The Results of Pancreatic Resections and Long-Term Survival for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Single-Institution Experience

Abstract

Objectives:

Since the early 1990s, low long-term survival rates following pancreatic surgery for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma have challenged us to improve treatment. In this series, we aim to show improved survival from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma during the era of centralized pancreatic surgery.

Methods:

Analysis of all pancreatic resections performed at Helsinki University Hospital and survival of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients during 2000–2013 were included. Post-operative complications such as fistulas, reoperations, and mortality rates were recorded. Patient and tumor characteristics were compared with survival data.

Results:

Of the 853 patients undergoing pancreatic surgery, 581 (68%) were pancreaticoduodenectomies, 195 (21%) distal resections, 28 (3%) total pancreatectomies, and 49 (6%) other procedures. Mortality after pancreaticoduodenectomy was 2.1%. The clinically relevant B/C fistula rate was 7% after pancreaticoduodenectomy and 13% after distal resection, and the re-operation rate was 5%. The 5- and 10-year survival rates for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were 22% and 14%; for T1-2, N0 and R0 tumors, the corresponding survival rates were 49% and 31%. Carbohydrate antigen 19-9 >75 kU/L, carcinoembryonic antigen >5 µg/L, N1, lymph-node ratio >20%, R1, and lack of adjuvant therapy were independent risk factors for decreased survival.

Conclusion:

After centralization of pancreatic surgery in southern Finland, we have managed to enable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients to survive markedly longer than in the early 1990s. Based on a 1.7-million population in our clinic, mortality rates are equal to those of other high-volume centers and long-term survival rates for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma have now risen to some of the highest reported.

Keywords

Pancreatic cancer survival pancreatic surgery

Introduction

Pancreatic surgery has a high morbidity rate, and even very high-volume hospitals report high postoperative mortality. In-hospital, 30-day, or 60-day mortality in high volume centers for pancreatic-head resections ranges from 0.9% to 8.1% (1 –5). In a very high-volume center in Heidelberg, Germany, with a case load of more than 2000 pancreaticoduodenectomies, the in-hospital mortality rate was 3.9% (5). Overall morbidity after pancreaticoduodenectomy has even been 59% with 27% of the cases being serious adverse events (6, 7). Post-operative pancreatic fistula is one of the most serious complications and may lead to death.

Overall long-term survival (>5 years) of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), ranges from 0%–18% (4, 8 –10). In a debate over the accuracy of a histological diagnosis of PDAC one suggestion is that diagnosis of all long-time survivors needs re-evaluation by experienced pancreatic pathologists (8).

Only a few reports from high-volume centers have indicated longer survival for a certain very small proportion of PDAC patients (2, 4, 9). These cases contribute 5%–6% of all patients undergoing surgery for PDAC (2, 4).

The earlier high postoperative mortality, complication rates, and very low long-term survival rates for PDAC patients after pancreatic surgery have led to a demand for improved treatment for this devastating disease. Internationally, centers for pancreatic surgery have been established with multidisciplinary treatment. By this approach, diagnostic accuracy of PDAC, postoperative mortality, and long-term survival for PDAC patients can be improved markedly (11 –14). In southern Finland, all pancreatic resections were centralized to Helsinki University Hospital, with its 1.7 million population basis from the year 2000.

Aim

The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of patients undergoing pancreatic surgery in general as well as the possible survival benefits of PDAC patients in our hospital during its centralization.

Patients And Methods

From the Helsinki University Hospital database, we identified all patients undergoing pancreatic surgery other than necrosectomy between January 2000 and September 2013. Survival data came from patient records and from the Finnish population registry on September 2014 followed by analysis of cause of death (COD) from pancreatic cancer or unrelated cause. Information on age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Physical Status Classification, tumor-histology, grade, Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) size of the tumor, nodes, and metastasis (TNM) stage, lymph-node status, margin-resection status (R, considered R0 when the clear resection margin is >1 mm), type of resection, complications, adjuvant therapy, and tumor-marker levels came from patient records. Analysis of postoperative pancreatic fistula rates was according to the international study group of post-operative pancreatic fistula (ISGPF) criteria (15).

