;265(5):978–86.Prediction of morbidity and mortality after pancreatoduodenectomy.

Malleo G, Vollmer CM. Postpancreatectomy complications and management. Surg Clin North Am. 2016;96(6):1313–36.CrossRefPubMed

McMillan MT, Vollmer CM. Predictive factors for pancreatic fistula following pancreatectomy. Langenbeck's Arch Surg. 2014;399(7):811–24.CrossRef

Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C, Sarr M, Abu Hilal M, Adham M, et al. The 2016 update of the international study group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 years after. Surgery. 2017;161(3):584–91.CrossRefPubMed

Datta J, Vollmer CM. Advances in surgical Management of Pancreatic Diseases. Gastroenterol Clin N Am. 2016;45(1):129–44.CrossRef

• Vollmer CM, Lewis RS, Hall BL, Allendorf JD, Beane JD, Behrman SW, et al. Establishing a quantitative benchmark for morbidity in pancreatoduodenectomy using ACS-NSQIP, the accordion severity grading system, and the postoperative morbidity index. Ann Surg. 2015;261(3):527–36.Quantification of the burden of complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy using the PMI.

Lee MK, Lewis RS, Strasberg SM, Hall BL, Allendorf JD, Beane JD, et al. Defining the post-operative morbidity index for distal pancreatectomy. HPB. 2014;16(10):915–23.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Datta J, Lewis RS, Strasberg SM, Hall BL, Allendorf JD, Beane JD, et al. Quantifying the burden of complications following total pancreatectomy using the postoperative morbidity index: a multi-institutional perspective. J Gastrointest Surg Off J Soc Surg Aliment Tract. 2015;19(3):506–15.CrossRef

McMillan MT, Christein JD, Callery MP, Behrman SW, Drebin JA, Kent TS, et al. Prophylactic octreotide for pancreatoduodenectomy: more harm than good? HPB. 2014;16(10):954–62.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

McMillan MT, Ecker BL, Behrman SW, Callery MP, Christein JD, Drebin JA, et al. Externalized stents for Pancreatoduodenectomy provide value only in high-risk scenarios. J Gastrointest Surg Off J Soc Surg Aliment Tract. 2016;20(12):2052–62.CrossRef

11.

• McMillan MT, Soi S, Asbun HJ, Ball CG, Bassi C, Beane JD, et al. Risk-adjusted outcomes of clinically relevant pancreatic fistula following Pancreatoduodenectomy: a model for performance evaluation. Ann Surg. 2016;264(2):344–52.Development of risk-adjusted model for performance evaluation after pancreatoduodenctomy.

12.

Finks JF, Osborne NH, Birkmeyer JD. Trends in hospital volume and operative mortality for high-risk surgery. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(22):2128–37.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Reames BN, Ghaferi AA, Birkmeyer JD, Dimick JB. Hospital volume and operative mortality in the modern era. Ann Surg. 2014;260(2):244–51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Kagedan DJ, Goyert N, Li Q, Paszat L, Kiss A, Earle CC, et al. The impact of increasing hospital volume on 90-day postoperative outcomes following Pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2017;21(3):506–15.CrossRefPubMed

15.

• Yoshioka R, Yasunaga H, Hasegawa K, Horiguchi H, Fushimi K, Aoki T, et al. Impact of hospital volume on hospital mortality, length of stay and total costs after pancreaticoduodenectomy: outcome-volume relationship for pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg. 2014;101(5):523–9.Demonstration of the outcome-volume relationship for pancreatic surgery in Japan.

16.

Shi H-Y, Wang S-N, Lee K-T. Temporal trends and volume-outcome associations in periampullary cancer patients: a propensity score–adjusted nationwide population-based study. Am J Surg. 2014;207(4):512–9.CrossRefPubMed

17.

•• Hata T, Motoi F, Ishida M, Naitoh T, Katayose Y, Egawa S, et al. Effect of hospital volume on surgical outcomes after Pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2016;263(4):664–72. Systematic review and metanalysis of the volume-outcome relationship for pancreaticoduodenectomy.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Amini N, Spolverato G, Kim Y, Pawlik TM. Trends in hospital volume and failure to Rescue for Pancreatic Surgery. J Gastrointest Surg. 2015;19(9):1581–92.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Swan RZ, Niemeyer DJ, Seshadri RM, Thompson KJ, Walters A, Martinie JB, et al. The impact of regionalization of pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer in North Carolina since 2004. Am Surg. 2014;80(6):561–6.PubMed

20.

