A systematic review of the role of periadventitial dissection of the superior mesenteric artery in affecting margin status after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma

James R. Butler, Syed A. Ahmad, Matthew H. Katz, Jessica L. Cioffi, Nicholas Zyromski

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

20 Citations (Scopus)

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)305-311
Number of pages7
JournalHPB
Volume18
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 2016

Fingerprint

Pancreaticoduodenectomy
Superior Mesenteric Artery
Dissection
Adenocarcinoma
Recurrence
MEDLINE
Databases
Incidence

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology
  • Hepatology

Cite this

A systematic review of the role of periadventitial dissection of the superior mesenteric artery in affecting margin status after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. / Butler, James R.; Ahmad, Syed A.; Katz, Matthew H.; Cioffi, Jessica L.; Zyromski, Nicholas.

In: HPB, Vol. 18, No. 4, 2016, p. 305-311.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{d84d51d0907d404d9791095d9521694b,
title = "A systematic review of the role of periadventitial dissection of the superior mesenteric artery in affecting margin status after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma",
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.",
author = "Butler, {James R.} and Ahmad, {Syed A.} and Katz, {Matthew H.} and Cioffi, {Jessica L.} and Nicholas Zyromski",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1016/j.hpb.2015.11.009",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "18",
pages = "305--311",
journal = "HPB",
issn = "1365-182X",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A systematic review of the role of periadventitial dissection of the superior mesenteric artery in affecting margin status after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma

AU - Butler, James R.

AU - Ahmad, Syed A.

AU - Katz, Matthew H.

AU - Cioffi, Jessica L.

AU - Zyromski, Nicholas

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84976346961&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84976346961&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.hpb.2015.11.009

DO - 10.1016/j.hpb.2015.11.009

M3 - Review article

C2 - 27037198

AN - SCOPUS:84976346961

VL - 18

SP - 305

EP - 311

JO - HPB

JF - HPB

SN - 1365-182X

IS - 4

ER -