4.7 Review

Distal Pancreatectomy with en Bloc Celiac Axis Resection (Modified Appleby Procedure) for Locally Advanced Pancreatic Body Cancer: A Single-Center Review of 80 Consecutive Patients

Journal

ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 23, Issue -, Pages S969-S975

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-016-5493-8

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Recently, distal pancreatectomy with en bloc celiac axis resection (DP-CAR) or modified Appleby procedure for locally advanced pancreatic body cancer is increasingly reported. However, actual long-term survival data are still unknown. Methods. This study retrospectively reviewed 80 consecutive patients with pancreatic body cancer who underwent DP-CAR at a single institution. Results. The study included 40 men and 40 women with a median age of 65 years (range, 44-85 years). A pancreatic fistula was the most common complication, occurring in 47 patients (57.5 %). Other complications with a high incidence were ischemic gastropathy (23 patients, 28.8 %) and delayed gastric emptying (20 patients, 25 %). According to the Clavien-Dindo classification, the major complications, defined as complications of grade 3 or higher, were observed in 33 patients (41.3 %), and the in-hospital mortality involved four patients (5 %). For all 80 patients, the 1-, 2-, and 5-year overall survivals (OSs) were respectively 81.1, 56.9, and 32.7 %, and the median survival time was 30.9 months. The actual 5-year survival for the 61 patients whose surgery was performed five or more years earlier was 27.9 % (17 of 61). The 1-, 2-, and 5-year OSs for the patients who underwent preoperative therapy (100, 90, and 78.8 %) were significantly better than for those who underwent upfront surgery (77.9, 51.5, and 26.7 %; P < 0.0001). Conclusions. The findings show DP-CAR to be a valid procedure for treating locally advanced pancreatic body cancer, which might contribute more to patients' survival when performed as part of multidisciplinary treatment.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available