Major pancreatic duct continuity is the crucial determinant in the management of blunt pancreatic injury: a pancreatographic classification

Should surgeon-performed intraoperative ultrasound be the preferred test for detecting main pancreatic duct injuries in operative trauma cases?

BACKGROUND

The diagnostic performance of multiple tests for detecting the presence of a main pancreatic duct injury remains poor. Given the central importance of main duct integrity for both subsequent treatment algorithms and patient outcomes, poor test reliability is problematic. The primary aim was to evaluate the comparative test performance of computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), and intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) for detecting main pancreatic duct injuries.

METHODS

All severely injured adult patients with pancreatic trauma (2010-2021) were evaluated. Patients who received an IOUS pancreas-focused evaluation, with Grades III, IV, and V injuries (main duct injury) were compared with those with Grade I and Grade II trauma (no main duct injury). Test performances were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 248 pancreatic injuries, 74 underwent an IOUS. The additional mix of diagnostic studies (CT, MRCP, ERCP) was variable across grade of injury. Of these 74 IOUS cases for pancreatic injuries, 48 (64.8%) were confirmed as Grades III, IV, or V main duct injuries. The patients were predominantly young (median age = 33, IQR:21-45) blunt injured (70%) males (74%) with severe injury demographics (injury severity score = 28, (IQR:19-36); 30% hemodynamic instability; 91% synchronous intra-abdominal injuries). Thirty-five percent of patients required damage-control surgery. Patient outcomes included a median 13-day hospital length of stay and 1% mortality rate. Test performance was variable across groups (CT = 58% sensitive/77% specific; MRCP = 71% sensitive/100% specific; ERCP = 100% sensitive; IOUS = 98% sensitive/100% specific).

CONCLUSION

Intraoperative ultrasound is a highly sensitive and specific test for detecting main pancreatic duct injuries. This technology is simple to learn, readily available, and should be considered in patients who require concurrent non-damage-control abdominal operations.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic Test/Criteria; Level III.

Emergency hybrid surgery for transection of pancreas at the head and neck after blunt abdominal trauma: A case report and review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

A complete disruption of main pancreatic duct (MPD) presents a significant challenge to the surgeon. Historically, the standard surgical approach for addressing a complete disruption of the MPD involved distal pancreatic resection and pancreaticojejunostomy Roux-en-Y anastomosis. Nevertheless, there have been no reported cases of hybrid surgery being employed for the complete disruption of the MPD.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 63-year-old male patient presented with blunt trauma in the upper abdomen and was transferred to our trauma center 10 hours after injury. Upon arrival at the emergency department, he was conscious, hemodynamically stable, and complained of upper abdominal pain and distention. Physical examination revealed right upper abdominal tenderness and slight abdominal tension. Abdominal contrast-enhanced CT scan revealed a complete transection of pancreatic parenchyma at the junction of the head and neck.

DIAGNOSES

Complete transection of pancreatic parenchyma at the junction of the head and neck combined with complete disruption of the MPD, AIS grade IV.

INTERVENTIONS

The hybrid surgery was initially utilized for complete MPD disruption, incorporating endoscope-assisted stent placement in the MPD along with primary repair of the pancreatic parenchyma and duct.

OUTCOMES

The postoperative period went smoothly, and the patient recovered and was discharged 4 weeks after operation. The MPD stent was removed under endoscope 4 months after operation, and Endoscopic Retrograde Pancreatography examination showed that the MPD was patency and slight MPD stenosis without pancreatic leakage. At the most recent follow-up, the patient had returned to normal life and work without any pancreatic endocrine or exocrine dysfunction.

LESSONS

The hybrid surgery, incorporating endoscope-assisted MPD stent placement and primary repair of the pancreatic parenchyma and duct, emerges as a promising alternative for complete MPD disruption in hemodynamically stable patients. The challenge in this hybrid surgery is the precise localization of the distal end of the MPD.

