Johanna A M G Tol1, Dirk J Gouma2, Claudio Bassi3, Christos Dervenis4, Marco Montorsi5, Mustapha Adham6, Ake Andrén-Sandberg7, Horacio J Asbun8, Maximilian Bockhorn9, Markus W Büchler10, Kevin C Conlon11, Laureano Fernández-Cruz12, Abe Fingerhut13, Helmut Friess14, Werner Hartwig10, Jakob R Izbicki9, Keith D Lillemoe15, Miroslav N Milicevic16, John P Neoptolemos17, Shailesh V Shrikhande18, Charles M Vollmer19, Charles J Yeo20, Richard M Charnley21. 1. Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 2. Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: D.J.Gouma@amc.nl. 3. Department of Surgery and Oncology, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona, Verona, Italy. 4. Department of First Surgery, Agia Olga Hospital, Athens, Greece. 5. Department of General Surgery, Instituto Clinico Humanitas IRCCS, University of Milan, Milan, Italy. 6. Department of HPB Surgery, Hopital Edouard Herriot, Lyon, France. 7. Department of Surgery, Karolinska Institutet at Karolinska University Hospital, Huddinge, Stockholm, Sweden. 8. Department of General Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL. 9. Department of General-, Visceral- and Thoracic-Surgery, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. 10. Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 11. Professorial Surgical Unit, University of Dublin, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland. 12. Department of Surgery, Clinic Hospital of Barcelona, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 13. First Department of Digestive Surgery, Hippokrateon Hospital, University of Athens, Athens, Greece; Section for Surgical Research, Department of Surgery, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria. 14. Department of Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany. 15. Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital and the Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. 16. First Surgical Clinic, Clinical Center of Serbia, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia. 17. Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, Liverpool Cancer Research-UK Centre, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. 18. Department of Gastrointestinal and HPB Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India. 19. Department of Surgery, Penn Medicine, The University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. 20. Department of Surgery, Jefferson Pancreas, Biliary and Related Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA. 21. Department of HPB & Transplant Surgery, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The lymph node (Ln) status of patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is an important predictor of survival. The survival benefit of extended lymphadenectomy during pancreatectomy is, however, disputed, and there is no true definition of the optimal extent of the lymphadenectomy. The aim of this study was to formulate a definition for standard lymphadenectomy during pancreatectomy. METHODS: During a consensus meeting of the International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery, pancreatic surgeons formulated a consensus statement based on available literature and their experience. RESULTS: The nomenclature of the Japanese Pancreas Society was accepted by all participants. Extended lymphadenectomy during pancreatoduodenectomy with resection of Ln's along the left side of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) and around the celiac trunk, splenic artery, or left gastric artery showed no survival benefit compared with a standard lymphadenectomy. No level I evidence was available on prognostic impact of positive para-aortic Ln's. Consensus was reached on selectively removing suspected Ln's outside the resection area for frozen section. No consensus was reached on continuing or terminating resection in cases where these nodes were positive. CONCLUSION: Extended lymphadenectomy cannot be recommended. Standard lymphadenectomy for pancreatoduodenectomy should strive to resect Ln stations no. 5, 6, 8a, 12b1, 12b2, 12c, 13a, 13b, 14a, 14b, 17a, and 17b. For cancers of the body and tail of the pancreas, removal of stations 10, 11, and 18 is standard. Furthermore, lymphadenectomy is important for adequate nodal staging. Both pancreatic resection in relatively fit patients or nonresectional palliative treatment were accepted as acceptable treatment in cases of positive Ln's outside the resection plane. This consensus statement could serve as a guide for surgeons and researchers in future directives and new clinical studies.
BACKGROUND: The lymph node (Ln) status of patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is an important predictor of survival. The survival benefit of extended lymphadenectomy during pancreatectomy is, however, disputed, and there is no true definition of the optimal extent of the lymphadenectomy. The aim of this study was to formulate a definition for standard lymphadenectomy during pancreatectomy. METHODS: During a consensus meeting of the International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery, pancreatic surgeons formulated a consensus statement based on available literature and their experience. RESULTS: The nomenclature of the Japanese Pancreas Society was accepted by all participants. Extended lymphadenectomy during pancreatoduodenectomy with resection of Ln's along the left side of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) and around the celiac trunk, splenic artery, or left gastric artery showed no survival benefit compared with a standard lymphadenectomy. No level I evidence was available on prognostic impact of positive para-aortic Ln's. Consensus was reached on selectively removing suspected Ln's outside the resection area for frozen section. No consensus was reached on continuing or terminating resection in cases where these nodes were positive. CONCLUSION: Extended lymphadenectomy cannot be recommended. Standard lymphadenectomy for pancreatoduodenectomy should strive to resect Ln stations no. 5, 6, 8a, 12b1, 12b2, 12c, 13a, 13b, 14a, 14b, 17a, and 17b. For cancers of the body and tail of the pancreas, removal of stations 10, 11, and 18 is standard. Furthermore, lymphadenectomy is important for adequate nodal staging. Both pancreatic resection in relatively fit patients or nonresectional palliative treatment were accepted as acceptable treatment in cases of positive Ln's outside the resection plane. This consensus statement could serve as a guide for surgeons and researchers in future directives and new clinical studies.
Authors: Thijs de Rooij; Sjors Klompmaker; Mohammad Abu Hilal; Michael L Kendrick; Olivier R Busch; Marc G Besselink Journal: Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2016-02-17 Impact factor: 46.802
Authors: Ekaterina Petrova; Felix Rückert; Sebastian Zach; YinFeng Shen; Jürgen Weitz; Robert Grützmann; Uwe A Wittel; Frank Makowiec; Ulrich T Hopt; Peter Bronsert; Florian Kühn; Bettina M Rau; Roman E Izrailov; Igor E Khatkov; Hryhoriy Lapshyn; Louisa Bolm; Dirk Bausch; Tobias Keck; Ulrich F Wellner; Gabriel Seifert Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2017-06-13 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: Peter J Allen; Deborah Kuk; Carlos Fernandez-Del Castillo; Olca Basturk; Christopher L Wolfgang; John L Cameron; Keith D Lillemoe; Cristina R Ferrone; Vicente Morales-Oyarvide; Jin He; Matthew J Weiss; Ralph H Hruban; Mithat Gönen; David S Klimstra; Mari Mino-Kenudson Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2017-01 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Thijs de Rooij; Marc G Besselink; Awad Shamali; Giovanni Butturini; Olivier R Busch; Bjørn Edwin; Roberto Troisi; Laureano Fernández-Cruz; Ibrahim Dagher; Claudio Bassi; Mohammad Abu Hilal Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2015-12-10 Impact factor: 3.647