Efficacy of an absorbable fibrin sealant patch (TachoSil) after distal pancreatectomy: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial

Fibrin sealants for the prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula following pancreatic surgery

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pancreatic fistula is one of the most frequent and potentially life-threatening complications following pancreatic resections. Fibrin sealants are introduced to reduce postoperative pancreatic fistula by some surgeons. However, the use of fibrin sealants during pancreatic surgery is controversial. This is an update of a Cochrane Review last published in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety, effectiveness, and potential adverse effects of fibrin sealants for the prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula following pancreatic surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched trial registers and the following biomedical databases: the Cochrane Library (2018, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1946 to 12 April 2018), Embase (1980 to 12 April 2018), Science Citation Index Expanded (1900 to 12 April 2018), and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) (1978 to 12 April 2018).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials that compared fibrin sealant (fibrin glue or fibrin sealant patch) versus control (no fibrin sealant or placebo) in people undergoing pancreatic surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently identified the trials for inclusion, collected the data, and assessed the risk of bias. We performed the meta-analyses using Review Manager 5. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes (or a Peto odds ratio (OR) for very rare outcomes), and the mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 studies involving 1462 participants in the review.Application of fibrin sealants to pancreatic stump closure reinforcement after distal pancreatectomyWe included seven studies involving 860 participants: 428 were randomized to the fibrin sealant group and 432 to the control group after distal pancreatectomy. Fibrin sealants may lead to little or no difference in postoperative pancreatic fistula (fibrin sealant 19.3%; control 20.1%; RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.35; 755 participants; four studies; low-quality evidence). Fibrin sealants may also lead to little or no difference in postoperative mortality (0.3% versus 0.5%; Peto OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.03; 804 participants; six studies; low-quality evidence), or overall postoperative morbidity (28.5% versus 23.2%; RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.58; 646 participants; three studies; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether fibrin sealants reduce reoperation rate (2.0% versus 3.8%; RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.71; 376 participants; two studies; very low-quality evidence). There is probably little or no difference in length of hospital stay between the groups (12.1 days versus 11.4 days; MD 0.32 days, 95% CI -1.06 to 1.70; 755 participants; four studies; moderate-quality evidence). The studies did not report serious adverse events, quality of life, or cost effectiveness.Application of fibrin sealants to pancreatic anastomosis reinforcement after pancreaticoduodenectomyWe included three studies involving 251 participants: 115 were randomized to the fibrin sealant group and 136 to the control group after pancreaticoduodenectomy. We are uncertain whether fibrin sealants reduce postoperative pancreatic fistula (1.6% versus 6.2%; RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.01 to 5.06; 57 participants; one study; very low-quality evidence). Fibrin sealants may lead to little or no difference in postoperative mortality (0.1% versus 0.7%; Peto OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.00 to 7.76; 251 participants; three studies; low-quality evidence) or length of hospital stay (12.8 days versus 14.8 days; MD -1.58 days, 95% CI -3.96 to 0.81; 181 participants; two studies; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether fibrin sealants reduce overall postoperative morbidity (33.7% versus 34.7%; RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.45; 181 participants; two studies; very low-quality evidence), or reoperation rate (7.6% versus 9.2%; RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.11; 181 participants; two studies, very low-quality evidence). The studies did not report serious adverse events, quality of life, or cost effectiveness.Application of fibrin sealants to pancreatic duct occlusion after pancreaticoduodenectomyWe included two studies involving 351 participants: 188 were randomized to the fibrin sealant group and 163 to the control group after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Fibrin sealants may lead to little or no difference in postoperative mortality (8.4% versus 6.1%; Peto OR 1.41, 95% CI 0.63 to 3.13; 351 participants; two studies; low-quality evidence) or length of hospital stay (17.0 days versus 16.5 days; MD 0.58 days, 95% CI -5.74 to 6.89; 351 participants; two studies; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether fibrin sealants reduce overall postoperative morbidity (32.0% versus 27.6%; RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.02; 351 participants; two studies; very low-quality evidence), or reoperation rate (13.6% versus 16.0%; RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.41; 351 participants; two studies; very low-quality evidence). Serious adverse events were reported in one study: more participants developed diabetes mellitus when fibrin sealants were applied to pancreatic duct occlusion, both at three months' follow-up (33.7% fibrin sealant group versus 10.8% control group; 29 participants versus 9 participants) and 12 months' follow-up (33.7% fibrin sealant group versus 14.5% control group; 29 participants versus 12 participants). The studies did not report postoperative pancreatic fistula, quality of life, or cost effectiveness.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current available evidence, fibrin sealants may have little or no effect on postoperative pancreatic fistula in people undergoing distal pancreatectomy. The effects of fibrin sealants on the prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula are uncertain in people undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Pancreatic stump closure techniques and pancreatic fistula formation after distal pancreatectomy: Meta-analysis and single-center experience

Background

Pancreatic fistula/PF is the most frequent and feared complication after distal pancreatectomy/DP. However, the safest technique of pancreatic stump closure remains an ongoing debate. Here, we aimed to compare the safety of different pancreatic stump closure techniques for preventing PF during DP.

Methods

We performed a PRISMA-based meta-analysis of all relevant studies that compared at least two techniques of stump closure during DP with regard to PF rates/PFR. We further performed a retrospective analysis of our institutional PFR in correlation with stump closure techniques.

Results

8301 studies were initially identified. From these, ten randomized controlled trials/RCTs, eleven prospective and 59 retrospective studies were eligible. Stapler closure (26%vs.31%, OR:0.73, p = 0.02), combination of stapler and suture (30%vs.33%, OR:0.70, p = 0.05), or stump anastomosis (14%vs.28%, OR:0.51, p = 0.02) were associated with lower PFR than suture closure alone. Spleen preservation/splenectomy, or laparoscopic/open DP, TachoSil^®, fibrin-like glue-application, or bioabsorbable-stapler-reinforcements (Seamguard^®) did not influence PFR after DP. In contrast, autologous patches (falciform ligament/seromuscular patches) resulted in lower PFR than no patch application (21.9%vs.25,8%, OR:0.60, p = 0.006). In our institution, the major three techniques of stump closure resulted in comparable PFR (suture:27%, stapler:29%, or combination:24%). However, selective suturing/clipping of the main pancreatic duct during pancreatic stump closure prevented severe PF (p = 0.02).

Conclusion

After DP, stapler closure, pancreatic anastomosis, or falciform/seromuscular patches lead to lower PFR than suture closure alone. However, the differences are rather small, and further RCTs are needed to test these effects. Selective closure of the main pancreatic duct during stump closure may prevent severe PF.

Randomized clinical trial of the effect of a fibrin sealant patch on pancreatic fistula formation after pancreatoduodenectomy

Background

The potential for a fibrin sealant patch to reduce the risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains uncertain. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether a fibrin sealant patch is able to reduce POPF in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy with pancreatojejunostomy.

Methods

In this multicentre trial, patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy were randomized to receive either a fibrin patch (patch group) or no patch (control group), and stratified by gland texture, pancreatic duct size and neoadjuvant treatment. The primary endpoint was POPF. Secondary endpoints included complications, drain‐related factors and duration of hospital stay. Risk factors for POPF were identified by logistic regression analysis.

Results

A total of 142 patients were enrolled. Forty‐five of 71 patients (63 per cent) in the patch group and 40 of 71 (56 per cent) in the control group developed biochemical leakage or POPF (P = 0·392). Fistulas were classified as grade B or C in 16 (23 per cent) and ten (14 per cent) patients respectively (P = 0·277). There were no differences in postoperative complications (54 patients in patch group and 50 in control group; P = 0·839), drain amylase concentration (P = 0·494), time until drain removal (mean(s.d.) 11·6(1·0) versus 13·3(1·3) days; P = 0·613), fistula closure (17·6(2·2) versus 16·5(2·1) days; P = 0·740) and duration of hospital stay (22·1(2·2) versus 18·2(0·9) days; P = 0·810) between the two groups. Multivariable logistic regression analysis confirmed that obesity (odds ratio (OR) 5·28, 95 per cent c.i. 1·20 to 23·18; P = 0·027), soft gland texture (OR 9·86, 3·41 to 28·54; P < 0·001) and a small duct (OR 5·50, 1·84 to 16·44; P = 0·002) were significant risk factors for POPF. A patch did not reduce the incidence of POPF in patients at higher risk.

