Faculty Bibliography

Resection of the celiac artery (CA) during surgery for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) carries a significant risk of hepatic and gastric ischemia.^1,2 In addition, in the current context, where patients undergo intensive chemotherapy before surgery, a new complication has emerged: post-pancreatectomy liver injury (PPLI).³ PATIENT AND METHODS: A 59-year-old patient with biopsy-confirmed locally advanced pancreatic cancer arising from the pancreatic body (Video and Fig. 1) underwent extended neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX (folinic acid [leucovorin], fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin). The patient was restaged using the A-B-C criteria,⁴ adding the target approach for anatomical feasibility,⁵ metabolic imaging, and survival prediction.⁶ Fig. 1 Preoperative planning and first operation: extended pancreatosplenectomy, including resection of the left adrenal gland and the celiac artery (CA) (Mayo Clinic class Ia), divestment of the superior mesenteric artery, and portal vein (PV)-superior mesenteric vein reconstruction using a left renal vein graft interposition (A and B). Abdominal phase computed tomography scan, axial view, showing the encasement of the CA but with a free proper hepatic artery (PHA) as a "suitable target" if needed. (C) Drawing of the tumoral involvement with CA encasement and left/anterior side of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) abutment. PHA, gastroduodenal artery (GDA), and the biliary tract were free of tumor, allowing a Mayo Clinic class Ia CA resection. 15 mm was the distance measured from the tumor to the GDA, and 28 mm was the distance of SMA abutment on the left side. (D) Operative view highlighting the common hepatic artery (CHA) stump, the remnant head of the pancreas (HoP), the venous reconstruction with left renal vein interposition graft, SMA divestment, and the CA stump. IVC, inferior vena cava; LGA, left gastric artery; LGV, left gastric vein; LRV, left renal vein; SA, splenic artery; SMV, superior mesenteric vein PERIOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT: The patient underwent extended pancreatosplenectomy, including resection of the left adrenal gland and the CA (Mayo Clinic class Ia), divestment of the superior mesenteric artery, and portal-superior mesenteric vein reconstruction using a left renal vein graft interposition. Arterial reconstruction was initially deemed unnecessary, as proper hepatic artery flow was maintained-albeit dampened-via the gastroduodenal artery, confirmed by visual inspection and Doppler ultrasound. Postoperatively, the course was notable for a rapid rise in alanine aminotransferase levels without overt clinical or radiological deterioration (Fig. 2). Emergency re-exploration was undertaken with the objective of hepatic arterial revascularization (Fig. 3). We hypothesized that, in the setting of underlying metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease, arterial inflow was insufficient to meet the demands of an already vulnerable parenchyma, with increased intrahepatic resistance further compounding ischemic liver injury consistent with clinically relevant (CR)-PPLI. Liver biopsy confirmed acute steatohepatitis and extensive ischemic necrosis. Fig. 2 Postoperative liver enzyme kinetics during the first postoperative week. Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels demonstrated a sharp and rapid increase from the day of surgery to postoperative day (POD) 2, leading to re-operation for a supercharged hepatic artery (HA) revascularization. Following revascularization, ALT levels decreased promptly, with complete normalization of liver biochemical parameters by POD 7. AST, aspartate aminotransferase; CAR, celiac artery resection; INR, international normalized ratio POD, postoperative day Fig. 3 Second surgical procedure: final reconstruction and liver biopsy. (A) Drawing of the final reconstruction with a zoom (B) on the arterial bypass between the right renal artery and the common hepatic artery. (C) Liver biopsy showing acute steatohepatitis, with 75% macro- and micro-vesicular steatosis and extensive ischemic necrosis. (D) Zoom on the area of ischemic necrosis, showing infiltration of the liver by neutrophils, lymphocytes, and plasma cells. CA, celiac artery; CHA, common hepatic artery; GDA, gastroduodenal artery; GSV, great saphenous vein; HoP, head of pancreas; IVC, inferior vena cava; LGA, left gastric artery; LGV, left gastric vein; LRV, left renal vein; PHA, proper hepatic artery; PV, portal vein; RRA, right renal artery; RRV, right renal vein; SMA, superior mesenteric artery; SMV, superior mesenteric vein CONCLUSION: Early postoperative recognition and grading of CR-PPLI is critical to prevent liver failure, as static imaging may fail to reflect dynamic hepatic perfusion. A disproportionate rise in alanine aminotransferase within 48 h is a key warning sign. Prospective multicenter studies are needed to better define the incidence, risk factors, and optimal management of CR-PPLI.

