Prophylactic pasireotide administration following pancreatic resection reduces cost while improving outcomes

Costs of complications following distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Postoperative complications following distal pancreatectomy (DP) are common, especially postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). In order to design adequate prophylactic strategies, it is of relevance to determine the costs of these complications. An overview of the literature on the costs of complications following DP is lacking.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library (inception until 1 August 2022). The primary outcome was the costs (i.e. cost differential) of major morbidity, individual complications and prolonged hospital stay. Quality of non-RCTs were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Costs were compared with the use of Purchasing Power parity. This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021223019).

RESULTS

Overall, seven studies were included with 854 patients after DP. The rate POPF grade B/C varied between 13% and 27% (based on five studies) with a corresponding cost differential of EUR 18,389 (based on two studies). The rate of severe morbidity varied between 13% and 38% (based on five studies) with a corresponding cost differential of EUR 19,281 (based on five studies).

CONCLUSION

This systematic review reported considerable costs for POPF grade B/C and severe morbidity after DP. Prospective databases and studies should report on all complications in a uniform matter to better display the economic burden of complications of DP.

Predictors of post-operative pancreatic fistula formation in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: A national surgical quality improvement program analysis

BACKGROUND

Post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a serious complication following pancreas surgery. We aimed to establish factors associated with POPF specifically in patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNET).

METHODS

The 2014-2018 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was querried for patients undergoing resection for PNET. The impact of patient, tumor, and operative factors on POPF formation was evaluated.

RESULTS

3532 patient underwent resections for PNET. The POPF rate was significantly higher in patients with PNET (24.8%) versus non-PNET (16.4%) (p < 0.0001). Male sex (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.11-1.89), enucleation (OR 3.14, 95% CI 1.10-8.98), pancreaticoduodenectomy (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.13-2.03), small duct size <3 mm (OR 3.24, 95% CI 1.62-6.48), and soft gland texture (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.18-2.77) were independently associated with POPF in PNET patients on multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

POPF is more common in patients undergoing resection for PNET and is dictated primarily by surgical approach and gland characteristics.

Iterative Changes in Risk-Stratified Pancreatectomy Clinical Pathways and Accelerated Discharge After Pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Previous implementation of risk-stratified pancreatectomy clinical pathways (RSPCPs) decreased length of stay (LOS) following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). This study's primary aim was to measure the association of iterative RSPCP revisions with accelerated discharge and early postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of a prospectively maintained surgical database (10/2016-9/2020). In February 2019, revised RSPCPs were implemented with earlier nasogastric tube (NGT) removal (postoperative day [POD] 1 for low risk; POD 2 for high risk) and updated drain fluid amylase cutoffs for POD 1/POD 3 removal. Perioperative outcomes between original and revised pathways were compared. Predictors of accelerated discharge (defined as ≤ POD 5 for low risk; ≤ POD 6 for high risk) were identified.

RESULTS

There were 233 (36% high risk) patients in original and 131 (32% high risk) in revised RSPCPs. After revision, the rate of POD 1 NGT removal was higher while POD ≤ 3 drain removal was similar. Median LOS decreased for low risk (5 vs. 6 days, p = 0.011) and high risk (6 vs. 9 days, p = 0.005) with no increase in delayed gastric emptying, postoperative pancreatic fistula, or readmissions. With POD 1 NGT removal, diet tolerance was earlier without increased NGT reinsertions. In low-risk patients, younger age, POD 1 NGT removal, and POD ≤ 3 drain removal were independent predictors of accelerated discharge. In high-risk patients, POD 1 NGT removal and POD ≤ 3 drain removal were independent predictors of accelerated discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Following iterative revisions in RSPCPs, LOS after PD decreased further without increasing readmissions, and NGTs were removed earlier without increased reinsertions. Early NGT and drain removal are modifiable practices within RSPCPs that are associated with accelerated discharge.