•• Gooiker GA, Lemmens VEPP, Besselink MG, Busch OR, Bonsing BA, Molenaar IQ, et al. Impact of centralization of pancreatic cancer surgery on resection rates and survival. Br J Surg. 2014;101(8):1000–5. Positive effects of centralization of pancreatic cancer surgery in the Netherlands.CrossRefPubMed

21.

• van der Geest LGM, van Rijssen LB, Molenaar IQ, de Hingh IH, Groot Koerkamp B, Busch ORC, et al. Volume–outcome relationships in pancreatoduodenectomy for cancer. HPB. 2016;18(4):317–24.Hospital volume influences not only perioperative, but also oncological outcomes of pancreaticoduodenectomy for cancer.

22.

Urbach DR. Pledging to eliminate low-volume surgery. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(15):1388–90.CrossRefPubMed

23.

•• Nimptsch U, Krautz C, Weber GF, Mansky T, Grützmann R. Nationwide in-hospital mortality following pancreatic surgery in Germany is higher than anticipated. Ann Surg. 2016;264(6):1082–90. Provocative paper reporting high mortality rates after pancreatic surgery in Germany.CrossRefPubMed

24.

•• Krautz C, Nimptsch U, Weber GF, Mansky T, Grützmann R. Effect of hospital volume on in-hospital morbidity and mortality following pancreatic surgery in Germany. Ann Surg. 2017;1. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000002248 Follow up to the previous analysis, unraveling the volume-outcome relation for pancreatic surgery in Germany.

25.

Xia BT, Habib DA, Dhar VK, Levinsky NC, Kim Y, Hanseman DJ, et al. Early recurrence and omission of adjuvant therapy after Pancreaticoduodenectomy argue against a surgery-first approach. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(13):4156–64.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Tzeng C-WD, Cao HST, Lee JE, Pisters PWT, Varadhachary GR, Wolff RA, et al. Treatment sequencing for Resectable pancreatic cancer: influence of early metastases and surgical complications on multimodality therapy completion and survival. J Gastrointest Surg. 2014;18(1):16–25.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Balzano G, Capretti G, Callea G, Cantù E, Carle F, Pezzilli R. Overuse of surgery in patients with pancreatic cancer. A nationwide analysis in Italy. HPB. 2016;18(5):470–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. 2017 version 1.

29.

Lidsky ME, Sun Z, Nussbaum DP, Adam MA, Speicher PJ, Blazer DG. Going the Extra Mile: Improved Survival for Pancreatic Cancer Patients Traveling to High-volume Centers. Ann Surg. 2016;1.

30.

• Kutlu OC, Lee JE, Katz MH, Tzeng C-WD, Wolff RA, Varadhachary GR, et al. Open pancreaticoduodenectomy case volume predicts outcome of laparoscopic approach: a population-based analysis. Ann Surg. 2016 doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000002111.Interesting study on the American National Cancer Database, confirming that risks of postoperative mortality and suboptimal oncologic outcomes following pancreaticoduodenectomy are higher in low-volume hospitals, especially when a laparoscopic approach is used.

31.

Enomoto LM, Gusani NJ, Dillon PW, Hollenbeak CS. Impact of surgeon and hospital volume on mortality, length of stay, and cost of Pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2014;18(4):690–700.CrossRefPubMed

32.

•• Vollmer CM, Asbun HJ, Barkun J, Besselink MG, Boggi U, Conlon KCP, et al. Proceedings of the first international state-of-the-art conference on minimally-invasive pancreatic resection (MIPR). HPB. 2017;19(3):171–7. Proceedings of the first State-of-the-Art Conference on minimally invasive pancreatic resection.CrossRefPubMed

33.

•• Røsok BI, de Rooij T, van Hilst J, Diener MK, Allen PJ, Vollmer CM, et al. Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy. HPB. 2017;19(3):205–14. Current evidence on minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy from the first State-of-the-Art Conference on minimally invasive pancreatic resection.CrossRefPubMed

34.

•• Kendrick ML, van Hilst J, Boggi U, de Rooij T, Walsh RM, Zeh HJ, et al. Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy. HPB. 2017;19(3):215–24. Current evidence on pancreaticoduodenectomy from the first State-of-the-Art Conference on minimally invasive pancreatic resection.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Montagnini AL, Røsok BI, Asbun HJ, Barkun J, Besselink MG, Boggi U, et al. Standardizing terminology for minimally invasive pancreatic resection. HPB. 2017;19(3):182–9.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Conlon KC, de Rooij T, van Hilst J, Abu Hidal M, Fleshman J, Talamonti M, et al. Minimally invasive pancreatic resections: cost and value perspectives. HPB. 2017;19(3):225–33.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Hogg ME, Besselink MG, Clavien P-A, Fingerhut A, Jeyarajah DR, Kooby DA, et al. Training in minimally invasive pancreatic resections: a paradigm shift away from “see one, do one, teach one.”. HPB. 2017;19(3):234–45.CrossRefPubMed

38.

