No abstract

IMPORTANCEThe operative scenarios with the highest postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) risk represent situations in which fistula prevention and mitigation strategies have the strongest potential to affect surgical outcomes after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Evidence from studies providing risk stratification is lacking.OBJECTIVE To investigate whether pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) or pancreaticogastrostomy (PG), both with externalized transanastomotic stent, is the best reconstruction method for patients at high risk of POPF after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Patients undergoing PD for PDAC after NAT exhibited reduced incidence of POPF and PPH but increased incidence of DGE compared with patients treated with UFS. Among patients developing postoperative complications after PD, those receiving NAT were associated with increased clinical burden.

Objective: To evaluate TP as an alternative to PD in patients at high-risk for popf. Background: Outcomes of high-risk PD (HR-PD) and TP have never been compared. Methods: All patients who underwent PD or TP between July 2017 and December 2019 were identified. HR-PD was defined according to the alternative fistula risk score. Postoperative outcomes (primary endpoint), pancreatic insufficiency, and quality of life after 12 months of follow-up (QoL) were compared between HR-PD or planned PD intraoperatively converted to TP (C-TP). Results: A total of 566 patients underwent PD and 136 underwent TP during the study period. One hundred one (18%) PD patients underwent HR-PD, whereas 86 (63%) TP patients underwent C-TP. Postoperatively, the patients in the C-TP group exhibited lower rates of postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (15% vs 28%), delayed gastric emptying (16% vs 34%), sepsis (10% vs 31%), and Clavien-Dindo ≥3 morbidity (19% vs 31%) and had shorter median lengths of hospital stay (10 vs 21 days) (all P < 0.05). The rate of POPF in the HR-PD group was 39%. Mortality was comparable between the 2 groups (3% vs 4%). Although general, cancer- and pancreas-specific QoL were comparable between the HR-PD and C-TP groups, endocrine and exocrine insufficiency occurred in all the C-TP patients, compared to only 13% and 63% of the HR-PD patients, respectively, and C-TP patients had worse diabetesspecific QoL. Conclusions: C-TP may be considered rather than HR-PD only in few selected cases and after adequate counseling.

OBJECTIVES: The management of small and incidental branch duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (BD-IPMNs) still is of concern. The aim is assessing the safety of a surveillance protocol through the evaluation of their progression to malignancy. METHODS: All presumed BD-IPMNs observed from 2000 to 2016 were included. Only patients presenting without worrisome features (WFs) and high-risk stigmata (HRS) at diagnosis were included. Development of WF, HRS, pancreatic cancer (PC), and survival were analyzed. BD-IPMNs were defined as trivial in the continuing absence of WF/HRS after 5 years of surveillance. The age-specific standardized incidence ratio of PC in the general population was used for comparison. RESULTS: A total of 1,036 BD-IPMNs without WF/HRS at diagnosis were included, 4.2% developed WF or HRS, and 1.1% developed PC after a median of 62 months. The median cyst growth rate was 0 mm/yr. A growth rate ≥2.5 mm/yr and the development of WF resulted independent predictors of PC. The standardized incidence ratio of PC for trivial BD-IPMN (n = 378) was 22.45 (95% confidence interval 8.19–48.86), but considering only patients aged >65 years (n = 198), it decreased to 3.84 (95% confidence interval 0.77–11.20). DISCUSSION: Surveillance of the vast majority of presumed BD-IPMNs is safe, as the risk of PC is comparable to postoperative mortality of pancreatic surgery. A growth rate ≥2.5 mm/yr is the main predictor of PC, reinforcing the role of repeated observations. A trivial BD-IPMN in patients aged >65 years might not increase the risk of developing PC compared with general population, identifying potential targets for follow-up discontinuation.