Conclusion

The use of a fibrin sealant patch did not reduce the occurrence of POPF and complications after pancreatoduodenectomy with pancreatojejunostomy. Registration number: 2013‐000639‐29 (EudraCT register).

Not effective in reducing complications

Postoperative pancreatic fistula: a review of traditional and emerging concepts

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains the major cause of morbidity after pancreatic resection, affecting up to 41% of cases. With the recent development of a consensus definition of POPF, there has been a large number of reports examining various risk factors, prediction models, and mitigation strategies for this costly complication. Despite these strategies, the rates of POPF have not significantly diminished. Here, we review the literature and evidence regarding both traditional and emerging concepts in POPF prediction, prevention, and management. In particular, we review the evidence for the association between postoperative pancreatitis and POPF, and present a novel proposed mechanism for the development of POPF.

The use of fibrin sealant during non-emergency surgery: a systematic review of evidence of benefits and harms

BACKGROUND

Fibrin sealants are used in different types of surgery to prevent the accumulation of post-operative fluid (seroma) or blood (haematoma) or to arrest haemorrhage (bleeding). However, there is uncertainty around the benefits and harms of fibrin sealant use.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the evidence on the benefits and harms of fibrin sealants in non-emergency surgery in adults.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases [MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library (including the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, the Health Technology Assessment database and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials)] were searched from inception to May 2015. The websites of regulatory bodies (the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, the European Medicines Agency and the Food and Drug Administration) were also searched to identify evidence of harms.

REVIEW METHODS

This review included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies using any type of fibrin sealant compared with standard care in non-emergency surgery in adults. The primary outcome was risk of developing seroma and haematoma. Only RCTs were used to inform clinical effectiveness and both RCTs and observational studies were used for the assessment of harms related to the use of fibrin sealant. Two reviewers independently screened all titles and abstracts to identify potentially relevant studies. Data extraction was undertaken by one reviewer and validated by a second. The quality of included studies was assessed independently by two reviewers using the Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool for RCTs and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination guidance for adverse events for observational studies. A fixed-effects model was used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

We included 186 RCTs and eight observational studies across 14 surgical specialties and five reports from the regulatory bodies. Most RCTs were judged to be at an unclear risk of bias. Adverse events were inappropriately reported in observational studies. Meta-analysis across non-emergency surgical specialties did not show a statistically significant difference in the risk of seroma for fibrin sealants versus standard care in 32 RCTs analysed [n = 3472, odds ratio (OR) 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68 to 1.04; p = 0.13; I² = 12.7%], but a statistically significant benefit was found on haematoma development in 24 RCTs (n = 2403, OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.86; p = 0.01; I² = 0%). Adverse events related to fibrin sealant use were reported in 10 RCTs and eight observational studies across surgical specialties, and 22 RCTs explicitly stated that there were no adverse events. One RCT reported a single death but no other study reported mortality or any serious adverse events. Five regulatory body reports noted death from air emboli associated with fibrin sprays.

LIMITATIONS

It was not possible to provide a detailed evaluation of individual RCTs in their specific contexts because of the limited resources that were available for this research. In addition, the number of RCTs that were identified made it impractical to conduct independent data extraction by two reviewers in the time available.

CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of fibrin sealants does not appear to vary according to surgical procedures with regard to reducing the risk of seroma or haematoma. Surgeons should note the potential risk of gas embolism if spray application of fibrin sealants is used and not to exceed the recommended pressure and spraying distance. Future research should be carried out in surgery specialties for which only limited data were found, including neurological, gynaecological, oral and maxillofacial, urology, colorectal and orthopaedics surgery (for any outcome); breast surgery and upper gastrointestinal (development of haematoma); and cardiothoracic heart or lung surgery (reoperation rates). In addition, studies need to use adequate sample sizes, to blind participants and outcome assessors, and to follow reporting guidelines.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015020710.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Reinforced staplers for distal pancreatectomy

PURPOSE

The safety and efficacy of reinforced staplers during distal pancreatectomy (DP) remain controversial because of the small sample size. This multicenter single-arm prospective study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of reinforced staplers with bioabsorbable material during DP.

METHODS

Between October 2014 and August 2015, 121 patients scheduled for DP were enrolled in this study at 11 institutions in Japan. The primary endpoint was the incidence of clinically relevant pancreatic fistula. Protocol treatment was defined as "distal pancreatectomy using reinforced staplers."

RESULTS

Per-protocol analysis of 105 patients was performed; 16 of the patients were excluded based on discontinuation of protocol treatment criteria. Clinically relevant pancreatic fistula occurred in 13 (12.4%) of 105 patients. The overall morbidity rate was 29.5% (31 of 105 patients) and severe complication (Clavien classification IIIa or more) was 10.5% (11/105). Mortality rate was 0%, although reoperations were performed on two patients (1.9%). Multivariate logistic regression analysis of independent risk factors for clinically relevant pancreatic fistula after DP using reinforced stapler closure was operative time more than 240 min (P = 0.047, odds ratio 5.79), registration numbers less than 10 (P = 0.046, odds ratio 13.01), and staple line hemorrhage (P = 0.003, odds ratio 16.34).

CONCLUSION

This study confirms the safety of reinforced staplers for pancreatic stump closure during DP. However, the efficacy of reinforced staplers for decreasing clinically relevant pancreatic fistula could not be drawn from this study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This prospective study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02270554) and UMIN Clinical Trial Registry (UMIN000015384).

Prevention of pancreatic fistula using polyethylene glycolic acid mesh reinforcement around pancreatojejunostomy: the propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Several small-scale studies have shown that wrapping polyethylene glycolic acid (PGA) mesh around the anastomotic site reinforced pancreaticojejunostomy following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) with favorable outcomes. This study investigated the efficacy of PGA mesh for reducing postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) and evaluated other risk factors for POPF.

METHODS

This study enrolled 464 consecutive patients who underwent PD performed by one surgeon between 2006 and 2015, including a PGA group of 281 patients (60.6%) and a control group of 183 patients (39.4%). All pancreatico-enteric anastomoses were performed using double-layered, duct-to-mucosa, end-to-side pancreaticojejunostomy.

RESULTS

Mean patient age was 63.1 years. The rates of overall (27.0% vs. 37.2%, P = 0.024) and clinically relevant (Grades B, C; 13.9% vs. 24.0%, P = 0.006) POPF were significantly lower in the PGA than in the control group. Following propensity score matching, the rates of clinically relevant POPF (12.6% vs. 22.4%, P = 0.024) and complications (40.2% vs. 63.8%, P < 0.001) remained significantly lower in the PGA group. Multivariate analysis showed that non-pancreatic disease, greater blood loss, higher body mass index, and non-application of PGA mesh were significantly associated with the development of clinically relevant POPF.

CONCLUSIONS

PGA mesh reinforcement of pancreaticojejunostomy may prevent POPF as well as reducing overall abdominal complications after PD.

Teres Ligament Patch Reduces Relevant Morbidity After Distal Pancreatectomy (the DISCOVER Randomized Controlled Trial)

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of teres ligament covering on pancreatic fistula rate after distal pancreatectomy (DP).

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) represents the most significant complication after DP. Retrospective studies suggested a benefit of covering the resection margin by a teres ligament patch.

METHODS

This prospective randomized controlled study (DISCOVER trial) included 152 patients undergoing DP, between October 2010 and July 2014. Patients were randomized to undergo closure of the pancreatic cut margin without (control, n = 76) or with teres ligament coverage (teres, n = 76). The primary endpoint was the rate of POPF, and the secondary endpoints included postoperative morbidity and mortality, length of hospital stay, and readmission rate.

RESULTS

Both groups were comparable regarding epidemiology (age, sex, body mass index), operative parameters (operation time [OP] time, blood loss, method of pancreas transection, additional operative procedures), and histopathological findings. Overall inhospital mortality was 0.6% (1/152 patients). In the group of patients with teres ligament patch, the rate of reoperations (1.3% vs 13.0%; P = 0.009), and also the rate of readmission (13.1 vs 31.5%; P = 0.011) were significantly lower. Clinically relevant POPF rate (grade B/C) was 32.9% (control) versus 22.4% (teres, P = 0.20). Multivariable analysis showed teres ligament coverage to be a protective factor for clinically relevant POPF (P = 0.0146).