Primary Repair of Traumatic Complete Pancreatic Rupture

Isolated pancreatic injury with transection of the pancreatic duct is generally treated with pancreatic resection, but the optimal management is not based on high-level evidence. Herein, we report a case of primary repair of complete rupture of the pancreas and pancreatic duct after a blunt abdominal trauma and a review of the literature. A 33-year-old patient had an isolated pancreatic injury after blunt abdominal trauma. At laparotomy, an even transection was found with minimal necrosis and tissue loss and an end-to-end anastomosis of the duct and the parenchyma with omental patch was performed. Patient's postoperative course was complicated by a 6 cm pseudocyst and a low output pancreatic fistula which did not require any intervention and were self-limited. In the literature, 17 cases with primary repair of similar grade IV pancreatic injuries have been reported. Postoperative complications included mostly fistulas and pseudocysts.

Current use and utility of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and pancreatic duct stents: A secondary analysis from the Western Trauma Association multicenter trials group on pancreatic injuries

INTRODUCTION

The single most important predictor of pancreas-specific complications (PSCs) after pancreatic trauma is injury to the main pancreatic duct (MPD). Pancreatography has been recommended to evaluate the integrity of the MPD. In addition, pancreatic duct stents have been proposed to prevent or treat PSC. The primary purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) in diagnosing MPD injury. We further sought to determine whether stents were effective in preventing PSC or facilitated the resolution of pancreatic leaks or fistulae.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of a multicenter retrospective review of pancreatic injuries in patients 15 years and older from 2010 to 2018, focusing on patients who underwent MRCP or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), was performed. Final pancreatic injury grade was determined based on all available assessments, ultimately adjudicated by the site principal investigator. Data were analyzed using various statistical tests where appropriate.

RESULTS

Thirty-three centers reported on 1,243 patients. A total of 216 underwent pancreatography-137 had MRCP and 115 ERCP, with 36 having both. The sensitivity of MRCP for MPD injury was 37%, the specificity was 94%, the positive predictive value was 77%, and the negative predictive value was 73%. When compared with ERCP, MRCP findings were discordant in 64% of cases. Pancreatic stents were placed in 77 patients; 48 (62%) were to treat PSC, with no clear benefit. Twenty-nine had prophylactic stents placed. There did not appear to be benefit in reduced PSC compared with the entire study group or among patients with high-grade pancreatic injuries.

CONCLUSION

The accuracy of MRCP to evaluate the integrity of the MPD does not appear to be superior to computed tomography scan. Consequently, the results of MRCP should be interpreted with caution. The current data do not support prophylactic use of pancreatic stents; they should be studied in a prospective trial.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

Delayed presentation of isolated grade III pancreatic injury-a case report

Because of their vague and subtle indications and symptoms, pancreatic injuries are frequently misdiagnosed. It's crucial to have a high level of clinical suspicion. The presence of other organ solid lesions and vascular injuries, as well as the patient's hemodynamic condition, will determine how these injuries are treated. A surgical approach is mandatory when a ductal disruption occurs. The case of a 32-year-old man who experienced an upper abdominal blunt trauma is presented. He was admitted to our hospital with an acute abdomen 48 hours later. A complete transection of the major pancreatic duct was discovered during surgical investigation, and a distal pancreatectomy with en bloc splenectomy was performed. Even in a delayed context, distal pancreatectomy can be safely performed and is the best option.

Traumatic pancreatic ductal injury treated by endoscopic stenting in a 9-year-old boy: A case report

BACKGROUND

Traumatic pancreatic injury is relatively rare in children, accounting for approximately 3%-12% of blunt abdominal trauma cases. Most traumatic pancreatic injuries in boys are related to bicycle handlebars. Traumatic pancreatic injuries often result in delayed presentation and treatment, leading to high morbidity and mortality. The management of children with traumatic main pancreatic duct injuries is still under debate.

CASE SUMMARY

We report the case of a 9-year-old boy who was presented at our institution with epigastric pain after being stuck with his bicycle handlebar at the upper abdomen and then treated with endoscopic stenting because of a pancreatic ductal injury.

CONCLUSION

We believe that endoscopic stenting of pancreatic ductal injuries may be a feasible technique in certain cases of children with traumatic pancreatic duct injuries to avoid unnecessary operations.