Outcomes of peri-operative glucocorticosteroid use in major pancreatic resections: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is increasing evidence that peri-operative glucocorticosteroid can ameliorate the systemic response following major surgery. Preliminary evidence suggests peri-operative usage of glucocorticosteroid may decrease post-operative complications. These positive associations have been observed in a range of different operations including intra-abdominal, thoracic, cardiac, and orthopaedic surgery. This review aims to investigate the impact of peri-operative glucocorticosteroid in major pancreatic resections.

METHODS

A systematic review based on a search in Medline and Embase databases was performed. PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews were followed.

RESULTS

A total of five studies were analysed; three randomised controlled trials and two retrospective cohort studies. The total patient population was 1042. The glucocorticosteroids used were intravenous hydrocortisone or dexamethasone. Three studies reported significantly lower morbidity in the peri-operative glucocorticosteroid group. The number needed to treat to prevent one major complication with hydrocortisone is four patients. Two studies demonstrated that dexamethasone was associated with a statistically significantly improved median overall survival in pancreatic cancer.

CONCLUSION

This is the first systematic review conducted to investigate the significance of peri-operative glucocorticosteroid in patients undergoing pancreatic resection. This review shows a correlation of positive outcomes with the administration of glucocorticosteroid in the peri-operative setting following a major pancreatic resection.. More randomised clinical trials are required to confirm if this is a true effect, as it would have significant implications.

Early vs Late Readmissions in Pancreaticoduodenectomy Patients: Recognizing Comprehensive Episodic Cost to Help Guide Bundled Payment Plans and Hospital Resource Allocation

INTRODUCTION

Previous studies on readmission cost in pancreaticoduodenectomy patients use estimated cost data and do not delineate etiology or cost differences between early and late readmissions. We sought to identify relationships between postoperative complication type and readmission timing and cost in pancreaticoduodenectomy patients.

METHODS

Hospital cost data from date of discharge to postoperative day 90 were merged with 2008-2018 NSQIP data. Early readmission was within 30 days of surgery, and late readmission was 30 to 90 days from surgery. Regression analyses for readmission controlled for patient comorbidities, complications, and surgeon.

RESULTS

Of 230 patients included, 58 (25%) were readmitted. The mean early and late readmission costs were $18,365 ± $20,262 and $24,965 ± $34,435, respectively. Early readmission was associated with index stay deep vein thrombosis (p < 0.01), delayed gastric emptying (p < 0.01), and grade B pancreatic fistula (p < 0.01). High-cost early readmission had long hospital stays or invasive procedures. Common late readmission diagnoses were grade B pancreatic fistula requiring drainage (n = 5, 14%), failure to thrive (n = 4, 14%), and bowel obstruction requiring operation (n = 3, 11%). High-cost late readmissions were associated with chronic complications requiring reoperation.

CONCLUSION

Early and late readmissions following pancreaticoduodenectomy differ in both etiology and cost. Early readmission and cost are driven by common complications requiring percutaneous intervention while late readmission and cost are driven by chronic complications and reoperation. Late readmissions are frequent and a significant source of resource utilization. Negotiations of bundled care payment plans should account for significant late readmission resource utilization.

Risk-stratified analysis of pasireotide for patients undergoing pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Pasireotide was shown in a randomized trial to decrease the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). However, retrospective series from other centers have failed to confirm these results.

METHODS

Patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy or distal pancreatectomy between January 2014 and February 2019 were included. Patients treated after November 2016 routinely received pasireotide and were compared to a retrospective cohort. Multivariate analysis was performed for the outcome of clinically relevant POPF (CR-POPF), with stratification by fistula risk score (FRS).

RESULTS

Ninety-nine of 300 patients received pasireotide. The distribution of high, intermediate, low, and negligible risk patients by FRS was comparable (P = .487). There were similar rates of CR-POPF (19.2% pasireotide vs 14.9% control, P = .347) and percutaneous drainage (12.1% vs 10.0%, P = .567), with greater median number of drain days in the pasireotide group (6 vs 4 days, P < .001). Multivariate modeling for CR-POPF showed no correlation with operation or pasireotide use. Adjustment with propensity weighted models for high (OR, 1.02, 95% CI, 0.45-2.29) and intermediate (OR, 1.02, CI, 0.57-1.81) risk groups showed no correlation of pasireotide with reduction in CR-POPF.