CONCLUSIONS

Coverage of the pancreatic remnant after DP is associated with less reinterventions, reoperations, and need for readmission. Although the overall fistula rate is not reduced by the coverage procedure, it should be considered as a valid measure for complication prevention due to its clinical benefit.

The Physiological Incubation Biosimulator (PIBS): An Improved Ex Vivo Experimental Setup for the Mechanical Stability of Biological Sealants in Surgical Procedures

BACKGROUND

Tissue-bound fibrin sealants are used in a wide array of surgical procedures. The microenvironmental interaction between sealant and application site is often poorly evaluated due to a lack of suitable experimental models.

METHODS

A physiological incubation biosimulator (PIBS) was developed to test biological sealants in an ex vivo setup under physiological conditions comparable to the microenvironment at application site (temperature, humidity, pressure). PIBS was validated by a study on the effectiveness of TachoSil for leak closure at pancreatic resection sites. Defined defects in a thoracic membrane of porcine origin were sealed by TachoSil. Integrity of the sealing was tested in the presence of active pancreatic fluid over 60 minutes. Heat-inactivated pancreatic fluid and electrolyte solution served as controls. The time to leakage was recorded and experimental groups were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

PIBS produced reliable results. TachoSil lead to a leakage rate of 96% after incubation with active pancreatic fluid (p = 34), which was significantly higher compared with heat-inactivated pancreatic fluid (p = 34, 52%) or electrolyte solution (p = 20, 19%).

CONCLUSION

PIBS is an effective tool to evaluate microenvironmental effects on the adhesive strength of biomaterials. Tissue sealing effect of TachoSil is diminished in a "pancreatic" microenvironment rich with pancreatic enzymes. Our results might therefore explain the reason of the findings of randomized controlled trials recently published on this subject.

The Largest European Single-Center Experience: 300 Laparoscopic Pancreatic Resections

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic pancreatic resection (LPR) has become routine, large single-center series are still lacking. Our aim was to analyze the results of a large European single-center series of LPR.

STUDY DESIGN

Between January 2008 and September 2015, 300 LPRs were performed and studied prospectively, including 165 (55%) distal pancreatectomies, 68 (23%) pancreaticoduodenectomies (PDs), 30 (10%) enucleations, 35 (11%) central pancreatectomies, and 2 (1%) total pancreatectomies.

RESULTS

Mean age was 54 ± 15.4 years old (range 17 to 87 years), and most patients were women (58%). Laparoscopic pancreatic resection was performed for malignancy (46%), low potential malignant (44%), or benign (10%) diseases. The mean operative durations were 211 ± 102 minutes (range 30 to 540 minutes) for the entire population and 351 ± 59 minutes (range 240 to 540 minutes) for PD, and decreased with the learning curve. Mean blood loss was 229 ± 269 mL (range 0 to 1,500 mL), and 13 patients (4%) received transfusions. Conversion to an open procedure was required in 12 patients (4%), and only 5 in the last 250 patients (14% vs 2%; p < 0.001). Mortality occurred in 4 (1.3%) patients and only after PD (5.8%). Common complications were pancreatic fistula (n = 124, 41%), bleeding (n = 35, 12%), and reoperation (n = 28, 9%). The postoperative outcomes were less favorable in procedures with a reconstruction phase (n = 105) than in those without (n = 195), with increased mortality (3.8% vs 0%; p = 0.04), overall morbidity (76% vs % 52%; p < 0.001), and mean hospital stay (26 ± 15 days vs 16 ± 10 days; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic pancreatic resection without a reconstruction phase has excellent outcomes; LPR with a reconstruction phase, especially PD, has less favorable outcomes, and further randomized studies are required to draw conclusions on the safety and benefits of this approach.

Amylase in drain fluid for the diagnosis of pancreatic leak in post-pancreatic resection

BACKGROUND

The treatment of people with clinically significant postoperative pancreatic leaks is different from those without clinically significant pancreatic leaks. It is important to know the diagnostic accuracy of drain fluid amylase as a triage test for the detection of clinically significant pancreatic leaks, so that an informed decision can be made as to whether the patient with a suspected pancreatic leak needs further investigations and treatment. There is currently no systematic review of the diagnostic test accuracy of drain fluid amylase for the diagnosis of clinically relevant pancreatic leak.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of amylase in drain fluid at 48 hours or more for the diagnosis of pancreatic leak in people who had undergone pancreatic resection.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Science Citation Index Expanded, and the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment (NIHR HTA) websites up to 20 February 2017. We searched the references of the included studies to identify additional studies. We did not restrict studies based on language or publication status, or whether data were collected prospectively or retrospectively. We also performed a 'related search' and 'citing reference' search in MEDLINE and Embase.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all studies that evaluated the diagnostic test accuracy of amylase in the drain fluid at 48 hours or more for the diagnosis of pancreatic leak in people who had undergone pancreatic resection excluding total pancreatectomy. We planned to exclude case-control studies because these studies are prone to bias, but did not find any. At least two authors independently searched and screened the references produced by the search to identify relevant studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data from the included studies. The included studies reported drain fluid amylase on different postoperative days and measured at different cut-off levels, so it was not possible to perform a meta-analysis using the bivariate model as planned. We have reported the sensitivity, specificity, post-test probability of a positive and negative drain fluid amylase along with 95% confidence interval (CI) on each of the different postoperative days and measured at different cut-off levels.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of five studies including 868 participants met the inclusion criteria for this review. The five studies included in this review reported the value of drain fluid amylase at different thresholds and different postoperative days. The sensitivities and specificities were variable; the sensitivities ranged between 0.72 and 1.00 while the specificities ranged between 0.73 and 0.99 for different thresholds on different postoperative days. At the median prevalence (pre-test probability) of 15.9%, the post-test probabilities for pancreatic leak ranged between 35.9% and 95.4% for a positive drain fluid amylase test and ranged between 0% and 5.5% for a negative drain fluid amylase test.None of the studies used the reference standard of confirmation by surgery or by a combination of surgery and clinical follow-up, but used the International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula (ISGPF) grade B and C as the reference standard. The overall methodological quality was unclear or high in all the studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Because of the paucity of data and methodological deficiencies in the studies, we are uncertain whether drain fluid amylase should be used as a method for testing for pancreatic leak in an unselected population after pancreatic resection; and we judge that the optimal cut-off of drain fluid amylase for making the diagnosis of pancreatic leak is also not clear. Further well-designed diagnostic test accuracy studies with pre-specified index test threshold of drain fluid amylase (at three times more on postoperative day 5 or another suitable pre-specified threshold), appropriate follow-up (for at least six to eight weeks to ensure that there are no pancreatic leaks), and clearly defined reference standards (of surgical, clinical, and radiological confirmation of pancreatic leak) are important to reliably determine the diagnostic accuracy of drain fluid amylase in the diagnosis of pancreatic leak.

Enhanced recovery pathway in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy: a case-matched study

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery (ER) pathways have improved outcomes across multiple surgical specialties, but reports concerning their application in distal pancreatectomy (DP) are lacking. The aim of this study was to assess compliance with an ER protocol and its impact on short-term outcomes in patients undergoing DP.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data were reviewed. One hundred consecutive patients undergoing DP were treated within an ER pathway comprising 18 care elements. Each patient was matched 1:1 with a patient treated with usual perioperative care. Match criteria were age, BMI, ASA score, lesion site, and type of disease.

RESULTS

Adherence to ER items ranged from 15% for intraoperative restrictive fluids to 100% for intraoperative warming, antibiotic and anti-thrombotic prophylaxis. Patients in ER group experienced earlier recovery of gastrointestinal function (2 vs. 3 days, p < 0.001), oral intake (2 vs. 4 days, p < 0.001), and suspension of intravenous infusions (3 vs. 5 days, p < 0.001). Overall morbidity was similar in the two groups (72% vs. 78%). Length of hospital stay (LOS) was reduced in ER patients without postoperative complications (6.7 ± 1.2 vs. 7.6 ± 1.6 days, p = 0.041).

CONCLUSIONS

An ER pathway for DP yielded an earlier postoperative recovery and shortened LOS in uneventful patients. Postoperative morbidity and readmissions were similar in both groups.

