PMCCPMCCPMCC

Search tips
Search criteria 

Advanced

 
Logo of worldjgastrosurgLink to Publisher's site
 
World J Gastrointest Surg. 2010 February 27; 2(2): 39–46.
Published online 2010 February 27. doi:  10.4240/wjgs.v2.i2.39
PMCID: PMC2999214

Extended pancreatic resections and lymphadenectomy: An appraisal of the current evidence

Abstract

Surgery remains the mainstay of treatment for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and complete removal of the cancer confers a definite survival advantage, especially in early disease. However, the majority of patients do not present with early disease, thus precluding the chance of a cure by standard pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), distal pancreatectomy or total pancreatectomy. For this reason, pancreatic surgeons have attempted to push the limits of resection over the last three decades. The aim of these resections has been to determine whether obtaining a complete resection by extending the limits of conventional resection in patients with advanced disease will yield the results seen with PD alone in early disease. This article revisits the data from such studies in an attempt to determine if the available literature supports the performance of extended resections for pancreatic cancer in terms of improvement of survival.

Keywords: Pancreas, Cancer, Vein, Lymphadenectomy, Artery, Reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

The prognosis for pancreatic cancer has largely remained the same for the last two decades[1]. Pancreatic cancer surgery, which may include pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), distal pancreatectomy (DP) and/or total pancreatectomy (TP), remains the mainstay of treatment for pancreatic cancer and the complete removal of the cancer confers a definite survival advantage in early disease[2]. However, not all patients present with early disease[3] precluding the chance of a cure by standard pancreatic resections in a vast majority of patients. Over the last 3 decades, pancreatic surgeons have attempted to push the limits of resection in patients with advanced disease with an aim to completely remove the tumour[4-8] by performing extended resections. This includes extended lymphadenectomies (removal of lymph nodes in addition to those removed during a standard lymphadenectomy such as the celiac axis nodes, nodes around the common and proper hepatic arteries, and the aorta and inferior vena cava in continuity with the Gerota’s fascia), vascular resections, multiorgan resections and even metastatectomies. However, while the feasibility of such major and often morbid procedures has been demonstrated in high-volume centers, the main outcome that needs to be addressed in such resections is the benefit in terms of overall survival and their impact on the quality of life[9].

The rationale behind the attempts at extended resections stem from a clear understanding that only a complete resection (no residual disease/R0) is associated with the best possible chance of survival for pancreatic cancer[10].

VASCULAR RESECTIONS AND RECONSTRUCTIONS

The proximity of the pancreatic head tumour to the portal vein as a cause for inoperability has been recognised for the last 6 decades. This prompted early experiments of PD with portal vein resections in dogs[11] aimed at determining the feasibility of such an operation. The results of the experiment were not very encouraging. This did not deter further attempts and surgeons continued experimental work attempting the procedure in two stages-initial ligation and then resection of the portal vein in monkeys and cadavers[12,13]. Central to all this work though, was the findings of von Eck and the "Eck fistula"[14]. Von Eck had shown that as a result of porta caval shunting in dogs the liver underwent a certain amount of atrophy. Nonetheless, the dogs lived a normal life for many years and demonstrated no gross clinical disturbances. Around the same year, Mc Dermott[15] attempted, for the first time, a single staged PD with portal vein resection and mesentero-caval anastomosis. The patient was discharged on the 19th postoperative day and was still alive for the 4 mo of follow-up. After that, another surgeon attempted resecting the portal vein and performing a portacaval anastomosis in 2 patients. One patient died after 3 mo and the other after 6 mo as a result of gastrointestinal bleeding and ammonia intoxication. Monge et al[16] in their audit of pancreatic cancer over a period of 22 years recognised the low resectability rate for pancreatic head cancer at the time, due to the proximity to the portal vein. This prompted Fortner et al[4,17,18] to suggest three types of en bloc resections based on the vascular resection (venous or arterial) and reconstruction. They believed that such procedures would not only increase the number of complete resections but also increase the lymph nodal yields. They demonstrated a reduction in post-operative morbidity and mortality with increasing experience with the procedure[18].

Since the description of the vascular resections as part of radical pancreatic cancer surgery, there has been considerable debate over the justification of the performance of such potentially morbid procedures in terms of survival.

Reports of arterial resections and reconstruction have been reported for pancreatic tumours[19-32]. While venous resection and reconstruction has been performed in many series, the resistance to arterial resections (hepatic artery or celiac trunk) is strong.

The basis behind the believed benefit of performing a venous resection over an arterial resection in cancer is that the portal venous system, unlike the arterial system, is not surrounded by perivascular neural plexus and lymphatic tissue[33]. Hence, portal vein involvement potentially remains the only barrier to radical tumour removal[33]. Besides, ‘venous involvement’ described preoperatively usually reflects an abutment of the vessel by the tumour without actual invasion. In the case of arteries, the fact that it is closely related to the neural and lymphatic plexuses implies that the disease is usually metastatic by the time the arteries are involved.

