The Impact Of A Multidisciplinary Approach (Ma) In The Management Of Pancreatic Disease (Pd).

e19196 Background: The management of PD is very insidious, mainly due to the often difficult differential diagnosis between benign and malignant diseases, and, in case of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDCA), to the frequently hard differentiation among resectable/borderline PDCA susceptible to upfront surgery, locally advanced PDCA susceptible to a neoadjuvant approach and never resectable or metastatic PDCA in which a palliative treatment is the only option. A correct PD evaluation and the subsequent choice of the most appropriate treatment strategy, thus, need a MA, involving surgeons, oncologists, radiologists, radiation oncologists, endoscopists, gastroenterologists and pathologists. On the basis of such considerations, we investigate the impact of the multidisciplinary meeting (MM) in the management of PD at our Institution. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated all the cases discussed by surgeons at our MM. We collected data, both pre- and post-MM, regarding diagnosis (cyst vs pancreatitis vs IPMN vs PDCA), and, in case of PDCA, tumor burden at baseline (resectable vs border-line resectable vs locally advanced vs metastatic disease) and disease response to treatment (disease control vs progression). Primary endpoint was the overall rate of discrepancy in diagnosis and/or PD evaluation between pre- and post-MM. Results: From October 2018 to December 2019, a total of 139 cases were presented by surgeons. After MM, a total of 38 diagnosis and/or PD evaluation were modified, for an overall discrepancy rate of 27%. In particular, of the 38 discordant cases, 9 (24%) were initial diagnosis, 24 (63%) baseline tumor burden assessments and 5 (13%) were PDCA response evaluations. Among the 24 cases of tumor burden evaluations, treatment strategy changed in 17 out of 24 cases. More specifically, of the 19 cases, evaluated as borderline/resectable before the MM, 15 were defined as locally-advanced or metastatic disease after the MM; of the 5 cases, evaluated as not resectable before the MM, 2 were considered border-line/resectable after the MM. Similarly, out of 9 cases of discrepant initial diagnosis, 5 cases, considered as malignant disease before MM, were assessed as benign after the MM. Conclusions: Our analysis demonstrates a significant rate of discrepancy in diagnosis and/or PD evaluation between pre- and post-MM. Our results show that a MA allows a considerable modification in PD diagnosis and evaluation, maximizing the treatment strategy, in particular avoiding unnecessary and detrimental pancreatic surgery.