Risk factors for postoperative pancreatic fistula after laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy using stapler closure technique from one single surgeon

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is a safe and reliable treatment for tumors in the body and tail of the pancreas. Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a common complication of pancreatic surgery. Despite improvement in mortality, the rate of POPF still remains high and unsolved. To identify risk factors for POPF after laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy, clinicopathological variables on 120 patients who underwent LDP with stapler closure were retrospectively analyzed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify risk factors for POPF. The rate of overall and clinically significant POPF was 30.8% and13.3%, respectively. Higher BMI (≥25kg/m²) (p-value = 0.025) and longer operative time (p-value = 0.021) were associated with overall POPF but not clinically significant POPF. Soft parenchymal texture was significantly associated with both overall (p-value = 0.012) and clinically significant POPF (p-value = 0.000). In multivariable analyses, parenchymal texture (OR, 2.933, P-value = 0.011) and operative time (OR, 1.008, P-value = 0.022) were risk factors for overall POPF. Parenchymal texture was an independent predictive factor for clinically significant POPF (OR, 7.400, P-value = 0.001).

Randomized clinical trial of duct-to-mucosa pancreaticogastrostomy versus handsewn closure after distal pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains a major cause of morbidity after distal pancreatectomy. The aim of this study was to investigate whether duct-to-mucosa pancreaticogastrostomy of the pancreatic stump decreased clinical POPF formation compared with handsewn closure after distal pancreatectomy.

METHODS

This multicentre RCT was performed between April 2012 and June 2014. Patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy were assigned randomly to either duct-to-mucosa pancreaticogastrostomy or handsewn closure. The primary endpoint was the incidence of clinical POPF. Secondary endpoints were rates of other complications and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Some 80 patients were randomized, and 73 patients were evaluated in an intention-to-treat analysis: 36 in the pancreaticogastrostomy group and 37 in the handsewn closure group. The duration of operation was significantly longer in the pancreaticogastrostomy group than in the handsewn closure group (mean 268 versus 197 min respectively; P < 0·001). The incidence of clinical POPF did not differ between groups (7 of 36 versus 7 of 37; odds ratio (OR) 1·03, 95 per cent c.i. 0·32 to 3·10; P = 1·000). The rate of intra-abdominal fluid collection was significantly lower in the pancreaticogastrostomy group (6 of 36 versus 21 of 37; OR 0·15, 0·05 to 0·45; P < 0·001). There were no statistically significant differences in the rates of other complications or length of hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

Duct-to-mucosa pancreaticogastrostomy did not reduce the incidence of clinical POPF compared with handsewn closure of the pancreatic stump after distal pancreatectomy. Registration number UMIN000007426 (http://www.umin.ac.jp).

Surgical Therapy for Pancreatic and Periampullary Cancer

Surgery is the key component of treatment for pancreatic and periampullary cancers. Pancreatectomy is complex, and there are numerous perioperative and intraoperative factors that are important for achieving optimal outcomes. This article focuses specifically on key aspects of the surgical management of periampullary and pancreatic cancers.

Risk factors and preventive strategies for post-operative pancreatic fistula after pancreatic surgery: a comprehensive review

BACKGROUND

Pancreas surgery has developed into a fairly safe procedure in terms of mortality, but is still hampered by considerable morbidity. Among the most frequent and dreaded complications are the development of a post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF). The prediction and prevention of POPF remains an area of debate with several questions yet to be firmly addressed with solid answers.

METHODS

A systematic review of systematic reviews/meta-analyses and randomized trials in the English literature (PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane library, EMBASE) covering January 2005 to December 2015 on risk factors and preventive strategies for POPF.

RESULTS

A total of 49 systematic reviews and meta-analyses over the past decade discussed patient, surgeon, pancreatic disease and intraoperative related factors of POPF. Non-modifiable factors (age, BMI, comorbidity) and pathology (histotype, gland texture, duct size) that indicates surgery are associated with POPF risk. Consideration of anastomotic technique and use of somatostatin-analogs may slightly modify the risk of fistula. Sealant products appear to have no effect. Perioperative bleeding and transfusion enhance risk, but is modifiable by focus on technique and training. Drains may not prevent fistulae, but may help in early detection. Early drain-amylase may aid in detection. Predictive scores lack uniform validation, but may have a role in patient information if reliable pre-operative risk factors can be obtained.

CONCLUSIONS

Development of POPF occurs through several demonstrated risk factors. Anastomotic technique and use of somatostatin-analogs may slightly decrease risk. Drains may aid in early detection of leaks, but do not prevent POPF.

Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Surgical resection is currently the only treatment with the potential for long-term survival and cure of pancreatic cancer. Surgical resection is provided as distal pancreatectomy for cancers of the body and tail of the pancreas. It can be performed by laparoscopic or open surgery. In operations on other organs, laparoscopic surgery has been shown to reduce complications and length of hospital stay as compared with open surgery. However, concerns remain about the safety of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy compared with open distal pancreatectomy in terms of postoperative complications and oncological clearance.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy versus open distal pancreatectomy for people undergoing distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma of the body or tail of the pancreas, or both.

SEARCH METHODS

We used search strategies to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded and trials registers until June 2015 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies. We also searched the reference lists of included trials to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered for inclusion in the review RCTs and non-randomised studies comparing laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer, irrespective of language, blinding or publication status..

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently identified trials and independently extracted data. We calculated odds ratios (ORs), mean differences (MDs) or hazard ratios (HRs) along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using both fixed-effect and random-effects models with RevMan 5 on the basis of intention-to-treat analysis when possible.

MAIN RESULTS

We found no RCTs on this topic. We included in this review 12 non-randomised studies that compared laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy (1576 participants: 394 underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and 1182 underwent open distal pancreatectomy); 11 studies (1506 participants: 353 undergoing laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and 1153 undergoing open distal pancreatectomy) provided information for one or more outcomes. All of these studies were retrospective cohort-like studies or case-control studies. Most were at unclear or high risk of bias, and the overall quality of evidence was very low for all reported outcomes.Differences in short-term mortality (laparoscopic group: 1/329 (adjusted proportion based on meta-analysis estimate: 0.5%) vs open group: 11/1122 (1%); OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.17; 1451 participants; nine studies; I(2) = 0%), long-term mortality (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.12; 277 participants; three studies; I(2) = 0%), proportion of people with serious adverse events (laparoscopic group: 7/89 (adjusted proportion: 8.8%) vs open group: 6/117 (5.1%); OR 1.79, 95% CI 0.53 to 6.06; 206 participants; three studies; I(2) = 0%), proportion of people with a clinically significant pancreatic fistula (laparoscopic group: 9/109 (adjusted proportion: 7.7%) vs open group: 9/137 (6.6%); OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.47 to 3.02; 246 participants; four studies; I(2) = 61%) were imprecise. Differences in recurrence at maximal follow-up (laparoscopic group: 37/81 (adjusted proportion based on meta-analysis estimate: 36.3%) vs open group: 59/103 (49.5%); OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.05; 184 participants; two studies; I(2) = 13%), adverse events of any severity (laparoscopic group: 33/109 (adjusted proportion: 31.7%) vs open group: 45/137 (32.8%); OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.66; 246 participants; four studies; I(2) = 18%) and proportion of participants with positive resection margins (laparoscopic group: 49/333 (adjusted proportion based on meta-analysis estimate: 14.3%) vs open group: 208/1133 (18.4%); OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.10; 1466 participants; 10 studies; I(2) = 6%) were also imprecise. Mean length of hospital stay was shorter by 2.43 days in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (MD -2.43 days, 95% CI -3.13 to -1.73; 1068 participants; five studies; I(2) = 0%). None of the included studies reported quality of life at any point in time, recurrence within six months, time to return to normal activity and time to return to work or blood transfusion requirements.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently, no randomised controlled trials have compared laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy versus open distal pancreatectomy for patients with pancreatic cancers. In observational studies, laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy has been associated with shorter hospital stay as compared with open distal pancreatectomy. Currently, no information is available to determine a causal association in the differences between laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy. Observed differences may be a result of confounding due to laparoscopic operation on less extensive cancer and open surgery on more extensive cancer. In addition, differences in length of hospital stay are relevant only if laparoscopic and open surgery procedures are equivalent oncologically. This information is not available currently. Thus, randomised controlled trials are needed to compare laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy versus open distal pancreatectomy with at least two to three years of follow-up. Such studies should include patient-oriented outcomes such as short-term mortality and long-term mortality (at least two to three years); health-related quality of life; complications and the sequelae of complications; resection margins; measures of earlier postoperative recovery such as length of hospital stay, time to return to normal activity and time to return to work (in those who are employed); and recurrence of cancer.