CONCLUSIONS

Pasireotide administration after pancreatectomy was not associated with a decrease in CR-POPF, even when patients were stratified by FRS.

Efficacy of Pasireotide for Prevention of Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula in Pancreatic Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pasireotide was recently suggested for the prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreatic surgery. However, its efficacy remains to be controversially dicussed. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of pasireotide for preventing POPF after pancreatic surgery.

METHOD

A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library to identify clinical studies investigating the efficacy of pasireotide after pancreatic surgery. The identified studies were critically appraised, and meta-analyses were then performed. The study was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines and was registered at the PROSPERO study database (CRD42018112334).

RESULTS

Four studies with a total of 919 patients were included: 418 with pasireotide treatment and 501 controls. Meta-analysis showed that pasireotide could reduce neither clinically relevant POPF rate (OR = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.49-1.24; P = 0.29) nor overall POPF rate (OR = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.60-1.48; P = 0.80) after pancreatic resections. There were no significant differences in delayed gastric emptying, mortality, and postoperative hospital stay after pancreatic surgery. However, pasireotide reduces readmission after pancreatic surgery (OR = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.44-0.85; P = 0.004). Subgroup analyses revealed that prophylactic use of pasireotide did not reduce the incidence of clinically relevant POPF after pancreaticoduodenectomy or distal pancreatectomy compared with the control.

CONCLUSION

Based on the available evidence, use of pasireotide may not reduce clinically relevant POPF as well as it may not improve postoperative course substantially after pancreatic surgery. Further investigator-initiated high-quality trials are needed.

Somatostatin analogues and the risk of post-operative pancreatic fistulas after pancreatic resection - A systematic review & meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a common complication of pancreatic resection. Somatostatin analogues (SA) have been used as prophylaxis to reduce its incidence. The aim of this study is to appraise the current literature on the effects of SA prophylaxis on the prevention of POPF following pancreatic resection.

METHODS

The review of the literature was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Data from studies that reported the effects of SA prophylaxis on POPF following pancreatic resection were extracted, to determine the effect of SA on POPF morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 15 studies, involving 2221 patients, were included. Meta-analysis revealed significant reductions in overall POPF (Odds ratio: 0.65 (95% CI 0.53-0.81, p < 0.01)), clinically significant POPF (Odds ratio: 0.53 (95% CI 0.34-0.83, p < 0.01)) and overall morbidity (OR: 0.69 (95% CI: 0.50-0.95, p = 0.02)) following SA prophylaxis. There is no evidence that SA prophylaxis reduces mortality (OR: 1.10 (95%CI: 0.68-1.79, p = 0.68)).

CONCLUSION

SA prophylaxis following pancreatic resection reduces the incidence of POPF. However, mortality is unaffected.

Outcomes after Pancreatectomy with Routine Pasireotide Use

BACKGROUND

Morbidity after pancreatectomy is commonly due to leakage of exocrine secretions resulting in abscess or pancreatic fistula (PF). Previously, we authored a double-blind randomized controlled trial demonstrating that perioperative pasireotide administration lowers abscess or PF formation by >50%. Accordingly, we adopted pasireotide use as standard practice after pancreatectomy in October 2014 and hypothesized a similar PF/abscess rate reduction would be observed.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospectively maintained database was queried for all patients who underwent pancreatectomy between October 2014 and July 2017. Pasireotide was administered preoperatively and twice daily for 7 days postoperatively or until discharge. The primary end point was clinically relevant PF/abscess requiring procedural intervention, identical to the earlier trial outcomes. Logistic regression was used to compare outcomes with the placebo arm of the earlier randomized trial and to control known PF risk factors.

