<p>Background: The management of locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (LA-PDAC) now relies on an integrated, multidimensional assessment that goes beyond just the relationship of the tumour to vascular anatomy. Summary: By combining dynamic imaging, biomarker monitoring, genetic profiling, and thorough physiological evaluation, clinicians can more accurately select patients who are most likely to benefit from aggressive surgical intervention. These patients can then be offered NAT, singly or in combination, and preferably within the context of a clinical trial. The re-staging of patients post-NAT remains a challenge, but in patients who have shown no evidence of tumour growth or metastases and preferably with evidence of biochemical, metabolic, or radiological response and are fit enough, a trial dissection may be indicated. This evolving strategy transforms a disease once considered palliative into one with curative potential in selected patients. In this setting, surgical techniques have also evolved to include artery-first approaches to the SMA and CA, arterial divestment as an alternative to arterial resection, and the triangle operation. Patients with LA-PDAC should be managed in a high-volume centre with experience in treating this type of patient. There is no established role for minimally invasive techniques, including laparoscopic or robotic surgery, with LA-PDAC. Key Messages: Determining the role of surgery for locally advanced pancreatic cancer requires more than just an assessment of the tumour-vasculature relationship. The multidisciplinary selection integrates dynamic imaging, biomarker monitoring, genetic profiling, and physiological evaluation. For some patients, a previous palliative strategy is transformed to a potentially curative one. In this setting, new surgical techniques include an artery-first approach to avoid futile resection, periadventitial dissection instead of arterial resection, and the triangle operation for complete nodal clearance. </p>

The REDISCOVER consensus conference aimed at developing and validate guidelines on the perioperative care of patients with borderline resectable (BR-) and locally advanced (LA) pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).Coupled with improvements in chemotherapy and radiation, the contemporary approach to pancreatic surgery supports resection of BR-PDAC and, to a lesser extent, LA-PDAC. Guidelines outlining the selection and perioperative care for these patients are lacking.The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology was used to develop the REDISCOVER guidelines and create recommendations. The Delphi approach was used to reach consensus (agreement ≥80%) among experts. Recommendations were approved after a debate and vote among international experts in pancreatic surgery and pancreatic cancer management. A Validation Committee used the AGREE II-GRS tool to assess the methodological quality of the guidelines. Moreover, an independent multidisciplinary advisory group revised the statements to ensure adherence to non-surgical guidelines.Overall, 34 recommendations were created targeting centralization, training, staging, patient selection for surgery, possibility of surgery in uncommon scenarios, timing of surgery, avoidance of vascular reconstruction, details of vascular resection/reconstruction, arterial divestment, frozen section histology of perivascular tissue, extent of lymphadenectomy, anticoagulation prophylaxis and role of minimally invasive surgery. The level of evidence was however low for 29 of 34 clinical questions. Participants agreed that the most conducive mean to promptly advance our understanding in this field is to establish an international registry addressing this patient population (https://rediscover.unipi.it/).The REDISCOVER guidelines provide clinical recommendations pertaining to pancreatectomy with vascular resection for patients with BR- and LA-PDAC, and serve as the basis of a new international registry for this patient population.Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

\n In 2018, Inoue et al.\n 1\n introduced a systematic classification of the extent of dissection along the celiac axis (CA) and hepatic artery (HA) during open pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Three levels of perivascular dissection were defined according to surgical indication: level 1, limited organ resection without oncological dissection for benign or low-grade malignant lesions; level 2, formal lymphadenectomy with preservation of the perivascular nerve plexus for borderline or low-grade malignancies; and level 3, radical dissection, including perineural clearance for pancreatic cancer. As robotic PD is increasingly adopted, it should reproduce the same oncological standards established in open surgery.\n 2–4\n However, a standardized robotic technique capable of achieving all levels of the Inoue classification has not yet been clearly described. This video article aims to present a stepwise robotic approach to CA-HA dissection consistent with these principles.\n