The argument against venous resection and reconstruction is that by the time the tumour infiltrates the portal vein, the incidence of lymph nodal involvement is 67.4%[34], negating the possibility of a cure by surgery. This pessimistic view has, however, been challenged by a number of surgeons who have reported that it is not the venous resection that is the determinant of poor long-term outcomes but rather the disease biology[33-49].

However, there has been considerable debate since then on the actual benefit of such resections in terms of overall survival. In 2006, Siriwardana et al[34] reviewed the available literature up to that time to determine the benefit of portal and superior mesenteric vein resections and reconstructions. Their study, which included data on 1646 patients, indicated that while the procedure could be performed with reasonable morbidity (42%) and mortality (6%), the benefit in terms of overall survival was lacking. Moreover, histopathological analysis of resected lymph nodes was also high, indicating that the disease was beyond cure by the time venous involvement had taken place. However, a closer look at their analysis revealed that in 40% of patients the resection margin was positive-a known indicator of poor outcomes. This precludes an accurate analysis of the benefit of the venous resection in terms of overall survival. This has been shown by other studies[44,45] published after the Siriwardena review[34] that demonstrated no difference in outcomes when venous involvement was documented on histology as compared to absence of venous involvement so long as an R0 resection could be achieved.

Similarly, other studies have confirmed that in cases of venous involvement by the tumour, there are other factors that determine outcome that include: (1) Depth of venous invasion[41]-no difference in survival was noted between patients without portal vein invasion as opposed to involvement of the tunica adventitia. However, outcome following a complete resection of the vein with involvement of tunica media and intima was no different from an incomplete resection; (2) Length of invasion[45]-while no difference was observed in terms of survival between no portal vein invasion and invasion that was unilateral or circumferential, the length of the involved segment did affect outcome. Length of involvement more than 3 cm was associated with poor outcomes.

The addition of neo-adjuvant chemo-radiation protocols may lead to an increased number of patients being offered a complete resection after being termed ‘borderline resectable’ due to likely vessel involvement on the initial staging[50]. The group from MD Anderson Cancer Centre[50] have defined ‘borderline resectable tumours’ as those tumours that exhibit the following: (1) Encasement of a short segment of the hepatic artery, without evidence of tumour extension to the celiac axis, that is amenable to resection and reconstruction; (2) Tumour abutment of the superior mesenteric artery involving < 180° of the circumference of the artery or short-segment occlusion of the superior mesenteric vein, portal vein, or their confluence with a suitable option available for vascular reconstruction because the veins are normal above and below the area of tumour involvement.

These neoadjuvant chemo-radiation protocols may help separate those who would not benefit from major vascular resection versus those who would indeed benefit from vascular resections and that too with higher probability of R0 resections.

MULTIVISCERAL RESECTIONS

In an attempt to obtain complete removal of pancreatic cancer, surgeons have resorted to en bloc resections that entailed removal of adjacent viscera/vessels that are grossly infiltrated by tumour at the time of PD, DP, or TP[51-55].

There has been considerable confusion in the literature as to the definition of extended resections: some authors have included a splenectomy as an extended resection for a pancreatic body and tail tumour[56]. Similarly, others have performed extended resections including gastrectomies even in the absence of gross invasion[57]. Such articles were not included in our analysis. Classic PD (Whipple’s operation) is essentially a multi-visceral resection which includes the resection of the pancreas with a portion of the stomach. Similarly, DP, as has been performed over the years, involves removal of the spleen. As such, multivisceral resections should strictly be defined as those resections that include removal of adjacent viscera that are not normally removed during the course of the operation but in whom gross involvement by the tumour entails their resection en bloc to achieve an R0 resection.

Table Table11 shows some of the larger studies in which such resections were undertaken. Morbidity following such procedures has been shown to vary between 35%-68% while mortality ranged from 0%-3%[20,51,52]. 5-year survival rates have been shown to be between 16%-22%[20,55] with one study even reporting an actuarial 10-year disease specific survival rate of 18%[55]. These recent results indicate an improvement in outcomes following multivisceral resections compared to a previous study published in 1996 by Klempnauer et al[54]. Based on their mortality rate of 17.7% with a 5-year survival rate of 12%, Klempnauer et al[54] had earlier concluded that such resections resulted in increased risk of mortality with an impaired long-term prognosis.

Table 1
Multi-visceral resections for pancreatic cancer (where studies have included vascular resections in the analysis this has been specified)

From the limited data available, what can be concluded at this time is that such resections are technically feasible and when performed in high volume centres with the necessary expertise they have shown to be associated with improved survival as compared to no resection and comparable survival to standard resections for lesions that do not involve adjacent organs. However, given the high morbidity and even mortality associated with these procedures, it should be advised that such resections should be performed only when the possibility of achieving R0 seems distinctly feasible.

EXTENDED LYMPHADENECTOMY

The knowledge of lymph node involvement in pancreatic cancer and the recognition that lymphadenectomy may be linked to survival has been known for the last 5 decades[58,59]. In fact, Fortner et al[4,17,18] proposed the en bloc resection as a means to increasing lymph nodal yield.