• Barkun J, Fisher W, Davidson G, Wakabayashi G, Besselink M, Pitt H, et al. Research considerations in the evaluation of minimally invasive pancreatic resection (MIPR). HPB. 2017;19(3):246–53.Current research perspectives from the first State-of-the-Art Conference on minimally invasive pancreatic resection.

39.

Butturini G, Damoli I, Crepaz L, Malleo G, Marchegiani G, Daskalaki D, et al. A prospective non-randomised single-center study comparing laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy. Surg Endosc. 2015;29(11):3163–70.CrossRefPubMed

40.

Chen S, Zhan Q, Chen J, Jin J, Deng X, Chen H, et al. Robotic approach improves spleen-preserving rate and shortens postoperative hospital stay of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a matched cohort study. Surg Endosc. 2015;29(12):3507–18.CrossRefPubMed

41.

Wright GP, Zureikat AH. Development of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery: an evidence-based systematic review of laparoscopic versus robotic approaches. J Gastrointest Surg. 2016;20(9):1658–65.CrossRefPubMed

42.

Gavriilidis P, Lim C, Menahem B, Lahat E, Salloum C, Azoulay D. Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy – the first meta-analysis. HPB. 2016;18(7):567–74.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

43.

de Rooij T, Klompmaker S, Hilal MA, Kendrick ML, Busch OR, Besselink MG. Laparoscopic pancreatic surgery for benign and malignant disease. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;13(4):227–38.CrossRefPubMed

44.

Mehrabi A, Hafezi M, Arvin J, Esmaeilzadeh M, Garoussi C, Emami G, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for benign and malignant lesions of the pancreas: It’s time to randomize. Surgery. 2015;157(1):45–55.CrossRefPubMed

45.

• de Rooij T, Jilesen AP, Boerma D, Bonsing BA, Bosscha K, van Dam RM, et al. A Nationwide comparison of laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy for benign and malignant disease. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;220(3):263–270.e1.Nationwide comparison of laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy for all indications in the Netherlands.

46.

Malleo G, Salvia R, Mascetta G, Esposito A, Landoni L, Casetti L, et al. Assessment of a complication risk score and study of complication profile in laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2014;18(11):2009–15.CrossRefPubMed

47.

Lee SY, Allen PJ, Sadot E, D’Angelica MI, DeMatteo RP, Fong Y, et al. Distal pancreatectomy: a single Institution’s experience in open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;220(1):18–27.CrossRefPubMed

48.

• Ricci C, Casadei R, Taffurelli G, Toscano F, Pacilio CA, Bogoni S, et al. Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2015;19(4):770–81Systematic review of 5 case-control studies comparing laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy for cancer.

49.

•• Sulpice L, Farges O, Goutte N, Bendersky N, Dokmak S, Sauvanet A, et al. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: time for a randomized controlled trial? Results of an all-inclusive National Observational Study. Ann Surg. 2015;262(5):868–74. Controversial paper reporting increased survival for patients undergoing laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for cancer.CrossRefPubMed

50.

van Hilst J, de Rooij T, Abu Hilal M, Asbun HJ, Barkun J, Boggi U, et al. Worldwide survey on opinions and use of minimally invasive pancreatic resection. HPB. 2017;19(3):190–204.CrossRefPubMed

51.

de Rooij T, Besselink MG, Shamali A, Butturini G, Busch OR, Edwin B, et al. Pan-European survey on the implementation of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery with emphasis on cancer. HPB. 2016;18(2):170–6.CrossRefPubMed

52.

• Klompmaker S, van Zoggel D, Watkins AA, Eskander MF, Tseng JF, Besselink MG, et al. Nationwide evaluation of patient selection for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy using American college of surgeons’ national quality improvement program. Ann Surg. 2016. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000001982.ACS-NSQIP analysis investigating current selection factors for open versus minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy.

53.

Bendersky N, Sulpice L, Farges O. Reply to the Letter to the Editor “Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: time for a Randomized Controlled Trial? Results of an All-inclusive National Observational Study.” Ann Surg. 2016. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000001709.

54.