Our pancreaticoduodenectomy operation technique was developed during the 1990s to become a standardized procedure by the year 2000. For malignant disease, operations began with laparoscopy to exclude peritoneal metastases. When none were detected, a transverse laparotomy followed. Pancreatic resection was according to the non-touch en-block principal including distal gastrectomy. Resection included right-sided omentectomy, excision of the right cranial peritoneal leaf of the transverse colon exposing the caval vein and renal veins. Excision of the lymph nodes of the hepaticoduodenal ligament, around the right side of the celiac axis, and excision of the aorto-caval notch caudally to the inferior arterial mesenterial axis, as well as along the anterior and right lateral side around the origin of the superior mesenteric artery were followed. If the tumor had infiltrated the superior mesenteric or portal vein, resection was the choice. Pancreatico-jejunal anastomosis was routinely performed end-to-side with a double-layer duct-to-mucosa suture line. All the patients were referred to adjuvant therapy. Neoadjuvant therapy was administered when the tumor was radiologically borderline resectable (16).

All histological specimens were re-evaluated and the diagnosis for PDAC was carried out by two experienced pancreatic pathologists. All slides from 2000 to 2006 were re-evaluated by both our local pancreatic pathologist (S.N.) and a German pancreatic pathologist (J.L.). Centralization of surgery over time led to centralization of pathology, as well, and specimens from 2007 and later were re-evaluated locally (S.N.). Pancreatic malignancies other than PDAC were excluded from survival analysis.

This study complies with the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the Surgical Ethics Committee of Helsinki University Hospital, and the National Supervisory Authority of Welfare and Health.

Statistics

Life tables were calculated according to Kaplan–Meier survival analysis, and the log rank test served for comparisons. Pancreatic cancer-specific overall survival was calculated from date of operation to death. Cox proportional hazards regression served for multivariate analysis. The Cox model assumption of constant hazard ratios (HRs) over time was tested by including the time-dependent covariate separately for each testable variable, when the assumption was valid. Variables included in the analyses were T-classification, N-classification, disease-free margin R0, lymph-node ratio (LNR) below 20%, adjuvant treatment, grade, perivascular invasion, carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) <75 kU/L, and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) <5.0 µg/L. Backward conditional stepping removed insignificant variables at p < 0.1. Results are age- and sex-adjusted. All statistical analyses were performed with SPSS (v21; IBM, New York, NY, USA). Statistical significance was p < 0.05.

Results

From January 2000 to September 2013, 853 patients underwent pancreatic surgery, (Table 1). Of the 853, 581 (68%) patients underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy, 195 (21%) distal pancreatic resection, 28 (3%) total pancreatectomy, and 49 (6%) other pancreatic procedures such as middle pancreatic resection, enucleation, or uncinate resection.

Table 1

Patients and operations (n = 853).

Age, mean (range)	62 (18–86)
Gender, n (%)
Female	435 (51)
Male	418 (49)
BMI, mean (range)	25 (17–37)
Type of resection, n (%)
Head	581 (68)
Distal	195 (23)
Total	28 (3)
Other	49 (6)

BMI: body mass index.

Post-Operative Outcome

Of the 853, 13 (1.5%) patients died post-operatively. The in-hospital mortality after pancreaticoduodenectomy was 2.1% (Table 2.) Clinically relevant grade B or C fistulas occurred in 7% after pancreaticoduodenectomy and in 13% after distal resection (Table 2). Of the 44 (5%) patients who were re-operated, 40 (91%) were after pancreaticoduodenectomy. There occurred 17 (39%) pancreatic leaks (grade C fistulas), 10 (23%) biliary leaks and peritonitis, 13 (30%) hemorrhages, and four other re-laparotomies.

Table 2

Postoperative complications after the pancreatic resection.

	All (n = 853)	PDAC (n = 306)
Fistula, n (%)
Head resection	n = 581	n = 254
A	116 (20)	22 (9)
B	28 (5)	6 (2)
C	14 (2)	6 (2)
Distal resection	n = 195	n = 38
A	45 (23)	13 (34)
B	21 (11)	2 (5)
C	3 (1.5)	1 (3)
Re-operations, n (%)	44 (5)	20 (7)
Mortality, n (%)
Whipple
30 days	7 (1.2)	1 (0.4)
In-hospital	12 (2.1)	4 (1.6)
All patients
30 days	8 (0.9)	1 (0.3)
In-hospital	13 (1.5)	4 (1.3)

PDAC: pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Histological diagnosis was PDAC for 309 patients. After excluding three cases with a diagnosis not congruent, 306 patients remained for final analysis (Table 3). Of the PDAC patients, 52 (17%) received neoadjuvant therapy, consisting of either gemcitabine, gemcitabine combined with cisplatin, oxaliplatin, or radiation therapy. We had 151 (53%, with information being available of 285 patients) patients who received adjuvant therapy, mainly gemcitabine or its combination with cisplatin, kabesitabine, or radiation therapy. The 23 (8%) patients who turned out to have metastasis at imaging after surgery but before receiving adjuvant therapy, all received palliative oncological therapy.