An analysis of 77 cases of pancreatic injuries at a level one trauma center: Outcomes of conservative and surgical treatments

Backgrounds/Aims

Traumatic pancreatic injury (TPI) is rare as an isolated injury. There is a trend to perform conservative treatment even in patients with complete duct dissection and successful treatment. This study reviewed our 20 years of experience in the management of TPI and assessed patient outcomes according to age group and treatment strategy.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of patients diagnosed and treated with TPI at a level-I trauma center from 2000-2019. Patients were divided into two groups: adults and pediatrics. Conservative treatment cases were subjected to subgroup analysis. Level of evidence: IV.

Results

Of a total of 77 patients, the mean age was 24.89 ± 15.88 years. Fifty-six (72.7%) patients had blunt trauma with motor vehicle accident. Blunt trauma was the predominant mechanism in 42 (54.5%) patients. Overall, 38 (49.4%) cases had grade I or II injury, 24 (31.2%) had grade III injury, and 15 (19.5%) had grade IV injury. A total of 30 cases had non-operative management (NOM). Successful NOM was observed in 16 (20.8%) cases, including eight (32.0%) pediatric cases and eight (15.4%) adult cases. Higher American association for the surgery of trauma (AAST) grade of injury was associated with NOM failure (16.7% for grade I/II, 100% for grade III, and 66.7% for grade IV injury; p = 0.001). An independent factor for NOM failure was female sex (69.2% in females vs. 29.4% in males; p = 0.03).

Conclusions

High AAST grade TPI is associated with a high rate of NOM failure in both pediatric and adults.

Resection versus drainage in the management of patients with AAST-OIS grade IV blunt pancreatic injury: A single trauma centre experience

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to compare outcomes of pancreatic resection with that of peripancreatic drainage for American Association for the Surgery of Trauma-Organ Injury Scale (AAST-OIS) grade IV blunt pancreatic injury in order to determine the optimal treatment method.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Nineteen surgical patients with AAST-OIS grade IV blunt pancreatic injury between 1994 and 2016 were retrospectively studied.

RESULTS

Among the 19 patients, 14 were men and 5 were women (median age: 33 years). Twelve patients underwent pancreatic resection (spleen-sacrificing distal pancreatectomy, n = 6; spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy, n = 3; and central pancreatectomy with Roux-en-Y anastomosis, n = 3), and seven underwent peripancreatic drainage. After comparing these two groups, no significant differences were found in terms of gender, shock at triage, laboratory data, injury severity score, associated injury, length of hospital stay, and complication. The only significant difference was that in the drainage group, the duration from injury to surgery was longer than that from injury to resection (median, 48 hours vs. 24 hours; P = 0.036). In the drainage group, three patients required reoperation, and another three required further pancreatic duct stent therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In the surgery of the grade IV blunt pancreatic injury, pancreatic resection is warranted in early, conclusive MPD injury; if surgery is delayed or MPD injury has not been clearly assessed, peripancreatic drainage is an alternative method. However, peripancreatic drainage alone is not adequate and further pancreatic duct stent or reoperation is required. Further studies should be conducted to confirm our conclusions.

Efficacy of early endoscopic intervention in pediatric pancreatic duct injury management

BACKGROUND

The optimal management method for pediatric pancreatic trauma is controversial. Moreover, the efficacy of stent placement via endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP) remains poorly documented.

METHODS

The present, retrospective review of pediatric patients with pancreatic trauma was conducted from 2010 to 2020 at a single institution.

RESULTS

Ten, male children with the median age of 9.5 years (range 4-14 years) with a grade I (n = 2), II (n = 4) or III (n = 4) pancreatic injury were identified. Of six of these patients in whom ERP was performed, four had a pancreatic duct injury (PDI). Pancreatic stent placement was performed in all the patients with ERP at a site proximal to the injury in four patients and across the injury in two patients. A pseudocyst or pancreatic fluid collection was detected in five patients, of these, two with a grade II injury were managed successfully with conservative therapy while three with PDI required surgery. In the four patients with PDI, only one in whom the stent was placed across the PDI was able to avoid surgery.

CONCLUSION

Therapeutic ERP might be effective even if a patient has a PDI, therefore, early ERP should be considered as a treatment option.

Does drainage or resection predict subsequent interventions and long-term quality of life in patients with Grade IV pancreatic injuries: A population-based analysis

BACKGROUND

Clinical equipoise remains significant for the treatment of Grade IV pancreatic injuries in stable patients (i.e., drainage vs. resection). The literature is poor in regards to experience, confirmed main pancreatic ductal injury, nuanced multidisciplinary treatment, and long-term patient quality of life (QOL). The primary aim was to evaluate the management and outcomes (including long-term QOL) associated with Grade IV pancreatic injuries.