Clinical trials to reduce pancreatic fistula after pancreatic surgery-review of randomized controlled trials

Pancreatic fistula is one of severe postoperative complications that occur after pancreatic surgery, such as pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) and distal pancreatectomy (DP). Because pancreatic fistula is associated with a higher incidence of life-threatening complications. In order to evaluate procedure or postoperative management to reduce pancreatic fistula after pancreatic surgery, we summarized some randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding pancreaticoenterostomy during PD, pancreatic duct stent during PD, procedure to resect pancreatic parenchyma during DP, and somatostatin and somatostatin analogues after pancreatic surgery. At first, we reviewed nine RCTs to compare pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) with pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) during PD. Next, we reviewed five RCTs, to evaluate the impact of pancreatic duct stent during PD. Regarding DP, we reviewed six RCTs to evaluate appropriate procedure to reduce pancreatic fistula after DP. Finally, we reviewed eight RCTs to evaluate the impact of somatostatin and somatostatin analogues after pancreatic surgery to reduce pancreatic fistula. The best way to prevent pancreatic fistula after pancreatic surgery remains still controversial. However, several RCTs clarify a useful procedure to reduce in reducing the incidence of pancreatic fistula after pancreatic surgery. Further RCTs to study innovative approaches remain a high priority for pancreatic surgeons to prevent pancreatic fistula after pancreatic surgery.

Effectiveness of Tachosil(®) in the prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a frequent and clinically relevant problem after distal pancreatectomy. A variety of methods have been tested in the attempt to prevent POPF, most of them without convincing results.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library to identify clinical studies comparing pancreatic stump closure with the addition of Tachosil(®) to conventional stump closure. The identified studies were critically appraised, and meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model. Dichotomous data were pooled using odds ratios, and weighted mean differences were calculated for continuous outcomes, together with the corresponding 95 % confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Four studies (two randomised controlled trials and two retrospective clinical studies) reporting data from 738 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall POPF, clinically-relevant POPF, mortality, reoperations, intraoperative blood loss and length of hospital stay did not differ significantly between conventional closure and additional covering of the pancreatic stump with Tachosil(®). A sensitivity analysis of only randomised controlled trials confirmed the results.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of Tachosil(®) to the pancreatic stump after distal pancreatectomy is a safe procedure but provides no relevant benefit in terms of POPF, mortality, reoperation rate, blood loss or length of hospital stay. Future research should concentrate on novel methods of pancreatic stump closure to prevent POPF after distal pancreatectomy.

Effectiveness of Tachosil(®) in the prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a frequent and clinically relevant problem after distal pancreatectomy. A variety of methods have been tested in the attempt to prevent POPF, most of them without convincing results.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library to identify clinical studies comparing pancreatic stump closure with the addition of Tachosil(®) to conventional stump closure. The identified studies were critically appraised, and meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model. Dichotomous data were pooled using odds ratios, and weighted mean differences were calculated for continuous outcomes, together with the corresponding 95 % confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Four studies (two randomised controlled trials and two retrospective clinical studies) reporting data from 738 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall POPF, clinically-relevant POPF, mortality, reoperations, intraoperative blood loss and length of hospital stay did not differ significantly between conventional closure and additional covering of the pancreatic stump with Tachosil(®). A sensitivity analysis of only randomised controlled trials confirmed the results.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of Tachosil(®) to the pancreatic stump after distal pancreatectomy is a safe procedure but provides no relevant benefit in terms of POPF, mortality, reoperation rate, blood loss or length of hospital stay. Future research should concentrate on novel methods of pancreatic stump closure to prevent POPF after distal pancreatectomy.

Fibrin sealants for the prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula following pancreatic surgery

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pancreatic fistula is one of the most frequent and potentially life-threatening complications following pancreatic resections. Fibrin sealants are introduced to reduce postoperative pancreatic fistula by some surgeons. However, the use of fibrin sealants during pancreatic surgery is controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety, effectiveness, and potential adverse effects of fibrin sealants for the prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula following pancreatic surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Library (2015, Issue 7), MEDLINE (1946 to 26 August 2015), EMBASE (1980 to 26 August 2015), Science Citation Index Expanded (1900 to 26 August 2015), and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) (1978 to 26 August 2015).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials that compared fibrin sealant group (fibrin glue or fibrin sealant patch) versus control group (no fibrin sealant or placebo) in people undergoing pancreatic surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently identified the trials for inclusion, collected the data, and assessed the risk of bias. We performed the meta-analyses using Review Manager 5. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes (or a Peto odds ratio for very rare outcomes), and the mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine trials involving 1095 participants who were randomized to the fibrin sealant group (N = 550) and the control group (N = 545) after pancreatic surgery. All of the trials were at high risk of bias. There was no evidence of differences in overall postoperative pancreatic fistula (fibrin sealant 29.6%; control 31.0%; RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.21; P = 0.58; nine studies; low-quality evidence), postoperative mortality (3.1% versus 2.1%; Peto OR 1.29, 95% CI 0.59 to 2.82; P = 0.53; eight studies; very low-quality evidence), overall postoperative morbidity (29.6% versus 28.9%; RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.32; P = 0.77; five studies), reoperation rate (8.7% versus 10.7%; RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.21; P = 0.29; five studies), or length of hospital stay (12.9 days versus 13.1 days; MD -0.73 days, 95% CI -2.20 to 0.74; P = 0.331; six studies) between the groups. The proportion of postoperative pancreatic fistula that was clinically significant was not mentioned in most trials. On inclusion of trials that clearly distinguished clinically significant fistulas, there was inadequate evidence to establish the effect of fibrin sealants on clinically significant postoperative pancreatic fistula (9.4% versus 13.4%; RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.21; P = 0.21; three studies). Quality of life and cost effectiveness were not reported in any of the trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current available evidence, fibrin sealants do not seem to prevent postoperative pancreatic fistula in people undergoing pancreatic surgery.

Modified Blumgart Suturing Technique for Remnant Closure After Distal Pancreatectomy: a Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Despite recent advances in surgical techniques including staple closure and ultrasonic devices, the reported incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after distal pancreatectomy (DP) remains high. Therefore, we devised a new strategy in which the pancreatic stump is enveloped with the elevated jejunum (EJ) by a modified Blumgart anastomotic technique. Eighty-one patients who underwent open DP with splenectomy from January 2008 to December 2014 were enrolled. Comparisons were made between 42 patients who underwent placement of an EJ patch using the modified Blumgart method after scalpel transection and 39 patients who underwent scalpel transection alone, using unmatched and propensity score-matched analysis. After 25 patients from each group were selected by propensity score matching, the EJ patch technique was significantly associated with a lower incidence of clinically relevant POPF (P = 0.036). Multivariate analysis showed that the EJ patch was an independent predictor of a lower incidence of POPF (odds ratio, 0.16; 95 % confidence interval, 0.01–0.48; P = 0.017) as was the estimated remnant pancreatic volume. Addition of the EJ patch improves postoperative outcomes in patients who undergo open DP with splenectomy by scalpel transection and hand-sewn closure of the pancreatic remnant.