RESULTS

During the 34-month study period, 652 patients underwent pancreatectomy (211 distal pancreatectomy, 441 pancreaticoduodenectomy). Compared with the historical placebo group (n = 148), the observational group had an increased prevalence of higher American Society of Anesthesiologists scores (69% vs 54%; p < 0.001) and high-risk cases (small duct and soft gland, 47% vs 36%; p = 0.030). The primary end point occurred in 13.3% of patients receiving pasireotide vs 20.9% in the placebo arm of the earlier trial trial (odds ratio 0.58; 95% CI 0.37 to 0.92; p = 0.020). Biliary leakage was lower in those receiving pasireotide (0.6% vs 3.4%; p = 0.014), and other morbidity was unchanged. No subpopulation was identified more likely to benefit from pasireotide.

CONCLUSIONS

At our center, adoption of pasireotide has allowed us to achieve a clinically significant abscess or pancreatic leak rate of 13.3%, approximating the effect observed in the randomized trial of pasireotide during routine surgical practice.

Pasireotide is not effective in reducing the development of postoperative pancreatic fistula

BACKGROUND

In a single trial, perioperative pasireotide demonstrated reduction in postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) following pancreatectomy, yet recent studies question the efficacy of this drug.

METHODS

All patients who underwent pancreatic resection between January 2014 and August 2017 at a single institution were prospectively followed. Starting in February 2016, pasireotide was administered to all pancreatectomies. Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) patients were additionally risk-stratified using a validated clinical risk score. The primary endpoint was the development of clinically relevant POPF (CR-POPF), and was compared between patients who received pasireotide and controls.

RESULTS

Of 116 patients, 87 patients (75%) underwent PD, and 43 patients (37.1%) received pasireotide. CR-POPF occurred in 28.4% patients. The use of pasireotide was not associated with reduced CR-POPF among the total cohort (25.6% vs. 30.1%, P = 0.599), distal pancreatectomy patients (P = 0.339), PD (P = 0.274), or PD patients with elevated risk scores (P = 0.073). Pasireotide did not decrease hospital length of stay, use of parenteral nutrition, delayed gastric emptying, surgical site wound infection, or readmission rate.

CONCLUSION

Use of pasireotide after pancreatic resection does not decrease CR-POPF, nor is it associated with reduced length of stay or postoperative complications. A multi-center randomized trial is warranted to study its true effect on outcomes after pancreatectomy.

Pasireotide does not prevent postoperative pancreatic fistula: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic fistula is a major cause of morbidity after pancreas surgery. In 2014, a single-center, randomized-controlled trial found pasireotide decreased pancreatic fistula rates. However, this finding has not been validated, nor has pasireotide been widely adopted.

METHODS

A single-arm study in 111 consecutive patients undergoing pancreatic resection April 2015-October 2016 was conducted. Beginning immediately before surgery, patients received 900 μg subcutaneous pasireotide twice daily for up to seven days. Fistula rates were compared to 168 historical controls from July 2013 to March 2015. The primary outcome was Grade B/C fistula, as defined by the International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula (ISGPF).

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the pasireotide group and historical controls in demographics, comorbidities, operation type, malignancy, gland texture, or pancreatic duct size. Pasireotide did not reduce fistula rate (15.5% control versus 17.1% pasireotide, p = 0.72). In subgroup analyses of pancreaticoduodenectomy or distal pancreatectomy, or patients with soft gland texture and/or small duct size, there was no decrease in fistulas. Thirty-nine patients (38%) experienced dose-limiting nausea.

CONCLUSIONS

In an appropriately-powered, single-institution prospective study, pasireotide was not validated as a preventive measure for pancreatic fistula.

[Evidence-based supportive measures to secure pancreatic anastomoses]

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic anastomosis is the Achilles heel of pancreatic surgery. Despite substantial progress in surgical techniques the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistulas remains very high. For this reason various supportive measures to secure pancreatic anastomoses are of continuing interest.

