Project description:BackgroundIndividuals with a very high lifetime risk of developing pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma; for example, hereditary pancreatitis and main-duct or mixed-type intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm, may wish to discuss prophylactic total pancreatectomy but strategies to do so are lacking.ObjectiveTo develop a shared decision-making programme for prophylactic total pancreatectomy using decision tables.MethodsFocus group meetings with patients were used to identify relevant questions. Systematic reviews were performed to answer these questions.ResultsThe first tables included hereditary pancreatitis and main-duct or mixed-type intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm. No studies focused on prophylactic total pancreatectomy in these groups. In 52 studies (3570 patients), major morbidity after total pancreatectomy was 25% and 30-day mortality was 6%. After minimally invasive total pancreatectomy (seven studies, 35 patients) this was, respectively, 13% and 0%. Exocrine insufficiency-related symptoms occurred in 33%. Quality of life after total pancreatectomy was slightly lower compared with the general population.ConclusionThe decision tables can be helpful for discussing prophylactic total pancreatectomy with individuals at high risk of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.
Project description:BackgroundPostpancreatectomy morbidity remains significant even in high-volume centers and frequently results in delay or suspension of indicated adjuvant oncological treatment. This study investigated the short-term and long-term outcome after primary total pancreatectomy (PTP) and pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPPD) or Whipple procedure, with a special focus on administration of adjuvant therapy and oncological survival.MethodsPatients who underwent PTP or PPPD/Whipple for periampullary cancer between January 2008 and December 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Propensity score-matched analysis was performed to compare perioperative and oncological outcomes. Correspondingly, cases of rescue completion pancreatectomy (RCP) were analyzed.ResultsIn total, 41 PTP and 343 PPPD/Whipple procedures were performed for periampullary cancer. After propensity score matching, morbidity (Clavien-Dindo classification (CDC) ≥ IIIa, 31.7% vs. 24.4%; p = 0.62) and mortality rates (7.3% vs. 2.4%, p = 0.36) were similar in PTP and PPPD/Whipple. Frequency of adjuvant treatment administration (76.5% vs. 78.4%; p = 0.87), overall survival (513 vs. 652 days; p = 0.47), and progression-free survival (456 vs. 454 days; p = 0.95) did not significantly differ. In turn, after RCP, morbidity (CDC ≥ IIIa, 85%) and mortality (40%) were high, and overall survival was poor (median 104 days). Indicated adjuvant therapy was not administered in 77%.ConclusionsIn periampullary cancers, PTP may provide surgical and oncological treatment outcomes comparable with pancreatic head resections and might save patients from RCP. Especially in selected cases with high-risk pancreatic anastomosis or preoperatively impaired glucose tolerance, PTP may provide a safe treatment alternative to pancreatic head resection.
Project description:Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) still represents the major driver of surgical morbidity after pancreaticoduodenectomy. The purpose of this narrative review was to critically analyze current evidence supporting the use of total pancreatectomy (TP) to prevent the development of POPF in patients with high-risk pancreas, and to explore the role of completion total pancreatectomy (CP) in the management of severe POPF. Considering the encouraging perioperative outcomes, TP may represent a promising tool to avoid the morbidity related to an extremely high-risk pancreatic anastomosis in selected patients. Surgical management of severe POPF is only required in few critical scenarios. In this context, even if anecdotal, CP might play a role as last resort in expert hands.
Project description:Background: Chemotherapy is suggested to use in all stages of pancreatic cancer. Is it reasonable to recommend chemotherapy for all PDAC patients? It is necessary to distinguish low-risk PDAC patients underwent pancreatectomy, who may not lose survival time due to missed chemotherapy and not need to endure pain, nausea, tiredness, drowsiness, and breath shortness caused by chemotherapy. Methods: Nomograms were constructed with basis from the multivariate Cox regression analysis. X-tile software was utilized to perform risk stratification. Survival curves were used to display the effect of chemotherapy in different risk-stratification. Results: All of the significant variables were used to create the nomograms for overall survival (OS). The total risk score of each patient was calculated by summing the scores related to each variable. X-tile software was utilized to classify patients into high-risk (score >283), median-risk (197<score ≤283), and low-risk (score ≤197) according to the total risk score. The low-risk PDAC patients after pancreatectomy cannot gain survival benefit from chemotherapy after surgery (p=0.443). Moreover, chemotherapy improved survival for patients with resected PDAC in the median-risk (p<0.001) and high-risk (p<0.001) groups. Conclusions: our research constructed a new risk-scoring system based on survival nomogram to screen low-risk PDAC patients after pancreatectomy and confirmed that those can avoid enduring side effects caused by chemotherapy without affecting the survival time.