Rehman S, John SKP, Lochan R, Jaques BC, Manas DM, Charnley RM, et al. Oncological feasibility of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for adenocarcinoma: a single-institution comparative study. World J Surg. 2014;38(2):476–83.CrossRefPubMed

55.

Shin SH, Kim SC, Song KB, Hwang DW, Lee JH, Lee D, et al. A comparative study of laparoscopic vs open distal pancreatectomy for left-sided ductal adenocarcinoma: a propensity score-matched analysis. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;220(2):177–85.CrossRefPubMed

56.

Hu M, Zhao G, Wang F, Zhao Z, Li C, Liu R. Laparoscopic versus open distal splenopancreatectomy for the treatment of pancreatic body and tail cancer: a retrospective, mid-term follow-up study at a single academic tertiary care institution. Surg Endosc. 2014;28(9):2584–91.CrossRefPubMed

57.

Sharpe SM, Talamonti MS, Wang E, Bentrem DJ, Roggin KK, Prinz RA, et al. The laparoscopic approach to distal pancreatectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma results in shorter lengths of stay without compromising oncologic outcomes. Am J Surg. 2015;209(3):557–63.CrossRefPubMed

58.

Stauffer JA, Coppola A, Mody K, Asbun HJ. Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. World J Surg. 2016;40(6):1477–84.CrossRefPubMed

59.

Adam MA, Choudhury K, Goffredo P, Reed SD, Blazer D, Roman SA, et al. Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy for cancer: short-term oncologic outcomes in 1733 patients. World J Surg. 2015;39(10):2564–72.CrossRefPubMed

60.

Tran Cao HS, Lopez N, Chang DC, Lowy AM, Bouvet M, Baumgartner JM, et al. Improved perioperative outcomes with minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: results from a population-based analysis. JAMA Surg. 2014;149(3):237.CrossRefPubMed

61.

•• Riviere D, Gurusamy KS, Kooby DA, Vollmer CM, Besselink MG, Davidson BR, et al. Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer. In: the Cochrane collaboration, editor. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;4:CD011391. Recent Cochrane review on laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for cancer.PubMed

62.

de Rooij T, Lu MZ, Steen MW, Gerhards MF, Dijkgraaf MG, Busch OR, et al. Minimally invasive versus open Pancreatoduodenectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative cohort and registry studies. Ann Surg. 2016;264(2):257–67.CrossRefPubMed

63.

Correa-Gallego C, Dinkelspiel HE, Sulimanoff I, Fisher S, Viñuela EF, Kingham TP, et al. Minimally-invasive vs open Pancreaticoduodenectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Surg. 2014;218(1):129–39.CrossRefPubMed

64.

Zhang H, Wu X, Zhu F, Shen M, Tian R, Shi C, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of minimally invasive versus open approach for pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surg Endosc. 2016;30(12):5173–84.CrossRefPubMed

65.

• Zureikat AH, Postlewait LM, Liu Y, Gillespie TW, Weber SM, Abbott DE, et al. A multi-institutional comparison of perioperative outcomes of robotic and open Pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 2016;264(4):640–9.Multi-institutional analysis showing that, after surpassing the learning curve, robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy can be performed with similar perioperative outcomes as the traditional open approach.

66.

• McMillan MT, Zureikat AH, Hogg ME, Kowalsky SJ, Zeh HJ, Sprys MH, et al. A propensity score–matched analysis of robotic vs open Pancreatoduodenectomy on incidence of pancreatic fistula. JAMA Surg. 2017;152(4):327–35.The first propensity score–matched analysis of robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy, demonstrating the non-inferiority of the robotic approach in terms of pancreatic fistula development and other major postoperative outcomes.

67.

•• Croome KP, Farnell MB, Que FG, Reid-Lombardo K, Truty MJ, Nagorney DM, et al. Total laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: oncologic advantages over open approaches? Ann Surg. 2014;260(4):633–40. High-volume institutional experience demonstrating shorter hospital stay and improved disease free survival for patients undergoing laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy.CrossRefPubMed

68.

•• Adam MA, Choudhury K, Dinan MA, Reed SD, Scheri RP, Blazer DG, et al. Minimally invasive versus open Pancreaticoduodenectomy for cancer: practice patterns and short-term outcomes among 7061 patients. Ann Surg. 2015;262(2):372–7. Controversial paper showing increased 30-day mortality for minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy at the national level.CrossRefPubMed

69.

Godhi SA, Nadi PR, Saluja S, Mishra P. “Minimally Invasive Versus Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Cancer. Practice Patterns and Short-term Outcomes Among 7061 Patients”. Ann Surg. 2015;1.

70.