Surgical resection with adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy is the only curative modality for treatment of patients with pancreatic and periampullary tumors. With the increasing use of minimally invasive techniques, laparoscopic and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) has become more common, but laparoscopic artery-first techniques have been described in few studies. The aim of this study is to describe our robotic artery-first technique.Video clips were compiled from several robotic PDs to demonstrate the artery-first technique. This technique consists of early retroperitoneal dissection of the superior mesenteric artery from the pancreatic head.Overall, 73 patients underwent robotic PD at our center between March 2018 and August 2020. Of these, 24 patients underwent the robotic artery-first approach. Indication for its use included proximity of the tumor to the portal vein or SMV in six cases. In three cases, partial resection of the portomesenteric axis was necessary, and the artery-first approach allowed for safe venous resection and reconstruction. In three other cases, the tumor was in close contact with the vein, but it could be resected with free margins without venous resection. In the remaining 18 patients, the approach was systematically used regardless of tumor proximity to the portomesenteric axis.This robotic artery-first approach is feasible and safe for PD. The approach could facilitate robotic PD, and its systematical use could provide some important advantages during the resection phase. The videos could also help oncological surgeons to perform this complex yet important maneuver.

Triangle pancreatoduodenectomy adds to the conventional procedure the en bloc removal of the retroperitoneal lympho-neural tissue included in the triangular area bounded by the common hepatic artery (CHA), the superior mesenteric artery (SMA), and the superior mesenteric vein/portal vein. We herein aim to show the feasibility of “cold” triangle robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (C-Tr-RPD) for pancreatic cancer (PDAC).

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate perioperative outcomes and survival in patients undergoing an artery-first approach to pancreatoduodenectomy in comparison with those having standard pancreatoduodenectomy.A systematic search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Comparative studies including patients who underwent artery-first pancreatoduodenectomy and standard pancreatoduodenectomy were analysed.Seventeen studies were included in the final analysis. There were 16 retrospective cohort or case-control studies and one RCT. A total of 1472 patients were included in the meta-analysis, of whom 771 underwent artery-first pancreatoduodenectomy and 701 had standard pancreatoduodenectomy. Intraoperative blood loss (mean difference -389 ml; P < 0·001) and the proportion of patients requiring intraoperative transfusion (10·6 per cent (54 of 508) versus 40·1 per cent (186 of 464); P < 0·001) were significantly lower in the artery-first group. Although rates of perioperative mortality were comparable between the two groups, perioperative morbidity (35·5 per cent (263 of 741) versus 44·3 per cent (277 of 625); P = 0·002), and the incidence of grade B/C pancreatic fistula (7·4 per cent (26 of 353) versus 12·8 per cent (42 of 327); P = 0·031) were significantly lower in the artery-first group. The R0 resection rate (75·8 per cent (269 of 355) versus 67·0 per cent (280 of 418); P < 0·001) and overall survival (hazard ratio 0·72, 95 per cent c.i. 0·60 to 0·87; P < 0·001) were significantly higher in the artery-first group.The artery-first approach to pancreatoduodenectomy may be associated with improved perioperative outcomes and survival.© 2018 BJS Society Ltd Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

The aim of this survey was to gain insights in the current surgical management and pathological assessment of pancreatoduodenectomy with portal-superior mesenteric vein resection (VR).A systematic literature search was performed to identify international expert surgeons (N = 150) and pathologists (N = 40) who published relevant studies between 2009 and 2019. These experts and Dutch surgeons (N = 17) and pathologists (N = 20) were approached to complete an online survey.Overall, 76 (46%) surgeons and 37 (62%) pathologists completed the survey. Most surgeons (71%) estimated that preoperative imaging corresponded correctly with intraoperative findings of venous involvement in 50-75% of patients. An increased complication risk following VR was expected by 55% of surgeons, mainly after Type 4 (segmental resection-venous conduit anastomosis). Most surgeons (61%) preferred Type 3 (segmental resection-primary anastomosis). Most surgeons (75%) always perform the VR themselves. Standard postoperative imaging for patency control was performed by 54% of surgeons and 39% adjusted thromboprophylaxis following VR. Most pathologists (76%) always assessed tumor infiltration in the resected vein and only 54% of pathologists always assess the resection margins of the vein itself. Variation in assessment of tumor infiltration depth was observed.This international survey showed variation in the surgical management and pathological assessment of pancreatoduodenectomy with venous involvement. This highlights the lack of evidence and emphasizes the need for research on imaging modalities to improve patient selection for VR, surgical techniques, postoperative management and standardization of the pathological assessment.Copyright © 2020 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is one of the most complex procedures in oncologic surgery. We present a video of robotic portomesenteric reconstruction with bovine pericardial graft during PD.A 52-year-old woman was referred with a mass in the head of the pancreas. The tumor was in contact with the portomesenteric axis. The multidisciplinary team decided to perform an upfront resection. The surgery was performed as a pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy with lymphadenectomy. The superior mesenteric artery first approach was used to expose the head of the pancreas, so that the entire surgical specimen was attached only through the tumor invasion of the portomesenteric axis. After resection of the invaded portomesenteric axis, its large extension precluded primary reconstruction, so a bovine pericardial graft was used for venous reconstruction. After completion of the venous anastomosis, reconstruction of the digestive tract was performed as usual.Surgical time was 430 min; clamp time was 55 min; and portomesenteric reconstruction took 41 min. Estimated blood loss was 320 mL without transfusion. Pathology confirmed T3N1 ductal adenocarcinoma with free margins. No pancreatic or biliary fistula was observed, and she was discharged on postoperative day 8. A postoperative examination confirmed the patency of the graft. The patient is doing well 6 months after surgery and has no signs of the disease.A bovine pericardial graft is useful for reconstruction and readily available, eliminating the need to harvest an autologous vein or use synthetic grafts. This procedure can be safely performed with the robotic platform.© 2023. Society of Surgical Oncology.