Table 3

Clinical and pathological parameters of the 306 PDAC patients.

	n (%)	Mean
Gender
Female	136 (44)
Male	170 (56)
Age (range)		65 (39–86)
BMI (range)		25 (18–37)
CA19-9 (SEM)		2158 (1139)
CEA (SEM)		4.4 (0.3)
ASA
1	10 (3)
2	82 (27)
3	101 (33)
4	7 (2)
Grade
1	29 (9)
2	139 (45)
3	34 (11)
T
1	24 (8)
2	72 (24)
3	192 (63)
4	11 (4)
N
0	105 (34)
1	194 (63)
Number of lymph nodes analyzed (SEM)		24 (0.8)
R-status
R0	221 (72)
R1	55 (18)
R2	3 (1)
Perineural invasion	147 (48)
Perivascular invasion	66 (22)
Neoadjuvant therapy	52 (17)
Adjuvant therapy	151 (53)
Palliative oncological therapy	23 (8)

CA19-9: carbohydrate antigen 19-9; CEA: carcinoembryonic antigen; ASA: American Society of Anesthesiologists; SEM: scanning electron microscopy; BMI: body mass index.

Long-Term Outcome

The overall 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year survival rates for the 306 patients radically operated on for PDAC were 74%, 36%, 22%, and 14% (Table 4). In univariate analysis, longer survival was significantly associated with CA19-9 <75 kU/L (p = 0.001), CEA <5.0 µg/L (p = 0.001), smaller tumor (T1-2) (p<0.001), lack of lymph-node metastasis (p = 0.001) or LNR <20% (p = 0.001), higher histological differentiation grade (p = 0.004), lack of perivascular invasion (p = 0.001), and having adjuvant therapy (p = 0.016) (Table 5; Fig. 1). Lack of perineural invasion was associated with a tendency for better survival (p = 0.055) (Table 5). Neither age, gender, and ASA class nor neoadjuvant therapy was significantly associated with survival.

Table 4

Survival of 306 patients undergoing surgery for PDAC in Helsinki from January 2000 to September 2013.

Survival	1 year (%)	3 years (%)	5 years (%)	10 years (%)	Median survival (months)	n (%)	p
All	74	36	22	14	26	306
R0N0	86	51	35	26	37	89 (29)	<0.001
T1-2, R0N0	90	52	49	31	46	49 (16)	<0.001

Note: p-values calculated with the log rank test versus other patients at 5 years (i.e. not R0N0 or not T1-2, R0N0, Fig. 1H).

Table 5

Factors associated with survival in PDAC patients in univariate analysis (n = 306).

	N	Median survival months (95% CI)	p
CA19-9 <75 kU/L	126	32 (24–39) versus 21 (16–27)	0.001
CEA <5.0 µg/L	230	27 (23–31) versus 17 (8–25)	0.001
T1-2 (versus T3)	96	34 (27–41) versus 21 (18–25)	<0.001
N0 (versus N1)	105	34 (28–40) versus 21 (17–24)	0.001
LNR <20% (versus >20%)	236	31 (26–35) versus 12 (7–17)	0.001
R0 (versus R1)	221	31 (26–36) versus 15 (7–22)	<0.001
Grade
G1		35 (21–49)
G2		24 (21–28)
G3		12 (5–18)	0.004
Perineural invasion	147	25 (20–31) versus 32 (24–41)	0.055
Perivascular invasion	66	19 (12–27) versus 31 (25–36)	0.001
Adjuvant therapy	151	30 (25–36) versus 22 (16–28)	0.016

CA19-9: carbohydrate antigen 19-9; CEA: carcinoembryonic antigen; CI: confidence interval; LNR: lymph-node ratio.

Fig. 1.

