James R Butler1, Syed A Ahmad2, Matthew H Katz3, Jessica L Cioffi1, Nicholas J Zyromski4. 1. Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of Surgery, Indianapolis IN, USA. 2. The University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati OH, USA. 3. Department of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. 4. Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of Surgery, Indianapolis IN, USA. Electronic address: nzyromsk@iupui.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma continues to carry a poor prognosis. Of the controllable clinical variables known to affect outcome, margin status is paramount. Though the importance of a R0 resection is generally accepted, not all margins are easily managed. The superior mesenteric artery [SMA] in particular is the most challenging to clear. The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature with specific focus on the role of a SMA periadventitial dissection during PD and it's effect on margin status in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. STUDY DESIGN: The MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched for abstracts that addressed the effect of margin status on survival and recurrence following pancreaticoduodenectomy [PD]. Quantitative analysis was performed. RESULTS: The overall incidence of a R1 resection ranged from 16% to 79%. The margin that was most often positive following PD was the SMA margin, which was positive in 15-45% of resected specimens. Most studies suggested that a positive margin was associated with decreased survival. No consistent definition of R0 resection was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Margin positivity in resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma is associated with poor survival. Inability to clear the SMA margin is the most common cause of incomplete resection. More complete and consistently reported data are needed to evaluate the potential effect of periadventitial SMA dissection on margin status, local recurrence, or survival.
BACKGROUND: Resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma continues to carry a poor prognosis. Of the controllable clinical variables known to affect outcome, margin status is paramount. Though the importance of a R0 resection is generally accepted, not all margins are easily managed. The superior mesenteric artery [SMA] in particular is the most challenging to clear. The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature with specific focus on the role of a SMA periadventitial dissection during PD and it's effect on margin status in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. STUDY DESIGN: The MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched for abstracts that addressed the effect of margin status on survival and recurrence following pancreaticoduodenectomy [PD]. Quantitative analysis was performed. RESULTS: The overall incidence of a R1 resection ranged from 16% to 79%. The margin that was most often positive following PD was the SMA margin, which was positive in 15-45% of resected specimens. Most studies suggested that a positive margin was associated with decreased survival. No consistent definition of R0 resection was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Margin positivity in resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma is associated with poor survival. Inability to clear the SMA margin is the most common cause of incomplete resection. More complete and consistently reported data are needed to evaluate the potential effect of periadventitial SMA dissection on margin status, local recurrence, or survival.
Authors: Helmut Oettle; Stefan Post; Peter Neuhaus; Klaus Gellert; Jan Langrehr; Karsten Ridwelski; Harald Schramm; Joerg Fahlke; Carl Zuelke; Christof Burkart; Klaus Gutberlet; Erika Kettner; Harald Schmalenberg; Karin Weigang-Koehler; Wolf-Otto Bechstein; Marco Niedergethmann; Ingo Schmidt-Wolf; Lars Roll; Bernd Doerken; Hanno Riess Journal: JAMA Date: 2007-01-17 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Y Nishimura; R Hosotani; Y Shibamoto; M Kokubo; S Kanamori; K Sasai; M Hiraoka; G Ohshio; M Imamura; M Takahashi; M Abe Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1997-08-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: J F Pingpank; J P Hoffman; E A Ross; H S Cooper; N J Meropol; G Freedman; W H Pinover; T E LeVoyer; A R Sasson; B L Eisenberg Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2001 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Axel Richter; Marco Niedergethmann; Jörg W Sturm; Dietmar Lorenz; Stefan Post; Michael Trede Journal: World J Surg Date: 2003-02-27 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Charles W Kimbrough; Charles R St Hill; Robert C G Martin; Kelly M McMasters; Charles R Scoggins Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2013-02-28 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Timothy J Kinsella; Yuji Seo; Joseph Willis; Thomas A Stellato; Christopher T Siegel; Deborah Harpp; James K Willson; Joseph Gibbons; Juan R Sanabria; Jeffrey M Hardacre; James P Schulak Journal: Am J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-10 Impact factor: 2.339
Authors: Jae P Jung; Mazen S Zenati; Ahmad Hamad; Melissa E Hogg; Richard L Simmons; Amer H Zureikat; Herbert J Zeh; Brian A Boone Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2018-11-28 Impact factor: 3.647
Authors: Laura R Prakash; Huamin Wang; Jun Zhao; Graciela M Nogueras-Gonzalez; Jordan M Cloyd; Ching-Wei D Tzeng; Michael P Kim; Jeffrey E Lee; Matthew H G Katz Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2019-02-28 Impact factor: 3.452