In 1999, recognising that positive lymph nodes on histology are a poor risk factor for outcomes following pancreatic resections for pancreatic cancer, leading pancreatic surgeons from around the world issued consensus definitions of the different surgeries for pancreatic cancer[60]. They defined radical surgery as en bloc pancreaticoduodenectomy with extended resection margins, resection of defined lymph nodes and an additional retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy. The definitions of lymphadenectomy as per the consensus definition[60] are in Table Table2.2. The prime issue in terms of lymphadenectomy is whether the performance of an extended lymphadenectomy (EL) offers any survival advantage over standard lymphadenectomy (SL).

Table 2
Definitions of lymphadenectomy for pancreatic cancer according to the consensus definitions published in 1999[60]

Numerous studies have attempted to answer this question[8,61-77]. Table Table33 lists the randomised controlled trials published to date comparing SL versus EL.

Table 3
Randomised controlled trials analysing the benefits of SL versus EL for pancreatic cancer

In the last 2 years there have been 2 meta-analyses[78,79] published comparing SL with EL. The lymph node yield and the ability to achieve a complete resection improved with an extended resection that involved an EL. Both the meta-analyses concluded that while the extended procedure tended to be associated with a comparable morbidity and mortality (5.5% versus 3.8%)[79] (except for increased risk of delayed gastric emptying in the EL group; 9.4% vs 19.4% OR = 0.120)[78], the extended procedure did not impact on overall survival. They also concluded that more adequately powered studies are needed which should preferably be performed within the realms of controlled trials. Farnell et al[64] also reported a decreased quality of life in their patients who underwent EL. Interestingly in 2005, Pawlik et al[80] analysed the results of SL and EL from their own data and determined that only 3 in 1000 patients would benefit from an EL. Put differently, this would imply a 0.22% potential incremental improvement in survival following EL compared with SL. Based on a biostatistical model they determined that a definitive evaluation of the potential benefits of EL would require a prohibitively large sample size of 202,000 in each arm in a phase 3 randomized trial. This meant that even if an accrual of 200 patients per year in the trial was possible, it would take 1010 years to complete the trial! This led them to conclude that such a trial would be infeasible.

However, as the argument on the ideal lymphadenectomy for pancreatic cancer continues, some surgeons have focussed their attention on analysing another potential predictor of survival-lymph node ratio[81-85]. The lymph nodal ratio essentially is a ratio of metastatic to examined lymph nodes. Based on the results obtained using SL, the cut-off ratio indicative of adverse prognosis in the different studies varied between 0.15 and 0.3. What has also been shown to aid an accurate staging and in turn more precise prediction of survival has been the total number of lymph nodes harvested. In a large population-based cohort, Schwarz et al[86] found that lymph nodal yields of at least 15 in the histopathological specimen analysed would yield at least 10-15 negative lymph nodes resulting in a more accurate prediction of survival.

M1 RESECTIONS

The presence of distant metastases in patients with pancreatic cancer has generally been considered an indicator of terminal disease. However, there have been a number of reports (case reports and even some large series) highlighting attempts from surgical resection of distant metastases (liver, peritoneum)[7,87-91]. While some studies have demonstrated improved survival in patients with pancreatic cancer in whom metastasectomy was performed for adenocarcinoma[7,88,89,91], a more recent study in which resections were performed for liver and peritoneal metastases has indicated that such resections do not provide a survival benefit[90].

In one of the larger series of metastasectomies for pancreatic cancer published till date, Shrikhande et al[7] were able to achieve a median survival of 13.8 mo after R0/R1 (microscopically positive margins) surgery for advanced pancreatic cancer with M1 disease with a 1-year survival of 58.9%. While the median survival following resection of liver and peritoneal metastases was comparatively low (11.4 mo and 12.9 mo respectively) the median survival following removal of interaortocaval lymph nodal metastases was as high as 27 mo. Furthermore, the morbidity and mortality in their series was 24% and 0% respectively. Yamada et al[90] observed no difference in survival between those patients who had resections for liver and peritoneal metastases (n =11 and 6 respectively) as compared to those who did not. However, in the 48 patients who did undergo removal of the involved interaortocaval lymph nodes, survival appeared to be better than those who were not resected. The difference though did not attain statistical significance.

In 2008, Michalski et al[92] reviewed the available literature on liver resections for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma which included the results from 3 case reports and 21 studies (the largest had 11 patients undergoing liver resection). They concluded that while such resections were technically feasible in selected patients the actual benefit could be determined only from larger randomized controlled trials.

CONCLUSION

Available data on extended pancreatic resections for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma indicates that such major procedures are technically feasible and can be done with reasonable morbidity and mortality. However, the benefit of such surgery on more important variables such as overall survival and quality of life is lacking with the existence of conflicting and often confusing reports. Thus, till such time as more robust evidence from randomised controlled trials is available to support the performance of extended resections, standard PD, DP or TP should be considered as the best practice for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. The more complex resections should only be undertaken in high volume specialized centres of pancreatic surgery after a careful assessment of the risk benefit ratio in the individual patient.