METHODS

All severely injured adult patients with pancreatic trauma (1995-2020) were evaluated (Grade IV injuries compared). Concordance of perioperative imaging, intraoperative exploration, and pathological reporting with a main pancreatic ductal injury was required. Patients with resection of Grade IV injuries were compared with drainage alone. Long-term QOL was evaluated (Standard Short Form-36).

RESULTS

Of 475 pancreatic injuries, 36(8%) were confirmed as Grade IV. Twenty-four (67%) underwent a pancreatic resection (29% pancreatoduodenectomy; 71% extended distal pancreatectomy [EDP]). Patient, injury and procedure demographics were similar between resection and drainage groups (p > 0.05). Pancreas-specific complications in the drainage group included 92% pancreatic leaks, 8% pseudocyst, and 8% walled-off pancreatic necrosis. Among patients with controlled pancreatic fistulas beyond 90 days, 67% required subsequent pancreatic operations (fistulo-jejunostomy or EDP). Among patients whose fistulas closed, 75% suffered from recurrent pancreatitis (67% eventually undergoing a Frey or EDP). All patients in the resection group had fistula closure by 64 days after injury. The median number of pancreas-related health care encounters following discharge was higher in the drainage group (9 vs. 5; p = 0.012). Long-term (median follow-up = 9 years) total QOL, mental and physical health scores were higher in the initial resection group (p = 0.031, 0.022 and 0.017 respectively).

CONCLUSION

The immediate, intermediate and long-term experiences for patients who sustain Grade IV pancreatic injuries indicate that resection is the preferred option, when possible. The majority of drainage patients will require additional, delayed pancreas-targeted surgical interventions and report poorer long-term QOL.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Epidemiology/Prognostic, Level III.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural drainage of post-traumatic pancreatic fluid collections

Background

Pancreatic injury is an uncommon consequence of abdominal trauma, and surgery has been the conventional treatment. The role and timing of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided treatment of the consequences of traumatic pancreatic injury is unclear. Our study evaluated the safety and efficacy of EUS-guided transmural drainage of post-traumatic pancreatic fluid collections (PFC).

Methods

A retrospective analysis of 13 patients (mean age 20.2±4.4 years; 12 males) with post-traumatic PFC treated with EUS-guided transmural drainage over the last 10 years was performed. Patient demographics, imaging findings, size of PFC, details of endoscopic transmural drainage procedure, outcome details, as well complications were retrieved from our database.

Results

The patients underwent drainage at 26.8±7.4 days after abdominal trauma, and the mean size of PFC was 11.8±3.2 cm with 2 patients having multiple fluid collections. Ten patients had PFC with a well-formed wall and 3 patients had an incompletely formed wall. Endoscopic drainage was technically successful in all 13 patients and 11 patients underwent transmural drainage with multiple plastic stents whereas 2 patients were treated with lumen apposing metal stents. The PFC resolved in all patients over a mean period of 2.7±0.4 weeks. One patient developed gastrointestinal bleeding 6 days after the procedure, successfully treated with angio-embolization.

Conclusion

EUS-guided transmural drainage of post-traumatic PFC is safe and effective and can be safely performed at an early phase (<4 weeks) after pancreatic trauma.

Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy following grade III pancreatic injury in a delayed presentation: a technical challenge

Pancreatic injuries are often overlooked in view of subtle clinical signs, and high index of suspicion is required to manage these injuries. Management strategies vary depending on the grade of injury and associated solid organ injuries and vascular injuries. Early surgery is advised in patients with duct disruption to avoid complications related to duct disruption. We present a case of 19-year-old man with delayed presentation following pancreatic trauma. During the surgery, changes of pancreatitis were noted and posterior wall of the stomach was adherent to pancreas, and inflammatory changes in vicinity of pancreas posed a significant challenge while dissecting pancreas away from the splenic vein. Spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomty (SPDP) was done. SPDP is time-consuming and technically challenging procedure especially in patients with delayed presentation. It is safe and feasible to consider spleen preservation in pancreatic trauma when patient is haemodynamically stable and expertise is available.