Open pancreatoduodenectomy with vein resection (OPD-VR) is now standard of care in patients who responded to neoadjuvant therapies. Feasibility of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) with vein resection (RPD-VR) was shown, but no study provided a detailed description of the technical challenges associated with this formidable operation. Herein, we describe the trips and tricks for technically successful RPD-VR.The vascular techniques used in RPD-VR were borrowed from OPD-VR, as well as from our experience with robotic transplantation of both kidney and pancreas. Vein resection was classified into 4 types according to the international study group of pancreatic surgery. Each type of vein resection was described in detail and shown in a video.Between October 2008 and November 2021, a total of 783 pancreatoduodenectomies were performed, including 233 OPDs-VR (29.7%). RPD was performed in 256 patients (32.6%), and RPDs-VR in 36 patients (4.5% of all pancreatoduodenectomies; 15.4% of all pancreatoduodenectomies with vein resection; 14.0% of all RPDs). In RPD-VR vein resections were: 4 type 1 (11.1%), 10 type 2 (27.8%), 12 type 3 (33.3%) and 10 type 4 (27.8%). Vascular patches used in type 2 resections were made of peritoneum (n = 8), greater saphenous vein (n = 1), and deceased donor aorta (n = 1). Interposition grafts used in type 4 resections were internal left jugular vein (n = 8), venous graft from deceased donor (n = 1) and spiral saphenous vein graft (n = 1). There was one conversion to open surgery (2.8%). Ninety-day mortality was 8.3%. There was one (2.8%) partial vein thrombosis, treated with heparin infusion.We have reported 36 technically successful RPDs-VR. We hope that the tips and tricks provided herein can contribute to safer implementation of RPD-VR. Based on our experience, and according to data from the literature, we strongly advise that RPD-VR is performed by expert surgeons at high volume centers.© 2023. The Author(s).

The proximal jejunal vein which branches from the dorsal side of the superior mesenteric vein (SMV) usually drains the inferior pancreatoduodenal veins (IPDVs) and contacts the uncinate process of the pancreas. We focused on this vein, termed the proximal dorsal jejunal vein (PDJV), and evaluated the anatomical classification of the PDJV and surgical outcomes in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) with PDJV involvement (PDJVI).The jejunal veins that branch from the dorsal side of the SMV above the inferior border of the duodenum are defined as PDJVs. We investigated 121 patients who underwent upfront pancreaticoduodenectomy for PDAC between 2011 and 2017; PDJVs were resected in all patients. The anatomical classification of PDJV was evaluated using multidetector computed tomography. Surgical and prognostic outcomes of pancreticoduodenectomy for PDAC with PDJVI were evaluated.The PDJVs were classified into seven types depending on the position of the first and second jejunal veins relative to the superior mesenteric artery. In all patients, the morbidity and mortality rates were 15.7 and 0.8%, respectively. The rates for parameters including SMV resection, presence of pathological T3-4, R0 resection, and 3-year survival were 46.2, 92.3, 92.3, and 61.1%, respectively, when there was PDJVI (n = 13). When there was no PDJVI (n = 108), the rates were 60.2, 93.5, 86.1, and 58.3%, respectively. Overall, there were no significant differences.Pancreaticoduodenectomy with PDJV resection is feasible for PDAC with PDJVI and satisfactory overall survival rates are achievable. It may be necessary to reconsider the resectability of PDAC with PDJVI.