• Nussbaum DP, Adam MA, Youngwirth LM, Ganapathi AM, Roman SA, Tyler DS, et al. Minimally invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy does not improve use or time to initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(3):1026–33.At a national level, minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy does not result in greater use or earlier initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy than the open approach.

71.

• Sharpe SM, Talamonti MS, Wang CE, Prinz RA, Roggin KK, Bentrem DJ, et al. Early National Experience with laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma: a comparison of laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy and open Pancreaticoduodenectomy from the National Cancer Data Base. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;221(1):175–84.Controversial analysis on the National Cancer Database asserting that the increased mortality observed after laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy is driven by a surmountable learning curve.

72.

• Wang M, Meng L, Cai Y, Li Y, Wang X, Zhang Z, et al. Learning curve for laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy: a CUSUM analysis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2016;20(5):924–35.Based on this study, a minimum of 40 cases is required for laparoscopic surgeons to attain technical competence in laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy.

73.

Speicher PJ, Nussbaum DP, White RR, Zani S, Mosca PJ, Blazer DG, et al. Defining the learning curve for team-based laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(12):4014–9.CrossRefPubMed

74.

Napoli N, Kauffmann EF, Palmeri M, Miccoli M, Costa F, Vistoli F, et al. The learning curve in robotic Pancreaticoduodenectomy. Dig Surg. 2016;33(4):299–307.CrossRefPubMed

75.

Boone BA, Zenati M, Hogg ME, Steve J, Moser AJ, Bartlett DL, et al. Assessment of quality outcomes for robotic Pancreaticoduodenectomy: identification of the learning curve. JAMA Surg. 2015;150(5):416.CrossRefPubMed

76.

•• Adam MA, Thomas S, Youngwirth L, Pappas T, Roman SA, Sosa JA. Defining a hospital volume threshold for minimally invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy in the United States. JAMA Surg. 2017;152(4):336–42. Hospital volume is significantly associated with improved outcomes from minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy, with a threshold of 22 cases per year.CrossRefPubMed

77.

Fong ZV, Chang DC, Ferrone CR, Lillemoe KD, Fernandez del Castillo C. Early National Experience with laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma: is this really a short learning curve? J Am Coll Surg. 2016;222(2):209.CrossRefPubMed

78.

McMillan MT, Malleo G, Bassi C, Sprys MH, Vollmer CM. Defining the practice of pancreatoduodenectomy around the world. HPB. 2015;17(12):1145–54.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

79.

Delitto D, Luckhurst CM, Black BS, Beck JL, George TJ, Sarosi GA, et al. Oncologic and perioperative outcomes following selective application of laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Periampullary malignancies. J Gastrointest Surg. 2016;20(7):1343–9.CrossRefPubMed

80.

Chen S, Chen J-Z, Zhan Q, Deng X-X, Shen B-Y, Peng C-H, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a prospective, matched, mid-term follow-up study. Surg Endosc. 2015;29(12):3698–711.CrossRefPubMed

81.

Song KB, Kim SC, Hwang DW, Lee JH, Lee DJ, Lee JW, et al. Matched case-control analysis comparing laparoscopic and open pylorus-preserving Pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with Periampullary tumors. Ann Surg. 2015;262(1):146–55.CrossRefPubMed

82.

Stauffer JA, Coppola A, Villacreses D, Mody K, Johnson E, Li Z, et al. Laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: long-term results at a single institution. Surg Endosc. 2016;31(5):2233-41. doi:10.1007/s00464-016-5222-1.

83.

Dokmak S, Ftériche FS, Aussilhou B, Bensafta Y, Lévy P, Ruszniewski P, et al. Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy should not be routine for resection of Periampullary tumors. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;220(5):831–8.CrossRefPubMed

84.

Croome KP, Farnell MB, Que FG, Reid-Lombardo K, Truty MJ, Nagorney DM, et al. Pancreaticoduodenectomy with major vascular resection: a comparison of laparoscopic versus open approaches. J Gastrointest Surg. 2015;19(1):189–94.CrossRefPubMed

85.

Tran TB, Dua MM, Worhunsky DJ, Poultsides GA, Norton JA, Visser BC. The first decade of laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy in the United States: costs and outcomes using the Nationwide inpatient sample. Surg Endosc. 2016;30(5):1778–83.CrossRefPubMed

86.

Kantor O, Talamonti MS, Sharpe S, Lutfi W, Winchester DJ, Roggin KK, et al. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for adenocarcinoma provides short-term oncologic outcomes and long-term overall survival rates similar to those for open pancreaticoduodenectomy. Am J Surg. 2017;213(3):512–5.CrossRefPubMed

87.