BACKGROUND:Although main duct (MD) and branch duct (BD) IPMNs differ in preoperative risk of malignant transformation, it remains unclear whether ductal subtype influences outcomes once invasive carcinoma develops and is resected. We compared recurrence and survival outcomes between these subtypes. METHODS:We identified patients with resected IPMN-derived pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) from three institutions. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods and compared with log-rank tests. Multivariable Cox regression models adjusted for age, T-stage, N-stage, histologic subtype, and adjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS:Among 136 patients, 106 (78%) had MD-derived and 30 (22%) had BD-derived IPMN-associated PDAC. Median OS was 36.6 months and did not differ by subtype on log-rank (p = 0.472) or multivariable analysis (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.15-1.31; p = 0.143). Median RFS was 41.8 months without significant difference by subtype on log-rank (p = 0.362) or adjusted analysis (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.21-1.46; p = 0.234). CONCLUSIONS:In patients with resected IPMN-derived PDAC, ductal subtype was not significantly associated with OS. While clinically meaningful differences in RFS cannot be excluded, these findings suggest that once invasive cancer arises and is resected, ductal subtype alone may not provide additional prognostic information.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a devastating cancer with increasing incidence and a dismal prognosis. Here, we uncover serine protease inhibitor Kazal type 1 (SPINK1) as a putative determinant of PDAC progression with a previously unrecognized role in epigenomic regulation. We show that SPINK1 expression, which is highly dynamic across PDAC progression, is associated with key aggressive cancer phenotypic states and regulates cancer cell stemness and plasticity in both in vitro and patient samples. Mechanistically, our results suggest a new signaling axis where SPINK1 interacts with COL18A1 to promote its cleavage into endostatin, which then induces histone H3 modifications. These results reveal a new function of SPINK1 in PDAC and highlight the SPINK1-COL18A1-endostatin signaling axis as a potential therapeutic target to combat PDAC aggressiveness.

BACKGROUND:Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) of the pancreas present a broad spectrum of biological behavior, ranging from benign to malignant. Their management poses significant ethical dilemmas, particularly concerning diagnostic uncertainty, the risk of overdiagnosis and overtreatment, and resource allocation. METHODS:This qualitative study employed a constructivist approach to explore the ethical challenges faced by surgeons in managing IPMNs. Data were collected through focus group meetings (FGMs) with members of an expert working group at the Verona Evidence-Based Meeting on IPMNs (2020). Discussions were analyzed to identify key ethical concerns. RESULTS:The analysis highlighted several major ethical concerns: (1) decision-making under diagnostic uncertainty, (2) ethical challenges in patient communication, (3) overdiagnosis and over-surveillance due to defensive medicine and patient anxiety, (4) overtreatment through unnecessary surgery, and (5) issues of distributive justice in access to care and healthcare resource utilization. Participants emphasized the difficulty of balancing transparency with the need to minimize psychological distress in patients, as well as the challenge of applying international guidelines in diverse healthcare settings. CONCLUSIONS:Ethical decision-making in IPMN management requires balancing the risks of malignancy with the potential harms of overtreatment, while also considering patient autonomy and resource limitations. Enhancing decision-support tools, improving surgeon training in communication, and refining clinical guidelines to incorporate ethical considerations may help address these challenges. Further research is needed to develop strategies for more individualized and patient-centered care.

BACKGROUND:Most branch duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (BD-IPMNs) are indolent, but distinguishing those harboring high-grade dysplasia or invasive cancer remains difficult. This analysis focuses not on incidental small BD-IPMNs but on the subset whose cyst characteristics bring surgery into the decision-making discussion. Surgery prevents malignant progression but carries morbidity; surveillance avoids overtreatment but risks delayed cancer detection. Current guidelines rely on fixed thresholds that may not reflect individual variation. Our study compared immediate surgery and initial surveillance in patients with BD-IPMNs, using a decision-analytic model that incorporates patient-specific risk factors. METHODS:A Markov decision model compared immediate surgery with initial surveillance, incorporating age, comorbidities, and cyst location. Health states reflected progression from low-grade to high-grade dysplasia and invasive cancer, postoperative complications, recurrence, and quality-of-life decrements. Transition probabilities were derived from published studies and American College of Surgeons (ACS)-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data. The primary outcome was quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). RESULTS:For a 60-year-old patient with mild comorbidities and a pancreatic head BD-IPMN, immediate surgery provided 16.8 QALYs versus 16.3 with surveillance (incremental gain, 0.5 QALYs). Lifetime cancer probability was lower with surgery (24.5% vs 33.5%), as was cancer-related mortality (9.3% vs 20.3%), though surgery resulted in more resections for low-grade dysplasia (55.0% vs 15.3%). Age, baseline cancer probability, and perioperative mortality were the strongest determinants of the preferred strategy. CONCLUSIONS:Among patients with BD-IPMNs being considered for surgery, immediate resection offers a modest benefit for younger, healthier individuals, whereas surveillance remains appropriate for older or comorbid patients. These findings support individualized, risk-based management rather than universal application of guideline thresholds.