Project description:ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to determine the factors influencing pancreatic surgery patients' perceptions of the shared decision-making process (SDM).BackgroundDecision-making in pancreatic surgery is complicated by the risk of morbidity and mortality and risk of early recurrence of disease. Improvement in SDM has the potential to improve the receipt of goal- and value-concordant care.MethodsThis cross-sectional survey included patients who underwent pancreatic surgery. The following components were studied in relation to SDM: modified satisfaction with decision scale (SWD), modified decisional regret scale (DRS), quality of physician and patient interaction, and the impact of quality of life (FACT-Hep). Correlations were computed using Pearson's correlation score and a regression model.ResultsThe survey completion rate was 72.2% (of 40/55) and the majority (72.5%) of patients underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy. There were significant positive relationships between the SDM measure and (DRS, SWD; r = 0.70, P < 0.001) and responses to questions regarding how well the patient's actual recovery matched their expectations before treatment (r = 0.62, P < 0.001). The quality of the physician-patient relationship correlated with how well recovery matched expectations (r = 0.53, P = 0.002). SDM measure scores were significant predictors of the decision evaluation measure (R2(adj) = 0.48, P < 0.001), FACT-Hep (R2(adj) = 0.15, P < 0.001), and recovery expectations measure (R2(adj) = 0.37, P < 0.001).ConclusionsImproved SDM in pancreatic surgery is associated with more realistic recovery expectations, decreased decisional regret, and improved quality of life.
Project description:This study aimed to investigate whether deficits in decision making were potential endophenotype markers for OCD considering different phases of the disease. Fifty-seven non-medicated OCD patients (nmOCD), 77 medicated OCD patients (mOCD), 48 remitted patients with OCD (rOCD) and 115 healthy controls were assessed with the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT), which measured decision making under ambiguity, and the Game of Dice Task (GDT), which measured decision making under risk. While the three patients groups showed impaired performance on the IGT compared with healthy controls, all patients showed intact performance on the GDT. Furthermore, the rOCD patients showed a preference for deck B, indicating that they showed more sensitivity to the frequency of loss than to the magnitude of loss, whereas the mOCD patients showed a preference for deck A, indicating that they had more sensitivity to the magnitude of loss than to the frequency of loss. These data suggested that OCD patients had trait-related impairments in decision making under ambiguity but not under risk, and that dissociation of decision making under ambiguity and under risk is an appropriate potential neurocognitive endophenotype for OCD. The subtle but meaningful differences in decision making performance between the OCD groups require further study.
Project description:BackgroundShared decision-making is critical to optimal patient-centered care. For elective operations, when there is sufficient time for deliberate discussion, little is known about how surgeons navigate decision-making and how surgeons align care with patient preferences. In this context, we sought to explore surgeons' approaches to decision-making for adults ≥65 years at high-risk of postoperative complications or death.MethodsWe conducted semistructured in-depth interviews with 46 practicing surgeons across Michigan. Transcripts were iteratively analyzed through steps informed by inductive thematic analysis.ResultsFour major themes emerged characterizing how surgeons approach high-risk surgical decision-making for older adults: (1) risk assessment was defined as the process used by surgeons to identify and analyze factors that may negatively impact outcome; (2) expectations and goals described the process of surgeons engaging with patients and families to discuss potential outcomes and desired objectives; (3) external and internal motivating factors outlined extrinsic dynamics (eg, quality metrics, referrals) and intrinsic drivers (eg, surgeons' personal experiences) that influenced high-risk decision-making; and (4) decision-making approaches and challenges encompassed the roles of patients and surgeons and obstacles to engaging in a true shared decision-making process.ConclusionAlthough shared decision-making is strongly recommended, we found that surgeons who perform high-risk operations among older adults predominantly focused on assessing risk and setting expectations with patients and families rather than inviting them to actively participate in the decision-making process. Surgeons also reported influences on decision-making from quality metrics, referrals, and personal experiences. Patient involvement, however, was seldom discussed suggesting that surgeons may not be engaging in true shared decision-making when benefits should be weighed against a high likelihood of harm.
Project description:A growing number of central pancreatectomies are performed. However, reconstruction of pancreaticoenteral digestive continuity after central pancreatectomy remains debated. This study evaluates the short-term outcomes of binding pancreaticogastrostomy anastomosis in central pancreatectomy.We have reviewed our experience with 52 patients who underwent binding pancreaticogastrostomy following central pancreatectomy from February 2009 to March 2015. Indication includes 6 noninvasive intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms, 11 neuroendocrine tumors, 12 solid pseudopapillary tumor, 9 serous cystadenoma, 6 mucinous cystadenoma, and 8 focal pancreatic traumas.The mortality rate was nil while the morbidity rate was 34.6%. Eighteen patients experienced complications including 6 pancreatic fistulas, 2 postpancreatectomy hemorrhages, 4 delayed gastric emptying, 1 hypostatic pneumonia, and 5 pancreatitis. The median postoperative length of hospital stay was 12 days (10 days for patients without fistula). None of the 52 patients were found to have pancreatic endocrine or exocrine insufficiency or recurrence of tumors.Central pancreatectomy with binding pancreaticogastrostomy is a useful and practicable surgical procedure for benign or borderline lesions of the pancreatic neck or proximal body.