Stapler versus scalpel resection followed by hand-sewn closure of the pancreatic remnant for distal pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Resections of the pancreatic body and tail reaching to the left of the superior mesenteric vein are defined as distal pancreatectomy. Most distal pancreatectomies are elective treatments for chronic pancreatitis, benign or malignant diseases, and they have high morbidity rates of up to 40%. Pancreatic fistula formation is the main source of postoperative morbidity, associated with numerous further complications. Researchers have proposed several surgical resection and closure techniques of the pancreatic remnant in an attempt to reduce these complications. The two most common techniques are scalpel resection followed by hand-sewn closure of the pancreatic remnant and stapler resection and closure.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the rates of pancreatic fistula in people undergoing distal pancreatectomy using scalpel resection followed by hand-sewn closure of the pancreatic remnant versus stapler resection and closure.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Biosis and Science Citation Index from database inception to October 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing stapler versus scalpel resection followed by hand-sewn closure of the pancreatic remnant for distal pancreatectomy (irrespective of language or publication status).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and extracted the data. Taking into consideration the clinical heterogeneity between the trials (e.g. different endpoint definitions), we analysed data using a random-effects model with Review Manager (RevMan), calculating risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

In two eligible trials, a total of 381 participants underwent distal pancreatic resection and were randomised to closure of the pancreatic remnant either with stapler (n = 191) or scalpel resection followed by hand-sewn closure (n = 190). One was a single centre pilot RCT and the other was a multicentre blinded RCT. The single centre pilot RCT evaluated 69 participants in five intervention arms (stapler, hand-sewn, fibrin glue, mesh and pancreaticojejunostomy), although we only assessed the stapler and hand-sewn closure groups (14 and 15 participants, respectively). The multicentre RCT had two interventional arms: stapler (n = 177) and hand-sewn closure (n = 175). The rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula was the main outcome, and it occurred in 79 of 190 participants in the hand-sewn group compared to 65 of 191 participants in the stapler group. Neither the individual trials nor the meta-analysis showed a significant difference between resection techniques (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.55 to 1.45; P = 0.66). In the same way, postoperative mortality and operation time did not differ significantly. The single centre RCT had an unclear risk of bias in the randomisation, allocation and both blinding domains. However, the much larger multicentre RCT had a low risk of bias in all domains. Due to the small number of events and the wide confidence intervals that cannot exclude clinically important benefit or harm with stapler versus hand-sewn closure, there is a serious possibility of imprecision, making the overall quality of evidence moderate.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The quality of evidence is moderate and mainly based on the high weight of the results of one multicentre RCT. Unfortunately, there are no other completed RCTs on this topic except for one relevant ongoing trial. Neither stapler nor scalpel resection followed by hand-sewn closure of the pancreatic remnant for distal pancreatectomy showed any benefit compared to the other method in terms of postoperative pancreatic fistula, overall postoperative mortality or operation time. Currently, the choice of closure is left up to the preference of the individual surgeon and the anatomical characteristics of the patient. Another (non-European) multicentre trial (e.g. with an equality or non-inferiority design) would help to corroborate the findings of this meta-analysis. Future trials assessing novel methods of stump closure should compare them either with stapler or hand-sewn closure as a control group to ensure comparability of results.

Systematic review on the use of matrix-bound sealants in pancreatic resection

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic fistula is a potentially life-threatening complication after a pancreatic resection. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the role of matrix-bound sealants after a pancreatic resection in terms of preventing or ameliorating the course of a post-operative pancreatic fistula.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in the literature from May 2005 to April 2015. Included were clinical studies using matrix-bound sealants after a pancreatic resection, reporting a post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) according to the International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula classification, in which grade B and C fistulae were considered clinically relevant.

RESULTS

Two were studies on patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy (sealants n = 67, controls n = 27) and four studies on a distal pancreatectomy (sealants n = 258, controls n = 178). After a pancreatoduodenectomy, 13% of patients treated with sealants versus 11% of patients without sealants developed a POPF (P = 0.76), of which 4% versus 4% were clinically relevant (P = 0.87). After a distal pancreatectomy, 42% of patients treated with sealants versus 52% of patients without sealants developed a POPF (P = 0.03). Of these, 9% versus 12% were clinically relevant (P = 0.19).

CONCLUSIONS

The present data do not support the routine use of matrix-bound sealants after a pancreatic resection, as there was no effect on clinically relevant POPF. Larger, well-designed studies are needed to determine the efficacy of sealants in preventing POPF after a pancreatoduodenectomy.

Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy with or without Preservation of the Spleen for Solid Pseudopapillary Neoplasm

Solid pseudopapillary neoplasm (SPN) is a rare tumor of the pancreas. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (DP) is a feasible and safe procedure, and successful spleen preservation rates are higher using a laparoscopic approach. We hypothesized that certain patients with SPN would be good candidates for laparoscopic surgery; however, few surgeons have reported laparoscopic DP for SPN. We discuss the preoperative assessment and surgical simulation for two SPN cases. A simulation was designed because we consider that a thorough preoperative understanding of the procedure based on three-dimensional image analysis is important for successful laparoscopic DP. We also discuss the details of the actual laparoscopic DP with or without splenic preservation that we performed for our two SPN cases. It is critical to use appropriate instruments at appropriate points in the procedure; surgical instruments are numerous and varied, and surgeons should maximize the use of each instrument. Finally, we discuss the key techniques and surgical pitfalls in laparoscopic DP with or without splenic preservation. We conclude that experience alone is inadequate for successful laparoscopic surgery.

Pancreatic Fistula and Delayed Gastric Emptying After Pancreatectomy: Where do We Stand?

Pancreatic resection has become a feasible treatment of pancreatic neoplasms, and with improvements in surgical techniques and perioperative management, mortality associated with pancreatic surgery has decreased considerably. Despite this improvement, a high rate of complications is still associated with these procedures. Among these complications, delayed gastric emptying (DGE) and postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) have a substantial impact on patient outcomes and burden our healthcare system. Technical modifications and postoperative approaches have been proposed to reduce rates of both POPF and DGE in patients undergoing pancreatectomy; however, to date, their rates have remained unchanged. In the present study, we summarize the findings of the most significant studies that have investigated these complications. In particular, several studies focused on technical modifications including extent of dissection, stent placement, nature of anastomosis, type of reconstruction, and application of biological or non-biological agents to site of anastomosis. Moreover, postoperatively, drain placement, duration of drain usage, postoperative feeding, and use of pharmacological agents were studied to reduce rates of POPF and DGE. In this review, we summarize the most relevant literature on this fundamental aspect of pancreatic surgery. Despite studies identifying the potential benefit of technical modifications and postoperative approaches, these findings remain controversial and suggest need for further extensive investigation. Most importantly, we recommend that all surgeons performing these procedures base their practice on the most updated and highest available level of evidence.

Technical Aspects of Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy for Benign and Malignant Disease: Review of the Literature

Distal pancreatectomy is the standard curative treatment for symptomatic benign, premalignant, and malignant disease of the pancreatic body and tail. The most obvious benefits of a laparoscopic approach to distal pancreatectomy include earlier recovery and shorter hospital stay. Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy should be attempted in case of benign disease. Spleen preservation can be achieved preferably by preserving the splenic vessels (Kimura technique), but also by resecting the splenic vessels and maintaining vascularity through the short gastric vessels and left gastroepiploic artery (Warshaw technique). Several studies have suggested a higher rate of spleen preservation with laparoscopy. The radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy has become mainstay for treating pancreatic cancer and can be performed laparoscopically as well. Evidence on the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for cancer is scarce. Despite the obvious advantages of laparoscopic surgery, postoperative morbidity remains relatively high, mainly because of the high incidence of pancreatic fistula. For decades, surgeons have tried to prevent these fistulas but to date no strategy has been confirmed to be effective in 2 consecutive randomized studies. Pragmatic multicenter studies focusing on technical aspects of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy are lacking and should be encouraged.

Can the measurement of amylase in drain after distal pancreatectomy predict post-operative pancreatic fistula?

INTRODUCTION

The most frequent reason for performing a distal pancreatectomy is the presence of cystic or neuroendocrine tumors, in which the distal pancreatic stump is often soft and non fibrotic. This parenchymal consistence represents the main risk factor for post-operative pancreatic fistula. In order to identify the fistula and assessing its severity postoperative monitoring of amylase from intraperitoneal drains is important.

METHODS

From a retrospective multicentric database analysis were included 33 patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic neoplastic disease.

RESULTS

Postoperative pancreatic fistula occurred in four cases. One patient had a ductal adenocarcinoma, two presented with pancreatic endocrine neoplasms and the last one had an intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia. Two patients underwent open, the other two laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy.

DISCUSSION

Postoperative pancreatic fistulas after distal pancreatectomy worsen the quality of life, prolong the post-operative stay and delay further adjuvant therapy. In patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy literature exposed some advantages deriving from the placement of abdominal drainages only in selected cases and from their early removal. Patients presenting a high risk of pancreatic fistula had higher amylase levels of drainage fluid in the first postoperative day.