Footnotes

Peer reviewers: Joseph Kim, MD, Department of Oncologic Surgery, City of Hope Medical Center, 1500 East Duarte Road Duarte, CA 91010, United States; Sonshin Takao, MD, Frontier Science Research Center, 8-35-1 Sakuragaoka, Kagoshima, 890-8520, Japan

S- Editor Li LF L- Editor Roemmele A E- Editor Yang C

References

1. Mendieta Zerón H, García Flores JR, Romero Prieto ML. Limitations in improving detection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Future Oncol. 2009;5:657–668. [PubMed]
2. Raut CP, Tseng JF, Sun CC, Wang H, Wolff RA, Crane CH, Hwang R, Vauthey JN, Abdalla EK, Lee JE, et al. Impact of resection status on pattern of failure and survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg. 2007;246:52–60. [PubMed]
3. Mackenzie RP, McCollum AD. Novel agents for the treatment of adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2009;9:1473–1485. [PubMed]
4. Fortner JG, Kim DK, Cubilla A, Turnbull A, Pahnke LD, Shils ME. Regional pancreatectomy: en bloc pancreatic, portal vein and lymph node resection. Ann Surg. 1977;186:42–50. [PubMed]
5. Martin RC 2nd, Scoggins CR, Egnatashvili V, Staley CA, McMasters KM, Kooby DA. Arterial and venous resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: operative and long-term outcomes. Arch Surg. 2009;144:154–159. [PubMed]
6. Abramson MA, Swanson EW, Whang EE. Surgical resection versus palliative chemoradiotherapy for the management of pancreatic cancer with local venous invasion: a decision analysis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2009;13:26–34. [PubMed]
7. Shrikhande SV, Kleeff J, Reiser C, Weitz J, Hinz U, Esposito I, Schmidt J, Friess H, Büchler MW. Pancreatic resection for M1 pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:118–127. [PubMed]
8. Massucco P, Ribero D, Sgotto E, Mellano A, Muratore A, Capussotti L. Prognostic significance of lymph node metastases in pancreatic head cancer treated with extended lymphadenectomy: not just a matter of numbers. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:3323–3332. [PubMed]
9. Crippa S, Domínguez I, Rodríguez JR, Razo O, Thayer SP, Ryan DP, Warshaw AL, Fernández-del Castillo C. Quality of life in pancreatic cancer: analysis by stage and treatment. J Gastrointest Surg. 2008;12:783–793; discussion 793-794. [PubMed]
10. Wagner M, Redaelli C, Lietz M, Seiler CA, Friess H, Büchler MW. Curative resection is the single most important factor determining outcome in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Br J Surg. 2004;91:586–594. [PubMed]
11. Schafer PW, Kozy JS. Radical Pan- creatoduodenectomy with Resection of the. Patent Portal Vein. Surgery. 1947;22:959. [PubMed]
12. Milnes RF, Child CG 3rd. Acute occlusion by ligature of the portal vein in the Macacus rhesus monkey. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1949;70:332–334. [PubMed]
13. Child CG 3rd, Holswade GR, Mcclure RD Jr, Gore AL, O'Neill EA. Pancreaticoduodenectomy with resection of the portal vein in the Macaca mulatta monkey and in man. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1952;94:31–45. [PubMed]
14. Child CG III. Eck’s Fistula. Surg Gynecol Obst. 1953;96:375.
15. Mcdermott WV Jr. A one-stage pancreatoduodenectomy with resection of the portal vein for carcinoma of the pancreas. Ann Surg. 1952;136:1012–1018. [PubMed]
16. Monge JJ, Judd ES, Gage RP. Radical pancreatoduodenectomy: A 22-Year experience with the complications, mortality rate, and survival rate. Ann Surg. 1964;160:711–722. [PubMed]
17. Fortner JG. Regional resection of cancer of the pancreas: a new surgical approach. Surgery. 1973;73:307–320. [PubMed]
18. Fortner JG. Regional pancreatectomy for cancer of the pancreas, ampulla, and other related sites. Tumor staging and results. Ann Surg. 1984;199:418–425. [PubMed]
19. Kondo S, Katoh H, Hirano S, Ambo Y, Tanaka E, Okushiba S, Morikawa T. Results of radical distal pancreatectomy with en bloc resection of the celiac artery for locally advanced cancer of the pancreatic body. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2003;388:101–106. [PubMed]
20. Sasson AR, Hoffman JP, Ross EA, Kagan SA, Pingpank JF, Eisenberg BL. En bloc resection for locally advanced cancer of the pancreas: is it worthwhile? J Gastrointest Surg. 2002;6:147–157; discussion 157-158. [PubMed]