Association of A) preoperative CA19-9 <75 kU/L (p = 0.001), B) preoperative CEA <5.0 µg/L (p = 0.001), C) tumor stage T1-2 (p < 0.001), D) N-stage (p < 0.001), E) LNR < 20% (p < 0.001), F) disease-free margins (R0) (p < 0.001), G) lymph node status and resection margin (p < 0.001), H) small tumor stage (T1-2), no lymph-node metastasis (N0) and clear resection margins (R0) (p < 0.001), I) histological differentiation grade (p = 0.004), J) perivascular invasion (p = 0.001), and K) adjuvant therapy compared to observation alone (p = 0.016) on survival after the pancreatic resection in PDAC patients.

When the R0N0 and tumor stage T1-2 patients (n = 49, 16%) were analyzed separately, their survival rates for five and 10 years were 49% and 31% (median survival 46 versus 23 months, p < 0.001) (Table 3). More than half the N1 patients (111, 57%) received adjuvant therapy and benefitted significantly from it (median survival 25 versus 13 months, p = 0.021).

In multivariate analysis, patients who received post-operative adjuvant treatment had a significantly decreased HR, while patients with N1 status or patients with R1 had significantly poorer HRs than did patients with N0-status, radical operation (R0), and who had received no adjuvant treatment. Patients with CA19-9 >75 kU/L, CEA >5.0 µg/L, and LNR >20% also had significantly increased HRs (Table 6). Multivariate analyses were adjusted for age and sex.

Table 6

Multivariate analysis of 306 patients undergoing surgery for PDAC in Helsinki January 2000 to September 2013.

Variable		95% CI
	HR	Lower	Upper	p
Aged over 65 years	1.3	0.9	1.8	0.1486
Gender female	1.2	0.9	1.8	0.2261
CA19-9 >75 kU/L	1.5	1.0	2.1	0.0368
CEA >5 µg/L	2.4	1.6	3.7	0.0001
N1	1.8	1.2	2.8	0.0046
LNR >20%	2.4	1.6	3.7	0.0000
R1	1.9	1.2	2.9	0.0036
Adjuvant therapy	0.5	0.4	0.7	0.0001

CI: confidence interval; HR: hazard ratio; CA19-9: carbohydrate antigen 19-9; CEA: carcinoembryonic antigen; LNR: lymph-node ratio.

Discussion

Since the beginning of 2000, the population base of our hospital has increased to 1.7 million. Larger hospital volume and improved surgical treatment may explain our very low post-operative in-hospital mortality rate nowadays of 2.1% after pancreaticoduodenectomy, which is at the same level as reported from very-high-volume international pancreatic centers. For example, Johns Hopkins Hospital in the USA reported 1%–2% postoperative mortality rates among almost 1500 pancreaticoduodenectomies, and Heidelberg in Germany, an in-hospital mortality of 3.9% after more than 2000 pancreatic resections (2, 5). In one Japanese pancreatic surgery database with 8575 pancreaticoduodenectomies, the in-hospital mortality was 2.8% (17).

In our hospital, clinically relevant ISGPF grade-B or -C fistulas occurred in 7% of pancreaticoduodenectomies. Johns Hopkins Hospital reported a 5% fistula rate (2). The variation has been high (5%–16%) among centers (5, 17). After distal resections fistula rates vary even more (0%–40%) (5, 18). In our hospital, the grade-B or -C fistula rate after distal resection was 13%. Several attempts have been made to reduce the number of fistulas by differing surgical techniques and with somatostatine analogs. A Cochrane analysis recommended octreotide for high-risk patients only (19). Prophylactic pasireotide in a recent randomized single-center study reduced the number of clinically significant fistulas to half (20). Pasireotide has been in prophylactic use in our center since that publication, but following the period of the current study. Our re-operation rate was 5% at the same level as in other large series reporting a 3%–6% re-operation rate (9, 21)

In our series, the overall 5-year survival of PDAC was 22% and in a subgroup of patients with T1-2, N0, and R0 tumors (49 patients, 16% of all) the 5-year survival was a very high 49% and even the 10-year survival was 31%. In 2006, at Johns Hopkins Hospital, the overall 5-year survival for pancreatic head cancer was 18%. When the tumor was <3 cm, and well or moderately differentiated, radically operated (R0), and lymph nodes were free of cancer, 5-year survival improved to 43% (2). Of 1175 pancreaticoduodenectomies for pancreatic head cancer, the patients with these features numbered 56 (4.8%) (2). In Heidelberg, the survival, among 1071, of an almost similar group of 62 patients (5.8%) (tumor grading Tis-T2), the 5-year survival was 54% (4). In our series, Tis was considered high-grade dysplasia, and these patients were not included in PDAC survival analysis. One explanation for our notably good survival results may be that an increasing number of patients are operated on at an earlier stage of the disease. In our series, tumor stage was T1-2 in 96 (32%) of the patients or the lymph nodes were free of metastasis in 105 (35%) patients compared to other centers with a 76%–78% N1 prevalence (2, 4). Several other favorable tumor characteristics such as CA19-9 <75 kU/L, CEA <5.0 µg/L, higher cancer-differentiation grade, and lack of perivascular invasion favored longer survival in both univariate and multivariate analysis, as could be expected. Our results stress the need for an earlier diagnosis of PDAC.