•• Von Hoff DD, Ervin T, Arena FP, Chiorean EG, Infante J, Moore M, et al. Increased survival in pancreatic cancer with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(18):1691–703. Seminal papers reporting the efficacy of new chemoterapic associations in the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer.

88.

•• Conroy T, Desseigne F, Ychou M, Bouché O, Guimbaud R, Bécouarn Y, et al. FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(19):1817–25. Seminal papers reporting the efficacy of new chemoterapic associations in the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer.CrossRefPubMed

89.

•• Suker M, Beumer BR, Sadot E, Marthey L, Faris JE, Mellon EA, et al. FOLFIRINOX for locally advanced pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and patient-level meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(6):801–10. Throughout review on FOLFIRINOX for locally advanced pancreatic cancer.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

90.

Kadera BE, Sunjaya DB, Isacoff WH, Li L, Hines OJ, Tomlinson JS, et al. Locally advanced pancreatic cancer: association between prolonged preoperative treatment and lymph-node negativity and overall survival. JAMA Surg. 2014;149(2):145.CrossRefPubMed

91.

Nitsche U, Wenzel P, Siveke JT, Braren R, Holzapfel K, Schlitter AM, et al. Resectability after first-line FOLFIRINOX in initially Unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer: a single-center experience. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(S3):1212–20.CrossRef

92.

Blazer M, Wu C, Goldberg RM, Phillips G, Schmidt C, Muscarella P, et al. Neoadjuvant modified (m) FOLFIRINOX for locally advanced Unresectable (LAPC) and borderline Resectable (BRPC) adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(4):1153–9.CrossRefPubMed

93.

Tachezy M, Gebauer F, Petersen C, Arnold D, Trepel M, Wegscheider K, et al. Sequential neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by curative surgery vs. primary surgery alone for resectable, non-metastasized pancreatic adenocarcinoma: NEOPA-a randomized multicenter phase III study (NCT01900327, DRKS00003893, ISRCTN82191749). BMC Cancer. 2014;14(1):411.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

94.

Malleo G, Maggino L, Marchegiani G, Feriani G, Esposito A, Landoni L, et al. Pancreatectomy with venous resection for pT3 head adenocarcinoma: perioperative outcomes, recurrence pattern and prognostic implications of histologically confirmed vascular infiltration. Pancreatology. Submitted;

95.

Christians KK, Evans DB. Additional support for neoadjuvant therapy in the Management of Pancreatic Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(6):1755–8.CrossRefPubMed

96.

Marchegiani G, Andrianello S, Malleo G, De Gregorio L, Scarpa A, Mino-Kenudson M, et al. Does Size Matter in Pancreatic Cancer?: Reappraisal of Tumour Dimension as a Predictor of Outcome Beyond the TNM. Ann Surg. 2016 17. [Epub ahead of print].

97.

Asare EA, Evans DB, Erickson BA, Aburajab M, Tolat P, Tsai S. Neoadjuvant treatment sequencing adds value to the care of patients with operable pancreatic cancer: cost-effectiveness of neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2016;114(3):291–5.CrossRefPubMed

98.

Desai NV, Sliesoraitis S, Hughes SJ, Trevino JG, Zlotecki RA, Ivey AM, et al. Multidisciplinary neoadjuvant management for potentially curable pancreatic cancer. Cancer Med. 2015;4(8):1224–39.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

99.

•• Mokdad AA, Minter RM, Zhu H, Augustine MM, Porembka MR, Wang SC, et al. Neoadjuvant therapy followed by resection versus upfront resection for Resectable pancreatic cancer: a propensity score matched analysis. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(5):515–22. Propensity score matched analysis in the NCDB reporting a significant survival benefit for neoadjuvant treatment in early stage pancreatic cancer.CrossRef

100.

Miura JT, Krepline AN, George B, Ritch PS, Erickson BA, Johnston FM, et al. Use of neoadjuvant therapy in patients 75 years of age and older with pancreatic cancer. Surgery. 2015;158(6):1545–55.CrossRefPubMed

101.

Cho SW, Tzeng C-WD, Johnston WC, Cassera MA, Newell PH, Hammill CW, et al. Neoadjuvant radiation therapy and its impact on complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer: analysis of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP). HPB. 2014;16(4):350–6.CrossRefPubMed

102.

Katz MHG, Fleming JB, Bhosale P, Varadhachary G, Lee JE, Wolff R, et al. Response of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer to neoadjuvant therapy is not reflected by radiographic indicators. Cancer. 2012;118(23):5749–56.CrossRefPubMed

103.