21. Miyakawa S, Horiguchi A, Hanai T, Mizuno K, Ishihara S, Niwamoto N, Iwase Y, Asano Y, Furusawa K, Miura K, et al. Monitoring hepatic venous hemoglobin oxygen saturation during Appleby operation for pancreatic cancer. Hepatogastroenterology. 2002;49:817–821. [PubMed]
22. Konishi M, Kinoshita T, Nakagori T, Inoue K, Oda T, Kimata T, Kikuchi H, Ryu M. Distal pancreatectomy with resection of the celiac axis and reconstruction of the hepatic artery for carcinoma of the body and tail of the pancreas. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 2000;7:183–187. [PubMed]
23. Mayumi T, Nimura Y, Kamiya J, Kondo S, Nagino M, Kanai M, Miyachi M, Hamaguchi K, Hayakawa N. Distal pancreatectomy with en bloc resection of the celiac artery for carcinoma of the body and tail of the pancreas. Int J Pancreatol. 1997;22:15–21. [PubMed]
24. Kimura W, Han I, Furukawa Y, Sunami E, Futakawa N, Inoue T, Shinkai H, Zhao B, Muto T, Makuuchi M, et al. Appleby operation for carcinoma of the body and tail of the pancreas. Hepatogastroenterology. 1997;44:387–393. [PubMed]
25. Makary MA, Fishman EK, Cameron JL. Resection of the celiac axis for invasive pancreatic cancer. J Gastrointest Surg. 2005;9:503–507. [PubMed]
26. Lin CC, Chen CL, Cheng YF. Modified extended distal pancreatectomy for carcinoma of body and tail of pancreas. Hepatogastroenterology. 2005;52:1090–1091. [PubMed]
27. Hirai I, Kimura W, Kamiga M, Mizutani M, Takeshita A, Watanabe T, Fuse A. The significance of intraoperative Doppler ultrasonography in evaluating hepatic arterial flow when assessing the indications for the Appleby procedure for pancreatic body cancer. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 2005;12:55–60. [PubMed]
28. Liu B. Modified Appleby operation in treatment of distal pancreatic cancer. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2003;2:622–625. [PubMed]
29. Yamaguchi K, Nakano K, Kobayashi K, Ogura Y, Konomi H, Sugitani A, Tanaka M. Appleby operation for pancreatic body-tail carcinoma: report of three cases. Surg Today. 2003;33:873–878. [PubMed]
30. Wu YL, Yan HC, Chen LR, Gao SL, Chen J, Dong X. Extended Appleby's operation for pancreatic cancer involving celiac axis. J Surg Oncol. 2007;96:442–446; discussion 447. [PubMed]
31. Gagandeep S, Artinyan A, Jabbour N, Mateo R, Matsuoka L, Sher L, Genyk Y, Selby R. Extended pancreatectomy with resection of the celiac axis: the modified Appleby operation. Am J Surg. 2006;192:330–335. [PubMed]
32. Nakano H, Bachellier P, Weber JC, Oussoultzoglou E, Dieng M, Shimura H, Boudjema K, Wolf P, Jaeck D. Arterial and vena caval resections combined with pancreaticoduodenectomy in highly selected patients with periampullary malignancies. Hepatogastroenterology. 2002;49:258–262. [PubMed]
33. Riediger H, Makowiec F, Fischer E, Adam U, Hopt UT. Postoperative morbidity and long-term survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy with superior mesenterico-portal vein resection. J Gastrointest Surg. 2006;10:1106–1115. [PubMed]
34. Siriwardana HP, Siriwardena AK. Systematic review of outcome of synchronous portal-superior mesenteric vein resection during pancreatectomy for cancer. Br J Surg. 2006;93:662–673. [PubMed]
35. Amano H, Miura F, Toyota N, Wada K, Katoh K, Hayano K, Kadowaki S, Shibuya M, Maeno S, Eguchi T, et al. Is pancreatectomy with arterial reconstruction a safe and useful procedure for locally advanced pancreatic cancer? J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 2009;16:850–857. [PubMed]
36. Tseng JF, Raut CP, Lee JE, Pisters PW, Vauthey JN, Abdalla EK, Gomez HF, Sun CC, Crane CH, Wolff RA, et al. Pancreaticoduodenectomy with vascular resection: margin status and survival duration. J Gastrointest Surg. 2004;8:935–949; discussion 949-950. [PubMed]
37. Shibata C, Kobari M, Tsuchiya T, Arai K, Anzai R, Takahashi M, Uzuki M, Sawai T, Yamazaki T. Pancreatectomy combined with superior mesenteric-portal vein resection for adenocarcinoma in pancreas. World J Surg. 2001;25:1002–1005. [PubMed]
38. van Geenen RC, ten Kate FJ, de Wit LT, van Gulik TM, Obertop H, Gouma DJ. Segmental resection and wedge excision of the portal or superior mesenteric vein during pancreatoduodenectomy. Surgery. 2001;129:158–163. [PubMed]
39. Adham M, Mirza DF, Chapuis F, Mayer AD, Bramhall SR, Coldham C, Baulieux J, Buckels J. Results of vascular resections during pancreatectomy from two European centres: an analysis of survival and disease-free survival explicative factors. HPB (Oxford) 2006;8:465–473. [PubMed]