The role of extended lymphadenectomy has been under debate. In gastric cancer, the increased survival after D2 lymph node dissection encouraged us to change the surgical technique toward the same principle also in PDAC patients (22, 23). In some studies, extended lymhadenectomy has led to an increased number of R0 resections associated with better survival. Whether extended lymphadenectomy improves overall survival remains beyond the scope of our study. Thus far, five prospective randomized studies show no survival benefit after extended lymphadenectomy. Conversely, after extended lymphadenectomy, one meta-analysis showed a decrease in two- and 3-year survival (4, 24 –29).

Covering the years 1990–1996, a former one Finnish study showed that only one patient in Finland with PDAC survived clearly longer than 5 years (8). A high number of misdiagnoses among long-term survivors were falsely listed in the tumor registry. Our current data are the results of the era of centralization of pancreatic surgery. Moreover, pathology has been centralized, and with the increase in cases an increase in experience in that field was gained. High-volume centers can achieve high diagnostic experience meaning that only limited outside reference evaluation is necessary. This was supported by two independent pathologists confirming the diagnosis of PDAC between 2000–2006 (S.N. and J.L.). In addition, the classification of pancreatic tumors (World Health Organization (WHO)) has been standardized and is in general use as well due to the increasing numbers of pancreatic-resection specimens.

In the Carpelan-Holmström study (8) no patients (data from 1990–1996) received oncological adjuvant treatment, although now it has become routine after pancreatic cancer surgery. In the 21st century, prospective randomized European Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer (ESPAC) 1-3 and Charité Onkologie 001 (CONCO-001) trials have shown that patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy survive significantly longer (30, 31). Our retrospective series showed a similar result in favor of adjuvant therapy. Neoadjuvant therapy has in some series improved surgical results, raising the number of R0 resections. Further randomized controlled studies are necessary (32, 33).

Conclusion

Pancreatic surgery is safe in high-volume centers. Our center’s low hospital mortality for pancreaticoduodenectomy (2.1%) is similar to that reported from other high volume centers. Our long-term survival for PDAC is now one of the highest reported. Early detection and multidisciplinary treatment of PDAC is essential for better survival. During the era of centralization of pancreatic (cancer) surgery, more patients have lived markedly longer than did those operated on in the early 1990s.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

Mary and Georg C. Ehrnrooth Foundation, the Sigrid Juselius Foundation, and Helsinki University Hospital Research Funds are acknowledged for supporting this study. None of the foundations have been involved in the study design.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Alexakis

Sutton

Raraty

: Major resection for chronic pancreatitis in patients with vascular involvement is associated with increased postoperative mortality. Br J Surg 2004;91:1410–1427.

Winter

Cameron

Campbell

: 1423 pancreaticoduodenectomies for pancreatic cancer: A single-institution experience. J Gastrointest Surg 2006;10:1199–1210.

Carroll

Smith

Simons

: Redefining mortality after pancreatic cancer resection. J Gastrointest Surg 2010;14:1701–1708.

Hartwig

Hackert

Hinz

: Pancreatic cancer surgery in the new millennium: Better prediction of outcome. Ann Surg 2011;254:311–319.

Hackert

Hinz

Hartwig

: Evolution of pancreatico-duodenectomy: Experience of 2055 consecutive resections. Pancreas 2013;42:1325.

DeOliveira

Winter

Schafer

: Assessment of complications after pancreatic surgery: A novel grading system applied to 633 patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg 2006;244:931–937.

Greenblatt

Kelly

Rajamanickam

: Preoperative factors predict perioperative morbidity and mortality after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg Oncol 2011;18:2126–2135.

Carpelan-Holmström

Nordling

Pukkala

: Does anyone survive pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma? A nation wide study re-evaluating the data of the Finnish Cancer Registry. Gut 2005;54:385–387.

