The International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) Definition and Classification of Postpancreatectomy Mortality

Objective: – The International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) aimed to uniform the definition and classification of mortality following pancreatic resections, to guide strategies for reducing preventable deaths and standardize reporting. Background: – Reported rates of mortality after pancreatic surgery vary widely depending on patient comorbidities, case mix, and institutional expertise and resources. Conventional reporting lacks granularity and fails to capture the mechanisms leading to death. A standardized classification rooted in causal analysis may provide a more meaningful framework to appraise outcomes and design targeted interventions. Methods: – A systematic review of the literature, focusing on mortality rates, causes of death, and existing classification systems after pancreatectomy was conducted. A consensus definition and tripartite classification were developed through iterative discussions, revisions, and final approval by the ISGPS board members. Results: – Postpancreatectomy mortality (PPM) was defined as death occurring within 90 days of any pancreatic resection, directly or indirectly attributable to a surgical complication and retrospectively linked to it through root-cause analysis. Three categories were established: PPM 1, vascular/technical complexity-related mortality (15–30%); PPM 2, pancreatectomy-specific complication-related deaths, mainly due to postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) and secondary systemic deterioration (45–65%); and PPM 3, cardiopulmonary and cerebrovascular deaths (10–25%). Each category reflects distinct mechanisms, timing of onset, intervention windows, and opportunities for rescue. Discussion: – The proposed ISGPS classification of mortality enables the development of targeted strategies to reduce potentially preventable deaths and provides a more robust framework for the appraisal and benchmarking of surgical outcomes. Prospective validation is warranted to standardize this newly defined quality metric, ensuring its consistent use in future reporting and ultimately enhancing surgical quality and patient safety on a global scale.