40. Jaeck D, Bachellier P, Oussoultzoglou E, Audet M, Rosso E, Wolf P. [Analysis of a series of 100 mesenterico-portal vein resections during pancreatic resection] Bull Acad Natl Med. 2006;190:1495–1506; dsicussion 1506-1509. [PubMed]
41. Fukuda S, Oussoultzoglou E, Bachellier P, Rosso E, Nakano H, Audet M, Jaeck D. Significance of the depth of portal vein wall invasion after curative resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Arch Surg. 2007;142:172–179; discussion 180. [PubMed]
42. Park DI, Lee JK, Kim JE, Hyun JG, Shim SG, Lee KT, Palk SW, Rhee JC, Choi KW, Lim JH, et al. The analysis of resectability and survival in pancreatic cancer patients with vascular invasion. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2001;32:231–234. [PubMed]
43. Taschieri AM, Elli M, Rovati M, Sampietro GM, Cristaldi M, Danelli P, Pisacreta M. Surgical treatment of pancreatic tumors invading the spleno-mesenteric-portal vessels. An Italian Multicenter Survey. Hepatogastroenterology. 1999;46:492–497. [PubMed]
44. Toomey P, Hernandez J, Morton C, Duce L, Farrior T, Villadolid D, Ross S, Rosemurgy A. Resection of portovenous structures to obtain microscopically negative margins during pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma is worthwhile. Am Surg. 2009;75:804–809; discussion 809-810. [PubMed]
45. Kaneoka Y, Yamaguchi A, Isogai M. Portal or superior mesenteric vein resection for pancreatic head adenocarcinoma: prognostic value of the length of venous resection. Surgery. 2009;145:417–425. [PubMed]
46. Shimada K, Sano T, Sakamoto Y, Kosuge T. Clinical implications of combined portal vein resection as a palliative procedure in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic head carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2006;13:1569–1578. [PubMed]
47. Hartel M, Niedergethmann M, Farag-Soliman M, Sturm JW, Richter A, Trede M, Post S. Benefit of venous resection for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head. Eur J Surg. 2002;168:707–712. [PubMed]
48. Kure S, Kaneko T, Takeda S, Inoue S, Nakao A. Analysis of long-term survivors after surgical resection for invasive pancreatic cancer. HPB (Oxford) 2005;7:129–134. [PubMed]
49. Takahashi S, Ogata Y, Tsuzuki T. Combined resection of the pancreas and portal vein for pancreatic cancer. Br J Surg. 1994;81:1190–1193. [PubMed]
50. Varadhachary GR, Tamm EP, Abbruzzese JL, Xiong HQ, Crane CH, Wang H, Lee JE, Pisters PW, Evans DB, Wolff RA. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: definitions, management, and role of preoperative therapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2006;13:1035–1046. [PubMed]
51. Hartwig W, Hackert T, Hinz U, Hassenpflug M, Strobel O, Büchler MW, Werner J. Multivisceral resection for pancreatic malignancies: risk-analysis and long-term outcome. Ann Surg. 2009;250:81–87. [PubMed]
52. Nikfarjam M, Sehmbey M, Kimchi ET, Gusani NJ, Shereef S, Avella DM, Staveley-O'Carroll KF. Additional organ resection combined with pancreaticoduodenectomy does not increase postoperative morbidity and mortality. J Gastrointest Surg. 2009;13:915–921. [PubMed]
53. Trede M, Schwall G. [Multivisceral and extended resection in pancreatic cancer] Langenbecks Arch Chir Suppl Kongressbd. 1992:61–65. [PubMed]
54. Klempnauer J, Ridder GJ, Bektas H, Pichlmayr R. Extended resections of ductal pancreatic cancer--impact on operative risk and prognosis. Oncology. 1996;53:47–53. [PubMed]
55. Shoup M, Conlon KC, Klimstra D, Brennan MF. Is extended resection for adenocarcinoma of the body or tail of the pancreas justified? J Gastrointest Surg. 2003;7:946–952; discussion 952. [PubMed]
56. Adam U, Makowiec F, Riediger H, Schareck WD, Benz S, Hopt UT. Risk factors for complications after pancreatic head resection. Am J Surg. 2004;187:201–208. [PubMed]
57. Ozaki H, Kinoshita T, Kosuge T, Yamamoto J, Shimada K, Inoue K, Koyama Y, Mukai K. An aggressive therapeutic approach to carcinoma of the body and tail of the pancreas. Cancer. 1996;77:2240–2245. [PubMed]
58. Miller EM, Clagett OT. Survival five years after radical pancreatoduodenectomy for carcinoma of the head of the pancreas. Ann Surg. 1951;134:1013–1017. [PubMed]
59. Weber AO. Carcinoma of head of pancreas with spread to local lymph nodes. Five-year survival after radical pancreaticoduodenectomy. JAMA. 1963;186:150–151. [PubMed]