CONCLUSION

POPF is the most frequently complication after pancreatectomy. In our analysis DFA1>5000 can be considered as a predictive factor for pancreatic fistula. For this reason, the systematic measurement of amylase in drain fluid in first-postoperative day can be considered a good clinical practice.

Stump closure reinforcement with absorbable fibrin collagen sealant sponge (TachoSil) does not prevent pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy: the FIABLE multicenter controlled randomized study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of TachoSil sponge on distal pancreatectomy remnant stump in reducing the rate and severity of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF).

METHODS

All consecutive patients requiring distal pancreatectomy were randomized in 45 centers. The principal end point was onset of "clinically relevant" POPF. Univariate and multivariate analyses were searched for predictive factors.

RESULTS

Of the 270 patients randomized (134 with TachoSil; 136 without), 150 (55.6%) patients sustained a POPF [74 clinically relevant and 76 clinically silent (27.4% and 28.1%), respectively]: no statistically significant difference was found between patients sustaining clinically relevant POPF [41 (30.6%) with vs 33 (24.3%) without TachoSil (P = .276)], or overall POPF [73 (54.5%) with vs 77 (56.6%) without TachoSil, (P = .807)], but there were more clinically relevant POPF after hand-sewn (32.3%) versus mechanical closure (19.8%) (P = .025) and, in case of splenic preservation, after splenic vessel ligation (15/32, 46.9%) versus vascular preservation (17/72, 23.6%) (P = .024). Hand-sewn pancreatic remnant closure (P = .023) and splenic vessel ligation in splenic preservation (P = .035) were independent predictive factors for the onset of clinically relevant POPF.

CONCLUSION

TachoSil sponge reinforcement of the proximal remnant after distal pancreatectomy reduced neither the rate nor the severity of POPF.

Safety and efficacy of early drain removal and triple-drug therapy to prevent pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy

OBJECTIVE

Prior studies suggested that early drain removal prevented the development of pancreatic fistula (PF) after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), but there has been no corresponding prospective trial for distal pancreatectomy (DP). The purpose of this study was to determine the safety and efficacy of early drain removal and triple-drug therapy (TDT) with gabexate mesilate, octreotide and carbapenem antibiotics to prevent PF after DP in patients at high-risk of developing PF.

METHODS

A total 71 patients who underwent a DP were enrolled. We prospectively divided them into two groups: the late-removal group, in which the drain remained in place for at least for 5 days postoperatively (n = 30) and the early-removal group in which the drain was removed on postoperative day 1 (POD1) (n = 41). For the patients with a high drain amylase level (≥10,000 IU/L) and patients with symptomatic intraperitoneal fluid collection, our original TDT was introduced. The primary endpoint was the safety and efficacy of this management, and the secondary endpoint was the incidence of PF.

RESULTS

The incidence of clinical PF was significantly lower in the early-removal group (0% vs. the late removal 16%; p < 0.001). In the early-removal group, TDT was administered to 12 patients (29%) and none of the patients needed additional treatment after TDT.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative management after DP with early drain removal and TDT was safe and effective for preventing PF.

Perioperative management of distal pancreatectomy

Recent advances in surgical techniques and perioperative management have markedly reduced operative morbidity after distal pancreatectomy (DP). However, some questions remain regarding the protocol for the perioperative management of DP, in particular, with regard to the development of pancreatic fistula (PF). A review of DP was therefore conducted in order to standardize the management of patients for a favorable outcome. Overall, operative technique and perioperative management emerged as two critical factors contributing to favorable outcome in DP patients. As for the operative method, surgical and closure techniques exhibited differences in outcome. Laparoscopic DP generally yields more favorable perioperative outcomes compared to open DP, and is applicable for benign tumors and some ductal carcinomas of the pancreas. Robotic DP is also available for safe pancreatic surgery. En bloc celiac axis resection offers a high R0 resection rate and potentially allows for some local control in the case of advanced pancreatic cancer. Following resection, staple closure was not found to reduce the rate of PF when compared to hand-sewn closure. In addition, ultrasonic dissection devices, fibrin glue sealing, and staple closure with mesh reinforcement were shown to significantly reduce PF, although there was some bias in these studies. In perioperative management, both preoperative and postoperative treatment affected outcome. First, preoperative endoscopic pancreatic stenting may be an effective prophylactic measure against fistula development following DP in selected patients. Second, in postoperative management, a multifactorial approach including prophylactic antibiotics improved high surgical site infection rates following complex hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery. Furthermore, although conflicting results have been reported, somatostatin analogues should be administered selectively to patients considered to have a high risk for PF. Finally, careful drain management also facilitates a favorable outcome in patients with PF after DP. The results of the review indicate that laparoscopic DP coupled with perioperative management influences outcome in DP patients.

Novel surgical technique to prevent pancreatic fistula in distal pancreatectomy using a patch of the falciform ligament

PURPOSE

Pancreatic fistula (PF) is a serious complication of pancreatectomy and many techniques and devices have been designed to prevent PF and abdominal bleeding after pancreatectomy. We report a modified technique using a patch of the falciform ligament to prevent PF formation after distal pancreatectomy (DP).

METHOD

On completion of DP, the main pancreatic duct is sutured. The remnant pancreas is then closely patched and sutured vertically to the falciform ligament using 3-0 polypropylene suture. We compared the results of this method (group 1) with those of the simple method of covering the remnant pancreas with the falciform ligament (group 2).

RESULTS

We performed this method in 14 patients undergoing DP. The rate of grade B or C PF in group 1 (7.1 %) was lower than that in group 2 (46 %).

CONCLUSION

This is a simple and effective method of preventing PF fistula in DP.

Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing three techniques for pancreatic remnant closure following distal pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Established closure techniques for the pancreatic remnant after distal pancreatectomy include stapler, suture and anastomotic closure. However, controversy remains regarding the ideal technique; therefore, the aim of this study was to compare closure techniques and risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF).

METHODS

A systematic review was carried out according to PRISMA guidelines for studies published before January 2014 that compared at least two closure techniques for the pancreatic remnant in distal pancreatectomy. A random-effects model was constructed using weighted odds ratios (ORs).

RESULTS

Thirty-seven eligible studies matched the inclusion criteria and 5252 patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy were included. The primary outcome measure, the POPF rate, ranged 0 from to 70 per cent. Meta-analysis of the 31 studies comparing stapler versus suture closure showed that the stapler technique had a significantly lower rate of POPF, with a combined OR of 0.77 (95 per cent c.i. 0.61 to 0.98; P = 0.031). Anastomotic closure was associated with a significantly lower POPF rate than suture closure (OR 0.55, 0.31 to 0.98; P = 0.042). Combined stapler and suture closure had significantly lower POPF rates than suture closure alone, but no significant difference compared with stapler closure alone.

CONCLUSION

The use of stapler closure or anastomotic closure for the pancreatic remnant after distal pancreatectomy significantly reduces POPF rates compared with suture closure. The combination of stapler and suture closure shows superiority over suture closure alone.

Results of 100 consecutive laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies: postoperative outcome, cost-benefit analysis, and quality of life assessment

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) has been recently proposed as the procedure of choice for lesions of the pancreatic body and tail in experienced centres. The purpose of this study is to assess the potential advantages of LDP in a consecutive series of 100 patients.

METHODS

Propensity score matching was used to identify patients for comparison between LDP and control open group. Match criteria were: age, gender, ASA score, BMI, lesion site and size, and malignancy. All patients were treated according to an early feeding recovery policy. Primary endpoint was postoperative morbidity rate. Secondary endpoints were operative time, blood transfusion, length of hospital stay (LOS), hospital costs, and quality of life.

RESULTS

Thirty patients of the LDP group had pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Conversion to open surgery was necessary in 23 patients. Mean operative time was 29 min shorter in the open group (p = 0.002). No significant difference between groups was found in blood transfusion rate and postoperative morbidity rate. LDP was associated with an early postoperative rehabilitation and a shorter LOS in uneventful patients. Economic analysis showed <euro> 775 extra cost per patient of the LDP group. General health perception and vitality were better in the LDP group one month after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy improved short-term postoperative recovery and quality of life in a consecutive series of both cancer and non-cancer patients. Despite the extra cost, the laparoscopic approach should be considered the first option in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy.