OBJECTIVE

This review presents the newest evidence-based data on supportive measures designed to secure a pancreatic anastomosis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The most recent meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials and the largest retrospective studies on the role of pancreatic duct stenting, double loop reconstruction, autologous patches and drainage in pancreaticoduodenectomy were taken into account. The value of somatostatin analogues, perioperative nutrition and fluid management is critically discussed.

RESULTS

The existing body of evidence on supportive measures is insufficient and remains controversial. The use of somatostatin analogues, drainages and restrictive perioperative fluid management has proven effective. In contrast, routine stenting of the pancreatic duct cannot be recommended. Other approaches, such as double loop reconstruction and use of autologous patches lack sufficient evidence.

CONCLUSION

Meticulous surgical technique and surgeon experience remain the cornerstones of performing a safe pancreatic anastomosis; however, some additional supportive measures seem to have significant potential and should be further investigated in large and well-designed prospective clinical trials.

Selective Perioperative Administration of Pasireotide is More Cost-Effective Than Routine Administration for Pancreatic Fistula Prophylaxis

BACKGROUND

In a randomized trial, pasireotide significantly decreased the incidence and severity of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). Subsequent analyses concluded that its routine use is cost-effective. We hypothesized that selective administration of the drug to patients at high risk for POPF would be more cost-effective.

STUDY DESIGN

Consecutive patients who did not receive pasireotide and underwent pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) or distal pancreatectomy (DP) between July 2011 and January 2014 were distributed into groups based on their risk of POPF using a multivariate recursive partitioning regression tree analysis (RPA) of preoperative clinical factors. The costs of treating hypothetical patients in each risk group were then computed based upon actual institutional hospital costs and previously published relative risk values associated with pasireotide.

RESULTS

Among 315 patients who underwent pancreatectomy, grade B/C POPF occurred in 64 (20%). RPA allocated patients who underwent PD into four groups with a risk for grade B/C POPF of 0, 10, 29, or 60% (P < 0.001) on the basis of diagnosis, pancreatic duct diameter, and body mass index. Patients who underwent DP were allocated to three groups with a grade B/C POPF risk of 14, 26, or 44% (P = 0.05) on the basis of pancreatic duct diameter alone. Although the routine administration of pasireotide to all 315 patients would have theoretically saved $30,892 over standard care, restriction of pasireotide to only patients at high risk for POPF would have led to a cost savings of $831,916.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative clinical characteristics can be used to characterize patients' risk for POPF following pancreatectomy. Selective administration of pasireotide only to patients at high risk for grade B/C POPF may maximize the cost-efficacy of prophylactic pasireotide.

Cost-effectiveness comparison of prophylactic octreotide and pasireotide for prevention of fistula after pancreatic surgery

PURPOSE

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a major determinant of pancreatic surgery outcome, and prevention of POPF is a relevant clinical challenge. The aim of the present study is to compare the cost-effectiveness of octreotide and pasireotide for POPF prophylaxis.

METHODS

A systematic literature review and meta-analysis and a retrospective patient cohort provided the data. Cost-effectiveness was calculated by the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and by decision tree modelling of hospital stay duration.

RESULTS

Six randomised trials on octreotide (1255 patients) and one trial on pasireotide (300 patients) were included. The median POPF incidence without prophylaxis was 19.6 %. The relative risks for POPF after octreotide or pasireotide prophylaxis were 0.54 or 0.45. Octreotide prophylaxis (21 × 0.1 mg) costs were 249.69 Euro, compared with 728.84 Euro for pasireotide (14 × 0.9 mg) resulting in an ICER of 266.19 Euro for an additional 1.8 % risk reduction with pasireotide. Decision tree modelling revealed no significant reduction of median hospital stay duration if pasireotide was used instead of octreotide.

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic octreotide is almost as effective as pasireotide but incurs significantly fewer drug costs per case. However, the data quality is limited, because the effect of octreotide on clinically relevant POPF is unclear. Together with the lack of multicentric data on pasireotide and its effectiveness, a current off-label use of pasireotide does not appear to be justified.