A multicenter trial of current trends in the diagnosis and management of high-grade pancreatic injuries

BACKGROUND

Outcomes following pancreatic trauma have not improved significantly over the past two decades. A 2013 Western Trauma Association algorithm highlighted emerging data that might improve the diagnosis and management of high-grade pancreatic injuries (HGPIs; grades III-V). We hypothesized that the use of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, pancreatic duct stenting, operative drainage versus resection, and nonoperative management of HGPIs increased over time.

METHODS

Multicenter retrospective review of diagnosis, management, and outcomes of adult pancreatic injuries from 2010 to 2018 was performed. Data were analyzed by grade and time period (PRE, 2010-2013; POST, 2014-2018) using various statistical tests where appropriate.

RESULTS

Thirty-two centers reported data on 515 HGPI patients. A total of 270 (53%) had penetrating trauma, and 58% went directly to the operating room without imaging. Eighty-nine (17%) died within 24 hours. Management and outcomes of 426 24-hour survivors were evaluated. Agreement between computed tomography and operating room grading was 38%. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography use doubled in grade IV/V injuries over time but was still low.Overall HGPI treatment and outcomes did not change over time. Resection was performed in 78% of grade III injuries and remained stable over time, while resection of grade IV/V injuries trended downward (56% to 39%, p = 0.11). Pancreas-related complications (PRCs) occurred more frequently in grade IV/V injuries managed with drainage versus resection (61% vs. 32%, p = 0.0051), but there was no difference in PRCs for grade III injuries between resection and drainage.Pancreatectomy closure had no impact on PRCs. Pancreatic duct stenting increased over time in grade IV/V injuries, with 76% used to treat PRCs.

CONCLUSION

Intraoperative and computed tomography grading are different in the majority of HGPI cases. Resection is still used for most patients with grade III injuries; however, drainage may be a noninferior alternative. Drainage trended upward for grade IV/V injuries, but the higher rate of PRCs calls for caution in this practice.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective diagnostic/therapeutic study, level III.

Current status and management of pancreatic trauma with main pancreatic duct injury: A multicenter nationwide survey in Japan

Background

Pancreatic trauma is reportedly associated with high morbidity and mortality. Main pancreatic duct (MPD) injury is critical for treatment.

Methods

As a study project of the Japanese Society for Abdominal Emergency Medicine (JSAEM), we collected the data of 163 patients with pancreatic trauma who were diagnosed and treated at JSAEM board‐certified hospitals from 2006 to 2016. Clinical backgrounds, diagnostic approaches, management strategies, and outcomes were evaluated.

Results

Sixty‐four patients (39%) were diagnosed as having pancreatic trauma with MPD injury that resulted in 3% mortality. Blunt trauma and isolated pancreatic injury were independent factors predicting MPD injury. Nine of 11 patients with MPD injury who were initially treated nonoperatively had serious clinical sequelae and five (45%) required surgery as a secondary treatment. Among all cases, the detectability of MPD injury of endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP) was superior to that of other imaging modalities (CT or MRI), with higher sensitivity and specificity (sensitivity = 0.96; specificity = 1.0).

Conclusions

Acceptable outcomes were observed in pancreatic trauma patients with MPD injury. Nonoperative management should be carefully selected for MPD injury. ERP is recommended to be performed in patients with suspected MPD injury and stable hemodynamics.

Diagnostic and therapeutic role of endoscopic retrograde pancreatography and stent placement for grade IV blunt pancreatic trauma: A case report

Pancreatic trauma involving ductal injury is rare but is associated with high morbidity and mortality. The benefit of endoscopic retrograde pancreatography and stent placement is unclear because there are only a few case reports on endoscopically treated pancreatic duct transection at the pancreatic head. We report a rare case of grade IV pancreatic trauma successfully treated with endoscopic pancreatic stent, which we believe makes significant contribution to the existing literature. A 17-year-old man with blunt pancreatic trauma was referred to our hospital and was diagnosed with grade IV pancreatic injury using endoscopic retrograde pancreatography. The patient was successfully managed with endoscopic pancreatic duct stenting. Although stent replacement was required three times and a trivial ductal stricture remained, the patient finally became stent-free without any symptoms and further adverse events. Endoscopic retrograde pancreatography is highly advantageous for early detection and evaluation of the severity of ductal injury. Subsequent stent insertion is well tolerated in hemodynamically stable patients and is especially beneficial for the treatment of pancreatic head injuries because it allows avoidance of sub-total pancreatectomy or high-risk reconstructive surgery. Nevertheless, the long-term outcomes and appropriate management of main pancreatic duct strictures due to stents remain to be determined. Accumulation of similar case experiences is essential to address these issues.

