Published online Mar 27, 2019. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v11.i3.143
Peer-review started: February 27, 2019
First decision: March 14, 2019
Revised: March 19, 2019
Accepted: March 20, 2019
Article in press: March 20, 2019
Published online: March 27, 2019
Processing time: 28 Days and 21.1 Hours
Pancreatic head adenocarcinoma (PHAC) is one of the most aggressive malignancies, and it has low long-term survival rates. Surgery is the only option for long-term survival. The difficulties associated with PHAC include higher frequencies of regional or distant lymph node metastases and vascular involvement, and positive resection margins in pancreatic and retroperitoneal tissues. Radical resections increase margin negativity and life expectancy; however, the extend of the surgery applied is controversial. Thus, western and eastern centers may use different approaches. Multiorgan, peripancreatic nerve plexus, and vascular resections have been discussed in relation to radical surgery for pancreatic cancer as have the roles of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy regimens. Determining the appropriate limits for surgery, standardizing definitions and surgical techniques according to guidelines, and centralizing pancreatic surgery within high-volume institutions to reduce mortality and morbidity rates are among the most important issues to consider. In this review, we evaluate the basic concepts underlying and the roles of radical surgery for PHAC, and lymphadenectomy, nerve plexus, retroperitoneal tissue, vascular, and multivisceral resections, total pancreatectomy, and liver metastases are discussed.
Core tip: The challenges associated with pancreatic head adenocarcinoma include higher frequencies of regional or distant lymph node metastases and positive resection margins in the pancreatic and retroperitoneal tissues. There is no consensus on whether there is any difference between the standard and extended resections of pancreatic head adenocarcinoma in terms of in-hospital mortality, morbidity, disease free and overall survival. In this study, we aimed to discuss the positive and negative aspects of these two approaches.