Portal venous thrombosis after distal pancreatectomy: clinical outcomes.

AIM: Outcomes of patients developing portal vein (PV) thrombosis (PVT) after distal pancreatectomy (DP) are unknown. The goal of this study was to identify risk factors for PVT and describe the long-term outcomes in these patients. METHODS: Patients undergoing DP without repair or reconstruction of the PV between 2001 and 2011 were included. Patients that showed evidence of PVT on pre-operative imaging were excluded from the study. Location and extent of thrombosis was determined by post-operative computed tomography or ultrasound imaging in all patients. Evidence of systemic thrombosis (if present) in addition to PVT was also documented. RESULTS: In the study period, 991 patients underwent DP and 21 (2.1%) patients were diagnosed with PVT. Pancreatic neoplasm was the most frequent indication for operation (n = 11). Thrombus occurred in the main PV in 15 and the right branch of the PV in 8 patients. Complete PV occlusion occurred in nine patients with a median time to diagnosis of 16 days (range 5-85 days). Seventeen patients were anticoagulated for a median duration of 6 months (range 3.3-36 months) after the diagnosis of PVT. Over a median follow-up of 22 months, resolution of PVT occurred in seven patients. Predictors of non-resolution of PVT included anesthesia time >180 min (p = 0.025), DM type II (p = 0.03), BMI >30 Kg/m(2) (p = 0.03), occlusive PVT (p < 0.001), or thrombus in a sectoral branch (p = 0.02). Anticoagulation therapy did not influence the frequency of thrombus resolution and was complicated by gastrointestinal hemorrhage in four patients. There was no mortality as a direct result of PVT or anticoagulation. CONCLUSION: PVT after distal pancreatectomy is a rare complication. Serious complications as a direct result of PVT in this setting are uncommon and are not dependent on thrombus resolution. Although anticoagulation does not appear to influence the rate of PVT resolution in this small retrospective series, we support the use of anticoagulation until larger, controlled studies define clear advantages or disadvantages.

Neoadjuvant treatment of duodenal adenocarcinoma: a rescue strategy.

AIM: To evaluate the role of neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy and rescue surgery in the management of unresectable or recurrent duodenal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: Retrospective review of all adults treated with neoadjuvant therapy and rescue surgery for locally unresectable or locally recurrent duodenal adenocarcinoma from 1994 to 2010. RESULTS: Ten patients received various forms of neoadjuvant therapy prior to operative exploration for potential resection. Six patients presented with locally unresectable disease, while four had local recurrences. Six patients had vascular encasement, three had retroperitoneal extension with vascular invasion, and one had invasion of surrounding organs. Of the six patients with locally advanced disease, preoperative therapy consisted of chemotherapy alone (3) or chemoradiotherapy (3). Of the four patients with local recurrences, preoperative therapy consisted of chemotherapy alone (1), chemoradiotherapy alone (1), chemoradiotherapy after chemotherapy (1), and chemoradiotherapy followed by combination chemotherapy (1). Nine of ten patients became resectable after neoadjuvant therapy. Clinically, two patients had complete responses, and four had partial responses. Histopathology revealed complete pathologic response in two patients and near-complete pathologic response in one (<1 mm of residual disease). Currently, five patients are alive (range 18-83 months postoperatively). All have no evidence of disease. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant therapy may convert locally unresectable duodenal adenocarcinoma to resectable disease with subsequent prolonged survival.