•

We report a case of pancreatic head injury treated with endoscopic pancreatic stent.

•

Endoscopic retrograde pancreatography enables early detection of ductal injury.

•

Ductal stent is useful for pancreatic head trauma patient if hemodynamically stable.

Duodeno-pancreatic and extrahepatic biliary tree trauma: WSES-AAST guidelines

Duodeno-pancreatic and extrahepatic biliary tree injuries are rare in both adult and pediatric trauma patients, and due to their anatomical location, associated injuries are very common. Mortality is primarily related to associated injuries, but morbidity remains high even in isolated injuries. Optimal management of duodeno-bilio-pancreatic injuries is dictated primarily by hemodynamic stability, clinical presentation, and grade of injury. Endoscopic and percutaneous interventions have increased the ability to non-operatively manage these injuries. Late diagnosis and treatment are both associated to increased morbidity and mortality. Sequelae of late presentations of pancreatic injury and complications of severe pancreatic trauma are also increasingly addressed endoscopically and with interventional radiology procedures. However, for moderate and severe extrahepatic biliary and severe duodeno-pancreatic injuries, immediate operative intervention is preferred as associated injuries are frequent and commonly present with hemodynamic instability or peritonitis. The aim of this paper is to present the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) and American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) duodenal, pancreatic, and extrahepatic biliary tree trauma management guidelines.

Lessons learned from isolated blunt major pancreatic injury: Surgical experience in one trauma centre

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to present our surgical experience of isolated blunt major pancreatic injury (IBMPI), and to compare its characteristic outcomes with that of multi-organ injury.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From 1994-2015, 31 patients with IBMPI and 54 patients with multi-organ injury, who underwent surgery, were retrospectively studied.

RESULTS

Of the 31 patients with IBMPI, 22 were male and 9 were female. The median age was 30 years (interquartile range, 20-38). Twenty-one patients were classified as the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma-Organ Injury Scale Grade III, and 10 patients as Grade IV. Patients with IBMPI had significantly lower shock-at-triage rates, lower injury severity scores, longer injury-to-surgery time, and shorter length of hospital stay than those with multi-organ injury. There were no statistically significant differences in sex, age, trauma mechanism, laboratory data, surgical procedures, and complications between the two groups. Eight patients with IBMPI underwent endoscopic retrograde pancreatography, and 5 patients with complete major pancreatic duct (MPD) disruption underwent pancreatectomy eventually. The remaining 3 patients had partial MPD injury and two of them received a pancreatic duct stent for the treatment of existing postoperative pancreatic fistula. Spleen-sacrificing distal pancreatectomy (SSDP) was performed in 13 patient with IBMPI, followed by spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (n = 12), peripancreatic drainage (n = 4), and central pancreatectomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction (n = 2). The overall complication rates, related to the SSDP, SPDP, peripancreatic drainage, and central pancreatectomy, were 10/13 (77%), 4/12 (33%), 3/4 (75%), and 2/2 (100%), respectively. Three patients died resulting in a 10% mortality rate, and the other 16 patients developed intra-abdominal complications resulting in a 52% morbidity rate. In the subgroup analysis of the 25 patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy, SPDP was associated with a shorter injury-to-surgery time than SSDP.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with IBMPI have longer injury-to-surgery times, compared to those with multi-organ injury. Of the distal pancreatectomy patients, the time interval from injury to surgery was a significant associated factor in preserving or sacrificing the spleen.