60. Pedrazzoli S, Beger HG, Obertop H, Andrén-Sandberg A, Fernández-Cruz L, Henne-Bruns D, Lüttges J, Neoptolemos JP. A surgical and pathological based classification of resective treatment of pancreatic cancer. Summary of an international workshop on surgical procedures in pancreatic cancer. Dig Surg. 1999;16:337–345. [PubMed]
61. Pedrazzoli S, DiCarlo V, Dionigi R, Mosca F, Pederzoli P, Pasquali C, Klöppel G, Dhaene K, Michelassi F. Standard versus extended lymphadenectomy associated with pancreatoduodenectomy in the surgical treatment of adenocarcinoma of the head of the pancreas: a multicenter, prospective, randomized study. Lymphadenectomy Study Group. Ann Surg. 1998;228:508–517. [PubMed]
62. Yeo CJ, Cameron JL, Lillemoe KD, Sohn TA, Campbell KA, Sauter PK, Coleman J, Abrams RA, Hruban RH. Pancreaticoduodenectomy with or without distal gastrectomy and extended retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy for periampullary adenocarcinoma, part 2: randomized controlled trial evaluating survival, morbidity, and mortality. Ann Surg. 2002;236:355–366; discussion 366-368. [PubMed]
63. Nimura Y, Nagino M, Kato H, Miyagawa S, Yamaguchi A, Kinoshita T, Takao S, Takada T, Miyazaki K, Ishiyama S, et al. Regional versus extended lymph node dissection in radical pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer: A multicenter, randomized controlled trial. HPB (Oxford) 2004;6(suppl 1):2.
64. Farnell MB, Pearson RK, Sarr MG, DiMagno EP, Burgart LJ, Dahl TR, Foster N, Sargent DJ. A prospective randomized trial comparing standard pancreatoduodenectomy with pancreatoduodenectomy with extended lymphadenectomy in resectable pancreatic head adenocarcinoma. Surgery. 2005;138:618–628; discussion 628-630. [PubMed]
65. Yamada S, Nakao A, Fujii T, Sugimoto H, Kanazumi N, Nomoto S, Kodera Y, Takeda S. Pancreatic cancer with paraaortic lymph node metastasis: a contraindication for radical surgery? Pancreas. 2009;38:e13–e17. [PubMed]
66. Yoshida T, Matsumoto T, Sasaki A, Shibata K, Aramaki M, Kitano S. Outcome of paraaortic node-positive pancreatic head and bile duct adenocarcinoma. Am J Surg. 2004;187:736–740. [PubMed]
67. Shimada K, Sakamoto Y, Sano T, Kosuge T. The role of paraaortic lymph node involvement on early recurrence and survival after macroscopic curative resection with extended lymphadenectomy for pancreatic carcinoma. J Am Coll Surg. 2006;203:345–352. [PubMed]
68. Takamori H, Hiraoka T, Kanemitsu K, Tsuji T, Tanaka H, Chikamoto A, Horino K, Beppu T, Hirota M, Baba H. Long-term outcomes of extended radical resection combined with intraoperative radiation therapy for pancreatic cancer. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 2008;15:603–607. [PubMed]
69. Yang YM, Wan YL, Tian XD, Zhuang Y, Huang YT. Outcome of pancreaticoduodenectomy with extended retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy for adenocarcinoma of the head of the pancreas. Chin Med J (Engl) 2005;118:1863–1869. [PubMed]
70. Yeo CJ, Cameron JL, Sohn TA, Coleman J, Sauter PK, Hruban RH, Pitt HA, Lillemoe KD. Pancreaticoduodenectomy with or without extended retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy for periampullary adenocarcinoma: comparison of morbidity and mortality and short-term outcome. Ann Surg. 1999;229:613–622; discussion 622-624. [PubMed]
71. Henne-Bruns D, Vogel I, Lüttges J, Klöppel G, Kremer B. Surgery for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head: staging, complications, and survival after regional versus extended lymphadenectomy. World J Surg. 2000;24:595–601; discussion 601-602. [PubMed]
72. Henne-Bruns D, Vogel I, Lüttges J, Klöppel G, Kremer B. Ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas head: survival after regional versus extended lymphadenectomy. Hepatogastroenterology. 1998;45:855–866. [PubMed]
73. Riall TS, Cameron JL, Lillemoe KD, Campbell KA, Sauter PK, Coleman J, Abrams RA, Laheru D, Hruban RH, Yeo CJ. Pancreaticoduodenectomy with or without distal gastrectomy and extended retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy for periampullary adenocarcinoma--part 3: update on 5-year survival. J Gastrointest Surg. 2005;9:1191–204; discussion 1204-1206. [PubMed]
74. Popiela T, Kedra B, Sierzega M. Does extended lymphadenectomy improve survival of pancreatic cancer patients? Acta Chir Belg. 2002;102:78–82. [PubMed]
