[Significance of drains in surgery]

[Still no evidence for drains in bariatric surgery]

BACKGROUND

Registry data show that placement of a drain during bariatric surgery is still the normal practice in many surgical departments. Retrospective studies and a review article could show that the routine placement of a drain in bariatric surgery is useless and also potentially dangerous. Due to the lack of randomized controlled studies there is insufficient evidence on this topic in the literature.

OBJECTIVE

In order to further question the use of drains in bariatric interventions, the prospective in-house databank of patients who received a gastric sleeve (SG) or a Roux-en‑Y gastric bypass (RYGB) between January 2010 and June 2016 was retrospectively evaluated.

SETTING

A German university hospital.

METHODS

During the investigation period a total of 361 operations (219 gastric bypasses and 142 gastric sleeve operations) were carried out. A change in the internal treatment pathway with respect to the placement of drains in 2013 led to the formation of two groups: one where a drain was routinely placed in operations (n = 166) and a second group where a drain was not routinely placed (n = 195). The demographic data were statistically adjusted between the two groups using multiple regression analysis. The results of the operation and the 30-day morbidity were compared. Complications were evaluated according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.

RESULTS

In the group with no drain, complications occurred in seven patients. In the group with drainage there were 6 complications. The insufficiency and reoperation rates were not statistically significantly different between the two groups. The average postoperative hospital stay was 1.3 days longer in patients with a drain. Multivariate analysis showed that the placement of a drain was the greatest risk factor for a longer hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

Placement of a drain during bariatric interventions should only be considered on an individual basis. The routine placement should be discouraged.

Influence of Clinical pathways on treatment and outcome quality for patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy? A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic surgery demands complex multidisciplinary management. Clinical pathways (CPs) are a tool to facilitate this task, but evidence for their utility in pancreatic surgery is scarce. This study evaluated the effect of CPs on quality of care for pancreatoduodenectomy.

METHODS

Data of all consecutive patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy before (n = 147) or after (n = 148) CP introduction were evaluated regarding catheter and drain management, postoperative mobilization, pancreatic enzyme substitution, resumption of diet and length of stay. Outcome quality was assessed using glycaemia management, morbidity, mortality, reoperation and readmission rates.

RESULTS

Catheters and abdominal drainages were removed significantly earlier in patients treated with CP (p < 0.0001). First intake of liquids, nutritional supplement and solids was significantly earlier in the CP group (p < 0.0001). Exocrine insufficiency was significantly less common after CP implementation (47.3% vs. 69.7%, p < 0.0001). The number of patients receiving intraoperative transfusion dropped significantly after CP implementation (p = 0.0005) and transfusion rate was more frequent in the pre-CP group (p = 0.05). The median number of days with maximum pain level >3 was significantly higher in the CP group (p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in mortality, morbidity, reoperation and readmission rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Following implementation of a CP for pancreatoduodenectomy, several indicators of process and outcome quality improved, while others such as mortality and reoperation rates remained unchanged. CPs are a promising tool to improve quality of care in pancreatic surgery.

Clinical Pathways For Pancreatic Surgery: Are They A Suitable Instrument For Process Standardization To Improve Process And Outcome Quality Of Patients Undergoing Distal And Total Pancreatectomy? - A Retrospective Cohort Study

Purpose

Pancreatic surgery demands complex multidisciplinary management, which is often cumbersome to implement. Clinical pathways (CPs) are a tool to facilitate this task, but evidence for their utility in pancreatic surgery is scarce. This study evaluated if CPs are a suitable tool for process standardization in order to improve process and outcome quality in patients undergoing distal and total pancreatectomy.

Patients and methods

Data of consecutive patients who underwent distal or total pancreatectomy before (n=67) or after (n=61) CP introduction were evaluated regarding catheter management, postoperative mobilization, pancreatic enzyme substitution, resumption of diet and length of stay. Outcome quality was assessed using glycaemia management, morbidity, mortality, reoperation and readmission rates.

Results

The usage of incentive spirometers for pneumonia prophylaxis increased. The median number of days with hyperglycemia decreased significantly from 2.5 to 0. For distal pancreatectomy, the incidence of postoperative diabetes dropped from 27.9% to 7.1% (p=0.012). The incidence of postoperative exocrine pancreatic insufficiency decreased from 37.2% to 11.9% (p=0.007). There was no significant difference in mortality, morbidity, reoperation and readmission rates between groups.

Conclusion

Following implementation of a pancreatic surgery CP, several indicators of process and outcome quality improved, while others such as mortality and reoperation rates remained unchanged. CPs are a promising tool to improve quality of care in pancreatic surgery.