A rare case of central pancreatectomy for isolated complete pancreatic neck transection trauma

Background

Pancreatic trauma accounts for only 0.2% of blunt trauma and 1–12% of penetrating injuries. Injuries to other organs, such as spleen, liver, or kidney, are associated with 50.5% of the cases. The isolated complete traumatic transection of the pancreatic neck is rare. In the past, pancreatoduodenectomy or distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy was the standard care for patients with traumatic transection of the pancreatic head, duodenum or distal pancreas, and pancreatic neck. However, limited cases have been reported on the central pancreatectomy for pancreatic neck injuries. We present a rare case of a 21-year-old male patient who received central pancreatectomy for isolated complete traumatic transection of the pancreatic neck.

Case presentation

A 21-year-old male patient with mild abdominal pain and showed no apparent abnormality in the initial abdominal computed tomography (CT) was brought to the local hospital’s emergency department due to a traffic accident. The patient’s abdominal pain became progressively worse during observation in the hospital that led to the patient being referred to our hospital. The patient’s vital signs were stable, and a physical examination revealed marked tenderness and rebound pain throughout the abdomen. The patient’s white blood cells were increased; The serum amylase and lipase levels were elevated. The abdominal computed tomography revealed pancreatic neck parenchymal discontinuity, peripancreatic effusion, and hemorrhage. The patient underwent exploratory laparotomy. Intraoperative examination identified the neck of the pancreas was completely ruptured, and no apparent abnormalities were observed in the other organs. The patient underwent central pancreatectomy and Roux -Y pancreaticojejunostomy. The patient was treated with antibiotics, acid inhibition and nutritional supports for 10 days after surgery. Symptoms of the patient were significantly relieved, and white blood cells, serum amylase, and lipase levels returned to normal. The patient underwent follow up examination for 6 months with no evidence of exocrine or endocrine insufficiency.

Conclusions

Central pancreatectomy is an effective pancreas parenchyma preserving procedure, may be a promising alternative to distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy for this complex pancreatic trauma in hemodynamically stable patients. Patient selection and surgeon experience are crucial in the technical aspects of this procedure.

Role of multidetector computed tomography in the assessment of pancreatic injuries after blunt trauma: a multicenter experience

Pancreatic injuries can occur from either penetrating or blunt abdominal trauma. While there are rare, especially in the setting of blunt abdominal trauma, they are associated with a mortality of up to 30%, and a morbidity of 60%. Multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) is the preferred imaging modality in patients with acute blunt abdominal trauma and for the detection of acute pancreatic injury. Magnetic resonance (MR) and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) plays an important role in the follow-up of pancreatic injury. In this brief review, we discuss the main MDCT acute imaging findings as well as the complications. Finally, we discuss the role of MR and MRCP in follow up of patients with pancreatic injuries.

Spleen-preserving versus spleen-sacrificing distal pancreatectomy in adults with blunt major pancreatic injury

Background

The aim of this study was to analyse outcomes of spleen‐preserving (SPDP) and spleen‐sacrificing (SSDP) distal pancreatectomy in adults with severe blunt pancreatic injuries.

Methods

This was an observational study of adult patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy for grade III or IV blunt pancreatic injury between 1991 and 2015. Outcomes of SPDP and SSDP were compared.

Results

Fifty‐one patients were included, of whom 23 underwent SPDP and 28 SSDP. The median Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 13·0 (i.q.r. 9·0–18·0). No significant differences were observed between the groups regarding sex, trauma mechanism, shock at triage, laboratory data, location, ISS, associated injury, length of stay, mortality or morbidity. Age (27·0 versus 36·5 years; P = 0·012) and time interval from injury to distal pancreatectomy (15·0 versus 44·0 h; P = 0·022) differed significantly between SPDP and SSDP groups respectively. The mortality rate was 4 per cent (1 of 23) versus 11 per cent (3 of 28) respectively (P = 0·617). Nine patients (39 per cent) developed abdominal morbidity after SPDP, compared with 17 (61 per cent) after SSPD (P = 0·125). In the SPDP group, eight patients had grade B postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), two of whom required further intervention. In the SSDP group, six of ten patients with grade B POPF required CT‐guided drainage, and a further five patients required reoperation for other causes. There were more reinterventions after SSDP: 11 of 28 (39 per cent) versus 3 of 23 (13 per cent) in the SPDP group (P = 0·037).

Conclusion

SPDP was performed more often in younger patients and at a shorter interval after severe blunt pancreatic injury. SPDP was associated with fewer reinterventions.