Monopolar electrocautery versus scalpel for pancreatic neck transection during open pancreatoduodenectomy: A retrospective, registry-based study.

BACKGROUND: The method of transecting the pancreatic parenchyma during pancreatic resection may influence the rate of complications, including pancreatic fistula and bleeding. The objective of this study was to compare the transection of the pancreatic parenchyma during pancreatoduodenectomy with monopolar electrocautery versus scalpel in terms of postoperative complications. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients with open pancreatoduodenectomy from the German DGAV StuDoQ|Pancreas registry (January 2013 to December 2021) was performed. Transection of the pancreatic parenchyma with a scalpel versus monopolar electrocautery was compared regarding postoperative pancreatic fistula B/C, post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage B/C, and major complications (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥3) rates. Multivariable analysis with adjustment for potential confounders and surgical center cluster effect was performed. RESULTS: Overall, 6,752 patients were included in the study. In 4,072 (60.3%), transection was performed with a scalpel and, in 2,680 (39.7%), with electrocautery. Transection with electrocautery was associated with higher postoperative pancreatic fistula B/C (15.4% vs 12.8%; P = .003), post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage B/C (11% vs 7.4%; P < .001), and major complications (33.4% vs 29.6%; P = .001) rates. In the multivariable analysis, after adjustment for potential confounders and surgical center, the association of the transection method with postoperative pancreatic fistula B/C (odds ratio = 1.01; 95% CI, 0.79-1.2; P = .962), post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage B/C (odds ratio = 1.23; 95% CI, 0.94-1.6; P = .127), and major complications (odds ratio = 1.09; 95% CI, 0.93-1.27; P = .297) was not significant. CONCLUSION: The study found no significant association between transection of the pancreatic parenchyma during open pancreatoduodenectomy with a scalpel compared with monopolar electrocautery regarding pancreatic fistula, postoperative bleeding, or overall major complication rates.

Influence of aberrant right hepatic artery on survival after pancreatic resection for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head.

PURPOSE: The presence of an aberrant right hepatic artery (aRHA), arising from the superior mesenteric artery, is a common variant of the liver vascular anatomy. Considering that tumor spread occurs along vessels, the question arises, whether the presence of an aRHA influences the oncologic outcome after resection for cancer of the pancreatic head. METHODS: Patients with ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head, who underwent resection from 2011 to 2020 at the Frankfurt University Hospital, Germany, were analyzed retrospectively. Surgical records and computed tomography imaging were reviewed for the presence of aRHA. Overall and disease-free survival as well as hepatic recurrence were analyzed according to the presence of aRHA. RESULTS: aRHA was detected in 21 out of 145 patients (14.5%). The median overall survival was 26 months (95%CI 20.8-34.4), median disease-free survival was 12.1 months (95%CI 8.1-17.3). There was no significant difference in overall survival (26.1 versus 21.4 months, adjusted hazard ratio 1.31, 95%CI 0.7-2.46, p = 0.401) or disease-free survival (14.5 months versus 12 months, adjusted hazard ratio 0.98, 95%CI 0.57-1.71, p = 0.957) without and with aRHA. The hepatic recurrence rate was 24.4.% with conventional anatomy versus 30.8% with aRHA (adjusted odds ratio 1.36, 95%CI 0.3-5.38, p = 0.669). In the multivariable analysis, only lymphatic vessel invasion was an independent prognostic factor for hepatic recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of an aRHA does not seem to influence the long-term survival and hepatic recurrence after resection for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head.

Prognostic value of paraaortic lymph node metastases in patients with ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head.

INTRODUCTION: The role of paraaortic lymphadenectomy for cancer of the pancreatic head is controversial. The aim of this study is to analyze the prognostic role of paraaortic lymph node (PALN) metastases after resection for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of all patients, who underwent upfront resection for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head at the Frankfurt University Hospital from 2011 to 2020 was performed. The primary endpoint was survival, according to the presence of PALN metastases. RESULTS: Out of 468 patients with pancreatic resection, 148 had an upfront resection for ductal adenocarcinoma. Of those, in 125 (85%) a paraaortic lymphadenectomy was performed. In 19 (15.2%) PALN metastases were detected. The estimated overall median survival after resection was 21.7 months (95% CI 18.8 to 26.4), the disease free survival 16 months (95% CI 12 to 18). Among the patients with lymph node metastases, PALN metastases had no significant influence on overall (18.9 versus 19 months, HR = 1.3, 95% CI 0.7 to 2.6, p = 0.392) or disease free survival (14 versus 10.7 months, HR = 1.7, 95% CI 0.9 to 3.2, p = 0.076). After adjusting for T-stage, N-stage, grade, resection margin, PALN metastases, and adjuvant therapy, only adjuvant therapy had a prognostic significance for overall survival (HR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.85, p = 0.013). CONCLUSION: Patients with ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head and PALN metastases do not have inferior outcomes than those with regional lymph node metastases. Thus, positive PALN should not be considered a contraindication for resection.