Search

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection is the only potentially curative treatment for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. The choice for the type of procedure is influenced by the expected oncological benefit and the anticipated risk of procedure-specific complications. Few studies have focused on complications in these patients. This cohort study aimed to assess complications and risk factors after resections of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.METHODS: Patients undergoing resection of a pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor were identified within 2 centers of excellence. Complications were assessed according to the Clavien-Dindo classification and the comprehensive complication index. Logistic regression was performed to compare surgical procedures with adjustment for potential confounders (Clavien-Dindo ≥3).RESULTS: The cohort comprised 123 patients, including 12 enucleations, 50 distal pancreatectomies, 51 pancreatoduodenectomies, and 10 total/combined pancreatectomies. Mortality was 0.8%, a severe complication occurred in 41.5%, and the failure-to-rescue rate was 2.0%. The median comprehensive complication index was 22.6 (0-100); the comprehensive complication index increased after more extensive resections. After adjustment, a pancreatoduodenectomy, as compared to a distal pancreatectomy, increased the risk for a severe complication (odds ratio 3.13 [95% confidence interval 1.32-7.41]). Of the patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 or von Hippel-Lindau, 51.9% developed a severe complication vs 38.5% with sporadic disease. After major resections, morbidity was significantly higher in patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1/von Hippel-Lindau (comprehensive complication index 45.1 vs 28.9, P = .029).CONCLUSION: Surgery for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors is associated with a high rate of complications but low failure-to-rescue in centers of excellence. Complications are procedure-specific. Major resections in patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1/von Hippel-Lindau appear to increase the risk of complications.

Background: In a first step toward standardization, the Primary Aldosteronism Surgical Outcomes investigators introduced consensus criteria defining the clinical outcomes after adrenalectomy for primary aldosteronism. Within this retrospective cohort study, we evaluated the use of these consensus criteria in daily clinical practice in 16 centers in Europe, Canada, Australia, and the United States.Methods: Patients who underwent unilateral adrenalectomy for primary aldosteronism between 2010 and 2016 were included. Patients with missing data regarding preoperative or postoperative blood pressure or their defined daily dose were excluded. According to the Primary Aldosteronism Surgical Outcomes criteria, patients were classified as complete, partial, or absent clinical success.Results: A total of 380 patients were eligible for analysis. Complete, partial, and absent clinical success was achieved in 30%, 48%, and 22%, respectively. Evaluation of the Primary Aldosteronism Surgical Outcomes criteria showed that in 11% and 47% of patients with partial and absent clinical success, this classification was incorrect or debatable (16% of the total cohort). This concept of a "debatable classification of success" was due mainly to the cutoff of >= 20 mmHg used to indicate a clinically relevant change in systolic blood pressure and the use of percentages instead of absolute values to indicate a change in defined daily dose.Conclusion: Although introduction of the Primary Aldosteronism Surgical Outcomes consensus criteria induced substantial advancement in the standardization of postoperative outcomes, our study suggests that there is room for improvement in the concept for success given the observed limitations when the criteria were tested within our international cohort. In line, determining clinical success remains challenging, especially in patients with opposing change in blood pressure and defined daily dose. (C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.