75. Ohigashi H, Ishikawa O, Tamura S, Imaoka S, Sasaki Y, Kameyama M, Kabuto T, Furukawa H, Hiratsuka M, Fujita M, et al. Pancreatic invasion as the prognostic indicator of duodenal adenocarcinoma treated by pancreatoduodenectomy plus extended lymphadenectomy. Surgery. 1998;124:510–515. [PubMed]
76. Mukaiya M, Hirata K, Satoh T, Kimura M, Yamashiro K, Ura H, Oikawa I, Denno R. Lack of survival benefit of extended lymph node dissection for ductal adenocarcinoma of the head of the pancreas: retrospective multi-institutional analysis in Japan. World J Surg. 1998;22:248–252; discussion 252-253. [PubMed]
77. Nakagohri T, Kinoshita T, Konishi M, Takahashi S, Tanizawa Y. Clinical results of extended lymphadenectomy and intraoperative radiotherapy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Hepatogastroenterology. 2007;54:564–569. [PubMed]
78. Michalski CW, Kleeff J, Wente MN, Diener MK, Büchler MW, Friess H. Systematic review and meta-analysis of standard and extended lymphadenectomy in pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer. Br J Surg. 2007;94:265–273. [PubMed]
79. Iqbal N, Lovegrove RE, Tilney HS, Abraham AT, Bhattacharya S, Tekkis PP, Kocher HM. A comparison of pancreaticoduodenectomy with extended pancreaticoduodenectomy: a meta-analysis of 1909 patients. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2009;35:79–86. [PubMed]
80. Pawlik TM, Abdalla EK, Barnett CC, Ahmad SA, Cleary KR, Vauthey JN, Lee JE, Evans DB, Pisters PW. Feasibility of a randomized trial of extended lymphadenectomy for pancreatic cancer. Arch Surg. 2005;140:584–589; discussion 589-591. [PubMed]
81. Pawlik TM, Gleisner AL, Cameron JL, Winter JM, Assumpcao L, Lillemoe KD, Wolfgang C, Hruban RH, Schulick RD, Yeo CJ, et al. Prognostic relevance of lymph node ratio following pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer. Surgery. 2007;141:610–618. [PubMed]
82. Benassai G, Mastrorilli M, Mosella F, Mosella G. Significance of lymph node metastases in the surgical management of pancreatic head carcinoma. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 1999;18:23–28. [PubMed]
83. Riediger H, Keck T, Wellner U, zur Hausen A, Adam U, Hopt UT, Makowiec F. The lymph node ratio is the strongest prognostic factor after resection of pancreatic cancer. J Gastrointest Surg. 2009;13:1337–1344. [PubMed]
84. Berger AC, Watson JC, Ross EA, Hoffman JP. The metastatic/examined lymph node ratio is an important prognostic factor after pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Am Surg. 2004;70:235–240; discussion 240. [PubMed]
85. Sierzega M, Popiela T, Kulig J, Nowak K. The ratio of metastatic/resected lymph nodes is an independent prognostic factor in patients with node-positive pancreatic head cancer. Pancreas. 2006;33:240–245. [PubMed]
86. Schwarz RE, Smith DD. Extent of lymph node retrieval and pancreatic cancer survival: information from a large US population database. Ann Surg Oncol. 2006;13:1189–1200. [PubMed]
87. Klempnauer J, Ridder GJ, Piso P, Pichlmayr R. [Is liver resection in metastases of exocrine pancreatic carcinoma justified?] Chirurg. 1996;67:366–370. [PubMed]
88. Takamori H, Hiraoka T, Kanemitsu K, Tsuji T, Saito N, Nishida H, Sakaguchi H, Miyauchi Y. Treatment strategies for hepatic metastases from pancreatic cancer in patients previously treated with radical resection combined with intraoperative radiation therapy. HPB Surg. 1994;8:107–110. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
89. Shimada K, Kosuge T, Yamamoto J, Yamasaki S, Sakamoto M. Successful outcome after resection of pancreatic cancer with a solitary hepatic metastasis. Hepatogastroenterology. 2004;51:603–605. [PubMed]
90. Yamada S, Fujii T, Sugimoto H, Kanazumi N, Kasuya H, Nomoto S, Takeda S, Kodera Y, Nakao A. Pancreatic cancer with distant metastases: a contraindication for radical surgery? Hepatogastroenterology. 2009;56:881–885. [PubMed]
91. Yamada H, Hirano S, Tanaka E, Shichinohe T, Kondo S. Surgical treatment of liver metastases from pancreatic cancer. HPB (Oxford) 2006;8:85–88. [PubMed]
92. Michalski CW, Erkan M, Hüser N, Müller MW, Hartel M, Friess H, Kleeff J. Resection of primary pancreatic cancer and liver metastasis: a systematic review. Dig Surg. 2008;25:473–480. [PubMed]

Articles from World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery are provided here courtesy of Baishideng Publishing Group Inc