Economic and outcomes consequences of TachoSil®: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

TachoSil(®) is a medicated sponge coated with human fibrinogen and human thrombin. It is indicated as a support treatment in adult surgery to improve hemostasis, promote tissue sealing, and support sutures when standard surgical techniques are insufficient. This review systematically analyses the international scientific literature relating to the use of TachoSil in hemostasis and as a surgical sealant, from the point of view of its economic impact.

METHODS

We carried out a systematic review of the PubMed literature up to November 2013. Based on the selection criteria, papers were grouped according to the following outcomes: reduction of time to hemostasis; decrease in length of hospital stay; and decrease in postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Twenty-four scientific papers were screened, 13 (54%) of which were randomized controlled trials and included a total of 2,116 patients, 1,055 of whom were treated with TachoSil. In the clinical studies carried out in patients undergoing hepatic, cardiac, or renal surgery, the time to hemostasis obtained with TachoSil was lower (1-4 minutes) than the time measured with other techniques and hemostatic drugs, with statistically significant differences. Moreover, in 13 of 15 studies, TachoSil showed a statistically significant reduction in postoperative complications in comparison with the standard surgical procedure. The range of the observed decrease in the length of hospital stay for TachoSil patients was 2.01-3.58 days versus standard techniques, with a statistically significant difference in favor of TachoSil in eight of 15 studies.

CONCLUSION

This analysis shows that TachoSil has a role as a supportive treatment in surgery to improve hemostasis and promote tissue sealing when standard techniques are insufficient, with a consequent decrease in postoperative complications and hospital costs.

Fibrin sealants and topical agents in hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: a critical appraisal

INTRODUCTION

Fibrin sealants and topical hemostatic agents have been used extensively in hepatobiliary and pancreatic (HPB) surgery to promote coagulation and clot formation decreasing the need for allogeneic blood transfusion and to act as tissue sealants, ideally preventing biliary, enteric, and pancreatic leaks.

RESULTS

Current literature has demonstrated some favorable outcomes using many different products for application in the field of HPB surgery. However, critical findings exist demonstrating lack of reproducible efficacy or benefit. In all, many clinical trials have demonstrated effectiveness of fibrin sealants and other agents at reducing the need for intraoperative and postoperative blood transfusion. Ability to effectively seal tissues providing biliostatic effect or preventing postoperative fistula formation remains debated as definitive evidence is lacking.

CONCLUSIONS

In the following invited review, we discuss current literature describing the use of topical agents and fibrin sealants in liver and pancreas surgery. We summarize major contemporary clinical trials and their findings regarding the use of these agents in HPB surgery and provide evidence from the preclinical literature as to the translation of these products into the clinical arena.

Fibrin sealants and topical agents in hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: a critical appraisal

INTRODUCTION

Fibrin sealants and topical hemostatic agents have been used extensively in hepatobiliary and pancreatic (HPB) surgery to promote coagulation and clot formation decreasing the need for allogeneic blood transfusion and to act as tissue sealants, ideally preventing biliary, enteric, and pancreatic leaks.

RESULTS

Current literature has demonstrated some favorable outcomes using many different products for application in the field of HPB surgery. However, critical findings exist demonstrating lack of reproducible efficacy or benefit. In all, many clinical trials have demonstrated effectiveness of fibrin sealants and other agents at reducing the need for intraoperative and postoperative blood transfusion. Ability to effectively seal tissues providing biliostatic effect or preventing postoperative fistula formation remains debated as definitive evidence is lacking.

CONCLUSIONS

In the following invited review, we discuss current literature describing the use of topical agents and fibrin sealants in liver and pancreas surgery. We summarize major contemporary clinical trials and their findings regarding the use of these agents in HPB surgery and provide evidence from the preclinical literature as to the translation of these products into the clinical arena.

Surgical technique in distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review of randomized trials

Despite recent improvements in surgical technique, the morbidity of distal pancreatectomy remains high, with pancreatic fistula being the most significant postoperative complication. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) dealing with surgical techniques in distal pancreatectomy was carried out to summarize up-to-date knowledge on this topic. The Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, Embase, Web of Science, and Pubmed were searched for relevant articles published from 1990 to December 2013. Ten RCTs were identified and included in the systematic review, with a total of 1286 patients being randomized (samples ranging from 41 to 450). The reviewers were in agreement for application of the eligibility criteria for study selection. It was not possible to carry out meta-analysis of these studies because of the heterogeneity of surgical techniques and approaches, such as varying methods of pancreas transection, reinforcement of the stump with seromuscular patch or pancreaticoenteric anastomosis, sealing with fibrin sealants and pancreatic stent placement. Management of the pancreatic remnant after distal pancreatectomy is still a matter of debate. The results of this systematic review are possibly biased by methodological problems in some of the included studies. New well designed and carefully conducted RCTs must be performed to establish the optimal strategy for pancreatic remnant management after distal pancreatectomy.

Protection of colonic anastomosis with platelet-rich plasma gel in the open abdomen

BACKGROUND

Although evidence for colonic anastomosis in the damage control abdomen continues to accumulate, anastomotic leak is common and associated with greater morbidity. The purposes of our study was to evaluate the effect of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) gel on the healing of colon anastomosis and anastomotic strength in the open abdomen.

METHODS

PRP was prepared by enriching whole blood platelet concentration from healthy rat. In the rodent model, standard colonic anastomoses followed by closure of abdomen (Control; n=10) and anastomoses followed by open abdomen (OA; n=10) were compared to PRP-sealed anastomoses in open abdomen (OA+PRP; n=10). One week after surgery, body weight, anastomotic bursting pressure, hydroxyproline concentration, and histology of anastomotic tissue were evaluated.

RESULTS

All rats survived surgery and had no signs of anastomotic leakage. Compared with the control and PRP group, OA group exhibited a significant decrease in body weight, anastomotic bursting pressure, hydroxyproline concentration, and collagen deposition. No significant difference was detected in these variables between the PRP group and the control group.

CONCLUSION

PRP gel application prevented delayed anastomotic wound healing after open abdomen, which suggested that anastomotic sealing with PRP gel might improve outcome of colonic injuries in the setting of open abdomen.

Fibrin Sealant: The Only Approved Hemostat, Sealant, and Adhesive-a Laboratory and Clinical Perspective

Background. Fibrin sealant became the first modern era material approved as a hemostat in the United States in 1998. It is the only agent presently approved as a hemostat, sealant, and adhesive by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The product is now supplied as patches in addition to the original liquid formulations. Both laboratory and clinical uses of fibrin sealant continue to grow. The new literature on this material also continues to proliferate rapidly (approximately 200 papers/year). Methods. An overview of current fibrin sealant products and their approved uses and a comprehensive PubMed based review of the recent literature (February 2012, through March 2013) on the laboratory and clinical use of fibrin sealant are provided. Product information is organized into sections based on a classification system for commercially available materials. Publications are presented in sections based on both laboratory research and clinical topics are listed in order of decreasing frequency. Results. Fibrin sealant remains useful hemostat, sealant, and adhesive. New formulations and applications continue to be developed. Conclusions. This agent remains clinically important with the recent introduction of new commercially available products. Fibrin sealant has multiple new uses that should result in further improvements in patient care.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of fibrin sealants for patients undergoing pancreatic resection

INTRODUCTION

Post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a common complication after partial pancreatic resection, and is associated with increased rates of sepsis, mortality and costs. The role of fibrin sealants in decreasing the risk of POPF remains debatable. The aim of this study was to evaluate the literature regarding the effectiveness of fibrin sealants in pancreatic surgery.

METHODS

A comprehensive database search was conducted. Only randomized controlled trials comparing fibrin sealants with standard care were included. A meta-analysis regarding POPF, intra-abdominal collections, post-operative haemorrhage, pancreatitis and wound infections was performed according to the recommendations of the Cochrane collaboration.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included, accounting for 897 patients. Compared with controls, patients receiving fibrin sealants had a pooled odds ratio (OR) of developing a POPF of 0.83 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.6-1.14], P = 0.245. There was a trend towards a reduction in post-operative haemorrhage (OR = 0.43 (95%CI: 0.18-1.0), P = 0.05) and intra-abdominal collections (OR = 0.52 (95%CI: 0.25-1.06), P = 0.073) in those patients receiving fibrin sealants. No difference was observed in terms of mortality, wound infections, re-interventions or hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

On the basis of these results, fibrin sealants cannot be recommended for routine clinical use in the setting of pancreatic resection.