Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 564

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Impact of Resection Status on Pattern of Failure and Survival After Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Open access
Raut, Chandrajit P., Tseng, Jennifer F., Sun, Charlotte C., Wang, Huamin, Wolff, Robert A., Crane, Christopher H., Hwang, Rosa, Vauthey, Jean-Nicolas, Abdalla, Eddie K., Lee, Jeffrey E., Pisters, Peter W. T., Evans, Douglas B.·2007·Annals of Surgery

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To better understand the impact of a microscopically positive margin (R1) on patterns of disease recurrence and survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: A positive resection margin after PD is considered to be a poor prognostic factor, and some have proposed that an R1 margin may be a biologic predictor of more aggressive disease. The natural history of patients treated with contemporary multimodality therapy who underwent a positive margin PD has not been described. METHODS: We analyzed our experience from 1990 to 2004, which included the prospective use of a standardized system for pathologic analysis of all PD specimens. All patients who underwent PD met objective computed tomographic criteria for resection. Standard pathologic evaluation of the PD specimen included permanent section analysis of the final bile duct, pancreatic, and superior mesenteric artery (SMA) margins. First recurrences (all sites) were defined as local, regional, or distant. Survival and follow-up were calculated from the date of initial histologic diagnosis to the dates of first recurrence or death and last contact, respectively. RESULTS: PD was performed on 360 consecutive patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Minimum follow-up was 12 months (median, 51.9 months). The resection margins were negative (R0) in 300 patients (83.3%) and positive (R1) in 60 (16.7%); no patients had macroscopically positive (R2) margins. By multivariate analysis (MVA), high mean operative blood loss and large tumor size were independent predictors of an R1 resection. Patients who underwent an R1 resection had a median overall survival of 21.5 months compared with 27.8 months in patients who underwent an R0 resection. After controlling for other variables on MVA, resection status did not independently affect survival. By MVA, only lymph node metastases, major perioperative complications, and blood loss adversely affected survival. CONCLUSIONS: There was no statistically significant difference in patient survival or recurrence based on R status. However, this series is unique in the incorporation of a standardized surgical technique for the SMA dissection, the prospective use of a reproducible system for pathologic evaluation of resection margins, the absence of R2 resections, and the frequent use of multimodality therapy.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/01.sla.0000259391.84304.2b

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 564

Metadata

Authors
Raut, C. P., Tseng, J. F., Sun, C. C., Wang, H., Wolff, R. A., Crane, C. H., Hwang, R., Vauthey, J.-N., Abdalla, E. K., Lee, J. E., Pisters, P. W. T., & Evans, D. B.
Venue
Annals of Surgery
Published
2007-07
Volume
246
Issue
1
Pages
52-60
ISSN
0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2118078989
Cited by
564
References
0
FWCI
17.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Impact of Resection Status on Pattern of Failure and Survival After Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.sla.0000259391.84304.2b
The paper
Raut, C. P., Tseng, J. F., Sun, C. C., Wang, H., Wolff, R. A., Crane, C. H., Hwang, R., Vauthey, J.-N., Abdalla, E. K., Lee, J. E., Pisters, P. W. T., & Evans, D. B. (2007). Impact of Resection Status on Pattern of Failure and Survival After Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000259391.84304.2b

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.