•• Ferrone CR, Marchegiani G, Hong TS, Ryan DP, Deshpande V, McDonnell EI, et al. Radiological and surgical implications of neoadjuvant treatment with FOLFIRINOX for locally advanced and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Ann Surg. 2015;261(1):12–7. Response to neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX is not predicted by cross-sectional imaging.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

104.

•• Boone BA, Steve J, Zenati MS, Hogg ME, Singhi AD, Bartlett DL, et al. Serum CA 19-9 response to neoadjuvant therapy is associated with outcome in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(13):4351–8. Ca 19-9 response to neoadjuvant therapy is associated with R0 resection rate, pathological response, and survival.CrossRefPubMed

105.

• Aldakkak M, Christians KK, Krepline AN, George B, Ritch PS, Erickson BA, et al. Pre-treatment carbohydrate antigen 19-9 does not predict the response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with localized pancreatic cancer. HPB. 2015;17(10):942–52.Two papers confirming the prognostic impact of the normalization of Ca 19-9 levels during neoadjuvant treatment.

106.

• Williams JL, Kadera BE, Nguyen AH, Muthusamy VR, Wainberg ZA, Hines OJ, et al. CA19-9 normalization during pre-operative treatment predicts longer survival for patients with locally progressed pancreatic cancer. J Gastrointest Surg. 2016;20(7):1331–42.Two papers confirming the prognostic impact of the normalization of Ca 19-9 levels during neoadjuvant treatment

107.

Tzeng C-WD, Balachandran A, Ahmad M, Lee JE, Krishnan S, Wang H, et al. Serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 represents a marker of response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. HPB. 2014;16(5):430–8.CrossRefPubMed

108.

Golcher H, Brunner TB, Witzigmann H, Marti L, Bechstein W-O, Bruns C, et al. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy with gemcitabine/cisplatin and surgery versus immediate surgery in resectable pancreatic cancer: results of the first prospective randomized phase II trial. Strahlenther Onkol. 2015;191(1):7–16.CrossRefPubMed

109.

Casadei R, Di Marco M, Ricci C, Santini D, Serra C, Calculli L, et al. Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy and surgery versus surgery alone in Resectable pancreatic cancer: a single-center prospective, randomized, controlled trial which failed to achieve accrual targets. J Gastrointest Surg. 2015;19(10):1802–12.CrossRefPubMed

110.

Fujii T, Yamada S, Murotani K, Kanda M, Sugimoto H, Nakao A, et al. Inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis of upfront surgery versus neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery for pancreatic adenocarcinoma with arterial abutment. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015;94(39):e1647.CrossRef

111.

Araujo RLC, Gaujoux S, Huguet F, Gonen M, D’Angelica MI, DeMatteo RP, et al. Does pre-operative chemoradiation for initially unresectable or borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma increase post-operative morbidity? A case-matched analysis. HPB. 2013;15(8):574–80.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

112.

• Cooper AB, Parmar AD, Riall TS, Hall BL, Katz MHG, Aloia TA, et al. Does the use of neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma increase postoperative morbidity and mortality rates? J Gastrointest Surg. 2015;19(1):80–7.This article shows that patients receiving surgery after neoadjuvant treatment are not at increased risk for postoperative morbidity, and might even have a lower risk for fistula when neoadjuvant radiation is administered.

113.

Verma V, Li J, Lin C. Neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer: systematic review of postoperative morbidity, mortality, and complications. Am J Clin Oncol. 2016;39(3):302–13.CrossRefPubMed

114.

•• Shubert CR, Bergquist JR, Groeschl RT, Habermann EB, Wilson PM, Truty MJ, et al. Overall survival is increased among stage III pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy compared to surgery first and adjuvant chemotherapy: an intention to treat analysis of the National Cancer Database. Surgery. 2016;160(4):1080–96. Neoadjuvant treatment positively impacts survival of stage III pancreatic cancer.CrossRefPubMed

115.

• Hackert T, Sachsenmaier M, Hinz U, Schneider L, Michalski CW, Springfeld C, et al. Locally advanced pancreatic cancer: neoadjuvant therapy with Folfirinox results in Resectability in 60% of the patients. Ann Surg. 2016;264(3):457–63.Large single-institutional experience on patients undergoing surgical exploration after neoadjuvant treatment, concluding that FOLFIRINOX is the most effective chemoterapic protocol.

116.