Although the artery-first approach is widely used in open pancreaticoduodenectomy, it is difficult to laparoscopically expose the origin of the inferior pancreaticoduodenal artery (IPDA) from the left side of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA). By contrast, damaging the inferior pancreaticoduodenal veins (IPDVs) is possible when approaching the IPDA from the right side of the SMA. To facilitate the artery-first approach in laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD), we focused on the proximal-dorsal jejunal vein (PDJV) that branched from the superior mesenteric vein (SMV) dorsal side and drained the IPDVs. This study aimed to clarify the usefulness of the right SMA approach using the PDJV preisolation method.The PDJV was first isolated, and the IPDVs were divided along the PDJV on the right side of the SMA. Then, the IPDA was divided at the root without first separating the pancreatic head from the portal vein and the SMV. Overall, 21 patients underwent this approach, and the results were retrospectively compared with those of 21 patients who underwent the artery-first approach, which was performed on the left side of the SMA. Anatomical characteristics of the PDJV were evaluated using multidetector computed tomography for the two groups.Operative times and resection times were significantly lower for the PDJV preisolation group than for the conventional LPD group (489.3 vs. 541.7 min, respectively; p = 0.002). During anatomical evaluation, 41 patients (97.6%) had a PDJV that drained from the SMV dorsally and was in contact with the anterior aspect of the uncinate process. The PDJV was confirmed as the first jejunal vein in 31 patients (73.8%) and as the second jejunal vein in 10 patients (23.8%).This approach facilitates dissection of the IPDA on the right side of the SMA, thereby reducing operative times.

The advantages of robotic‐assisted pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) in comparison with open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) have not been well‐established. We aimed to compare their short‐term outcomes by inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis.

Background: Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) with portal–superior mesenteric vein (PV-SMV) resection is increasingly performed in borderline-resectable periampullary cancer. While conventional PD is the reference standard, robotic PD (RPD) may improve operative ergonomics and recovery; its performance and learning curve in PV-SMV resection remain unclear. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients undergoing PD with PV-SMV resection at a single tertiary center by a single surgeon (July 2016–September 2022). Twenty-seven patients met the inclusion criteria and were grouped as conventional PD (n = 14) or RPD (n = 13). To assess the learning curve, RPD cases were stratified as early (cases 1–3) versus late (cases 4–13). Primary outcomes were operative time and blood loss; secondary outcomes included 90-day morbidity/mortality, R0 margin, lymph node yield, length of stay, readmission, and overall survival. Results: Baseline characteristics were comparable between conventional PD and RPD. Median operative time was longer with RPD vs. conventional PD (624.0 [IQR 579.0–794.0] vs. 529.5 [456.5–636.5] mins; p = 0.024). Median blood loss trended lower with RPD (350.0 [200.0–1950.0] vs. 1455.0 [630.0–2940.0] mL; p = 0.254). Rates of clinically relevant complications (including POPF, DGE, and hemorrhage), R0 resection (69% vs. 64%), lymph node retrieval, length of stay, 90-day readmission, 90-day mortality, and overall survival were similar between conventional PD and RPD. Within RPD, operative time and blood loss improved from the early to late phases (794.0 → 601.5 min; 1950.0 → 275.0 mL), consistent with a learning-curve effect, though not statistically significant in this small cohort. Conclusions: In selected patients, RPD with PV-SMV resection is feasible and achieves oncologic and short-term clinical outcomes comparable to conventional PD, with evidence of efficiency gains as experience accrues. These findings support structured training and case accumulation for the safe adoption of complex robotic pancreatic surgery.

Robotic-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) has been routinely performed in a few of centers worldwide. This study aimed to evaluate the perioperative outcomes and the learning curves of resection and reconstruction procedures in RPD by one single surgeon.