Cameron

Riall

Coleman

: One thousand consecutive pancreaticoduodenectomies. Ann Surg 2006;244:10–15.

10.

Ferrone

Brennan

Gönen

: Pancreatic adenocarcinoma: The actual 5-year survivors. J Gastrointest Surg 2008;12:701–706.

11.

Nordback

Parviainen

Räty

: Resection of the head of the pancreas in Finland: Effects of hospital and surgeon on short-term and long-term results. Scand J Gastroenterol 2002;37:1454–1460.

12.

Hines

Reber

: Pancreatic surgery. Curr Opin Gastroenterol 2006;22:520–526.

13.

Gooiker

van Gijn

Wouters

: Systematic review and meta-analysis of the volume-outcome relationship in pancreatic surgery. Br J Surg 2011;98:485–494.

14.

de Wilde

Besselink

van der Tweel

: Impact of nationwide centralization of pancreaticoduodenectomy on hospital mortality. Br J Surg 2012;99:404–410.

15.

Bassi

Dervenis

Butturini

: Postoperative pancreatic fistula: An international study group (ISGPF) definition. Surgery 2005;138:8–13.

16.

Callery

Chang

Fishman

: Pretreatment assessment of resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: Expert consensus statement. Ann Surg Oncol 2009;16:1727–1733.

17.

Kimura

Miyata

Gotoh

: A pancreaticoduodenectomy risk model derived from 8575 cases from a national single-race population (Japanese) using a web-based data entry system: The 30-day and in-hospital mortality rates for pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg 2014;259:773–780.

18.

Hackert

Werner

Büchler

: Postoperative pancreatic fistula. Surgeon 2011;9:211–217.

19.

Gurusamy

Koti

Fusai

: Somatostatin analogues for pancreatic surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010;2:CD008370.

20.

Allen

Gönen

Brennan

: Pasireotide for postoperative pancreatic fistula. N Engl J Med 2014;370:2014–2022.

21.

Simons

Shah

: National complication rates after pancreatectomy: Beyond mere mortality. J Gastrointest Surg 2009;13:1798–1805.

22.

Sasako

McCulloch

Kinoshita

: New method to evaluate the therapeutic value of lymph node dissection for gastric cancer. Br J Surg 1995;82:346–351.

23.

Hsiung

: Nodal dissection for patients with gastric cancer: A randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2006;7:309–315.

24.

Yeo

Cameron

Lillemoe

: 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.

25.

Sergeant

Melloul

Lesurtel

: Extended lymphadenectomy in patients with pancreatic cancer is debatable. World J Surg 2013;37:1782–1788.

26.

Jang

Kang

Heo

: A prospective randomized controlled study comparing outcomes of standard resection and extended resection, including dissection of the nerve plexus and various lymph nodes, in patients with pancreatic head cancer. Ann Surg 2014;259:656–664.

27.

Pedrazzoli

DiCarlo

Dionigi

: Standard versus extended lymphadenectomy associated with pancreatoduodenectomy in the surgical treatment of adenocarcinoma of the head of the pancreas: A multicenter, prospective, randomized study. Ann Surg 1998;228:508–517.

28.

Farnell

Pearson

Sarr

: A prospective randomized trial comparing standard pancreatoduodenectomy with pancreatoduodenectomy with extended lymphadenectomy in resectable pancreatic head adenocarcinoma. Surgery 2005;138:618–628.

29.

Nimura

Nagino

Takao

: Standard versus extended lymphadenectomy in radical pancreatoduodenectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma of the head of the pancreas: Long-term results of a Japanese multicenter randomized controlled trial. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 2012;19:230–241.

30.

Neoptolemos

Stocken

Tudur Smith

: Adjuvant 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid vs observation for pancreatic cancer: Composite data from the ESPAC-1 and -3(v1) trials. Br J Cancer 2009;100:246–250.

31.

Oettle

Neuhaus

Hochhaus

: Adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine and long-term outcomes among patients with resected pancreatic cancer: The CONKO-001 randomized trial. JAMA 2013;310:1473–1481.

32.

Katz

Wang

Balachandran

: Effect of neoadjuvant chemoradiation and surgical technique on recurrence of localized pancreatic cancer. J Gastrointest Surg 2012;16: 68–78.

33.

Hartwig

Werner

Jäger

: Improvement of surgical results for pancreatic cancer. Lancet Oncol 2013;14:e476–e485.