OBJECTIVE:To validate the ISGPS definition and grading system of PPAP after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA/BACKGROUND:In 2022, the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) defined post-pancreatectomy acute pancreatitis (PPAP) and recommended a prospective validation of its diagnostic criteria and grading system. METHODS:This was a prospective, international, multicenter study including patients undergoing PD at 17 referral pancreatic centers across Europe, Asia, Oceania, and the United States. PPAP diagnosis required the following three parameters: (1) postoperative serum hyperamylasemia /hyperlipasemia (POH) persisting on postoperative days 1 and 2, (2) radiologic alterations consistent with PPAP, and (3) a clinically relevant deterioration in the patient's condition. To validate the grading system, clinical and economic parameters were analyzed across all grades. RESULTS:Among 2902 patients undergoing PD, 7.5% (n=218) developed PPAP (6.3% grade B and 1.2% grade C). POH occurred in 24.1% of patients. Hospital stay was associated with PPAP grades (No POH/PPAP 10 days (IQR 7-17) days, grade B 22 days (IQR 15-34) days, and grade C 43 days (IQR 27-54) days; P<0.001), as well as intensive care unit admission (No POH/PPAP 5.4%, grade B 12.6%, grade C 82.9%; P<0.010), and hospital readmission rates (No POH/PPAP 7.3%, grade B 16.1%, grade C 18.5%; P<0.05). Costs of grade B and C PPAP were 2 and 11 times greater than uncomplicated clinical course, resp. (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS:This first prospective, international validation study of the ISGPS definition and grading system for PPAP highlighted the relevant clinical and financial implications of this condition. These results stress the importance of routine screening for PPAP in patients undergoing PD.

BACKGROUND:Management of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) requires choosing between surgical resection and active surveillance, yet current diagnostic tools cannot reliably distinguish which lesions harbor high-grade dysplasia or invasive cancer. As a result, many patients undergo major pancreatic surgery for low-grade disease, while others are observed until progression emerges. This uncertainty contributes to substantial variation in surgeon risk estimates, intervention thresholds, and treatment recommendations. Patients likewise differ in their tolerance for cancer risk, views on surgical morbidity, perceived burden of ongoing surveillance, and desired role in decision-making, making IPMN a distinctly preference-sensitive clinical scenario. Although recent international guidelines acknowledge the importance of incorporating patient values into management decisions, practical frameworks for doing so remain underdeveloped. METHODS:We performed a narrative review of the literature examining sources of uncertainty in IPMN management, variation in surgeon and patient risk perception, and existing approaches to shared decision-making (SDM) in preference-sensitive surgical decisions. We also evaluated communication strategies and decision-support tools relevant to improving decision quality in the setting of uncertain malignant potential. RESULTS:Evidence demonstrates substantial heterogeneity in both clinician and patient interpretation of malignancy risk, operative morbidity, and acceptable thresholds for surgical intervention. Surgeons and patients often weigh competing risks diff erently, contributing to variation in management recommendations even when clinical characteristics are similar. SDM provides a structured approach to integrating individualized malignancy risk estimates, discussion of treatment trade-off s, and elicitation of patient values. Conceptual frameworks and emerging decision-support tools suggest that SDM may improve calibration of risk perception, reduce unwarranted variation in care, and enhance alignment between treatment decisions and patient preferences. CONCLUSIONS:IPMN management represents a high-stakes clinical decision made under conditions of incomplete information. SDM off ers a pragmatic strategy to integrate clinical evidence with patient values when choosing between resection and surveillance. Incorporating SDM into routine IPMN care may improve decision quality, promote transparency in risk communication, and support more patient-centered recommendations while preserving clinical judgment.

BACKGROUND:Predicting long-term survival (>5 years; LTS) in resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains challenging. The aim of this study was to train and evaluate LTS prediction models. METHODS:We retrospectively included patients with PDAC who underwent resection between 2012 and 2019 from the databases at New York University, the Johns Hopkins Hospital, University of Verona Hospital Trust, and the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group. Two models were developed for the (1) post-operative and (2) post-adjuvant treatment phase. Training involved the full dataset followed by internal-external cross validation. RESULTS:4084 patients with resected PDAC were included. The estimated rate of LTS in (1) was 22% (95% CI: 21-24%) and in (2) 24% (95% CI: 22-26%). For model (1) 5-year performance metrics were an AUC of 0.68 (0.60-0.75), O/E ratio of 0.91 (0.45-1.82), and slope of 1.07 (0.56-2.05). Model (2) achieved 5-year AUC of 0.70 (0.64-0.75), O/E ratio of 0.96 (0.60-1.54), and slope of 1.16 (0.60-1.23). CONCLUSIONS:Our models achieved only modest performance despite a large, granular dataset and rigorous statistical methods, demonstrating the need for novel prognostic biomarkers.