Rose JB, Rocha FG, Alseidi A, Biehl T, Moonka R, Ryan JA, et al. Extended neoadjuvant chemotherapy for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer demonstrates promising postoperative outcomes and survival. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(5):1530–7.CrossRefPubMed

117.

Mellon EA, Jin WH, Frakes JM, Centeno BA, Strom TJ, Springett GM, et al. Predictors and survival for pathologic tumor response grade in borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer treated with induction chemotherapy and neoadjuvant stereotactic body radiotherapy. Acta Oncol. 2017;56(3):391–7.CrossRefPubMed

118.

Mellon EA, Strom TJ, Hoffe SE, Frakes JM, Springett GM, Hodul PJ, et al. Favorable perioperative outcomes after resection of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer treated with neoadjuvant stereotactic radiation and chemotherapy compared with upfront pancreatectomy for resectable cancer. J Gastrointest Oncol. 2016;7(4):547–55.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

119.

Christians KK, Heimler JW, George B, Ritch PS, Erickson BA, Johnston F, et al. Survival of patients with resectable pancreatic cancer who received neoadjuvant therapy. Surgery. 2016;159(3):893–900.CrossRefPubMed

120.

Petrelli F, Coinu A, Borgonovo K, Cabiddu M, Ghilardi M, Lonati V, et al. FOLFIRINOX-based neoadjuvant therapy in borderline resectable or unresectable pancreatic cancer: a meta-analytical review of published studies. Pancreas. 2015;44(4):515–21.CrossRefPubMed

121.

Cloyd JM, Katz MHG, Prakash L, Varadhachary GR, Wolff RA, Shroff RT, et al. Preoperative therapy and Pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a 25-year single-institution experience. J Gastrointest Surg. 2017;21(1):164–74.CrossRefPubMed

122.

OʼReilly EM, Perelshteyn A, Jarnagin WR, Schattner M, Gerdes H, Capanu M, et al. A single-arm, nonrandomized phase II trial of neoadjuvant gemcitabine and Oxaliplatin in patients with Resectable pancreas adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg. 2014;260(1):142–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

123.

Cooper AB, Holmes HM. Des Bordes JKA, Fogelman D, Parker NH, lee JE, et al. role of neoadjuvant therapy in the multimodality treatment of older patients with pancreatic cancer. J Am Coll Surg. 2014;219(1):111–20.CrossRefPubMed

124.

Mirkin KA, Hollenbeak CS, Wong J. Survival impact of neoadjuvant therapy in resected pancreatic cancer: a prospective cohort study involving 18,332 patients from the National Cancer Data Base. Int J Surg. 2016;34:96–102.CrossRefPubMed

125.

Lutfi W, Talamonti MS, Kantor O, Wang C-H, Liederbach E, Stocker SJ, et al. Perioperative chemotherapy is associated with a survival advantage in early stage adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head. Surgery. 2016;160(3):714–24.CrossRefPubMed

126.

•• de Geus SWL, Eskander MF, Bliss LA, Kasumova GG, Ng SC, Callery MP, et al. Neoadjuvant therapy versus upfront surgery for resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a nationwide propensity score matched analysis. Surgery. 2017;161(3):592–601. Propensity score matched analysis in the NCDB reporting a significant survival benefit for neoadjuvant treatment in advanced -but not in early-stage- pancreatic cancer.CrossRefPubMed

Title: Recent Advances in Pancreatic Cancer Surgery
Authors: Laura Maggino, MD
Charles M. Vollmer Jr., MD
Publication date: 01-12-2017
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology / Issue 4/2017
Print ISSN: 1092-8472
Electronic ISSN: 1534-309X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-017-0150-2

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Heart Failure Video

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Recent Advances in Pancreatic Cancer Surgery

Opinion statement

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Semaglutide benefits people with type 2 diabetes and obesity-related heart failure

Incentivised to exercise

New intervention for STEMI-related cardiogenic shock

» View more highlights on the ACC 2024 congress hub page

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Opinion statement

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 4/2017

Diabetes Mellitus and the Colon

Endoscopic Evaluation and Management of Gastric Stromal Tumors

Endoscopic Treatment of Subepithelial Lesions of the Gastrointestinal Tract

Endoscopic Evaluation/Management of Bariatric Surgery Complications

Gastric Peroral Endoscopic Pyloromyotomy Therapy for Refractory Gastroparesis

Diagnosis and Management of Autoimmune Pancreatitis

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Semaglutide benefits people with type 2 diabetes and obesity-related heart failure

Incentivised to exercise

New intervention for STEMI-related cardiogenic shock

» View more highlights on the ACC 2024 congress hub page