Stents, glue, etc.: is anything proven to help prevent pancreatic leaks/fistulae?

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

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is one of the most frequent and potentially life-threatening complications following pancreatic surgery. Fibrin sealants have been used in some centres to reduce POPF rate. However, the use of fibrin sealant during pancreatic surgery is controversial. This is an update of a Cochrane Review last published in 2020.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of fibrin sealant use for the prevention of POPF (grade B or C) in people undergoing pancreatic surgery compared to no fibrin sealant use.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases, and five trials registers on 09 March 2023, together with reference checking, citation searching, and contacting study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) 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

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 14 RCTs, randomising 1989 participants, comparing fibrin sealant use versus no fibrin sealant use for different locations: stump closure reinforcement (eight trials), pancreatic anastomosis reinforcement (five trials), or main pancreatic duct occlusion (two trials). Six RCTs were carried out in single centres; two in dual centres; and six in multiple centres. One RCT was conducted in Australia; one in Austria; two in France; three in Italy; one in Japan; two in the Netherlands; two in South Korea; and two in the USA. The mean age of the participants ranged from 50.0 years to 66.5 years. All RCTs were at high risk of bias. Application of fibrin sealants to pancreatic stump closure reinforcement after distal pancreatectomy We included eight RCTs involving 1119 participants: 559 were randomised to the fibrin sealant group and 560 to the control group after distal pancreatectomy. Fibrin sealant use may result in little to no difference in the rate of POPF (risk ratio (RR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73 to 1.21; 5 studies, 1002 participants; low-certainty evidence) and overall postoperative morbidity (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.48; 4 studies, 893 participants; low-certainty evidence). After fibrin sealant use, approximately 199 people (155 to 256 people) out of 1000 developed POPF compared with 212 people out of 1000 when no fibrin sealant was used. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of fibrin sealant use on postoperative mortality (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.39, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.29; 7 studies, 1051 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and total length of hospital stay (mean difference (MD) 0.99 days, 95% CI -1.83 to 3.82; 2 studies, 371 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Fibrin sealant use may reduce the reoperation rate slightly (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.90; 3 studies, 623 participants; low-certainty evidence). Serious adverse events were reported in five studies (732 participants), and there were no serious adverse events related to fibrin sealant use (low-certainty evidence). The studies did not report quality of life or cost-effectiveness. Application of fibrin sealants to pancreatic anastomosis reinforcement after pancreaticoduodenectomy We included five RCTs involving 519 participants: 248 were randomised to the fibrin sealant group and 271 to the control group after pancreaticoduodenectomy. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of fibrin sealant use on the rate of POPF (RR 1.34, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.48; 3 studies, 323 participants; very low-certainty evidence), postoperative mortality (Peto OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.06; 5 studies, 517 participants; very low-certainty evidence), reoperation rate (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.66; 3 studies, 323 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and total hospital cost (MD -1489.00 US dollars, 95% CI -3256.08 to 278.08; 1 study, 124 participants; very low-certainty evidence). After fibrin sealant use, approximately 130 people (70 to 240 people) out of 1000 developed POPF compared with 97 people out of 1000 when no fibrin sealant was used. Fibrin sealant use may result in little to no difference both in overall postoperative morbidity (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.19; 4 studies, 447 participants; low-certainty evidence) and in total length of hospital stay (MD -0.33 days, 95% CI -2.30 to 1.63; 4 studies, 447 participants; low-certainty evidence). Serious adverse events were reported in two studies (194 participants), and there were no serious adverse events related to fibrin sealant use (very low-certainty evidence). The studies did not report quality of life. Application of fibrin sealants to pancreatic duct occlusion after pancreaticoduodenectomy We included two RCTs involving 351 participants: 188 were randomised to the fibrin sealant group and 163 to the control group after pancreaticoduodenectomy. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of fibrin sealant use on postoperative mortality (Peto OR 1.41, 95% CI 0.63 to 3.13; 2 studies, 351 participants; very low-certainty evidence), overall postoperative morbidity (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.02; 2 studies, 351 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and reoperation rate (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.41; 2 studies, 351 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Fibrin sealant use may result in little to no difference in the total length of hospital stay (median 16 to 17 days versus 17 days; 2 studies, 351 participants; low-certainty evidence). Serious adverse events were reported in one study (169 participants; low-certainty evidence): 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 POPF, quality of life, or cost-effectiveness.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current available evidence, fibrin sealant use may result in little to no difference in the rate of POPF in people undergoing distal pancreatectomy. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of fibrin sealant use on the rate of POPF in people undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. The effect of fibrin sealant use on postoperative mortality is uncertain in people undergoing either distal pancreatectomy or pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Hepatic thermal injury promotes colorectal cancer engraftment in C57/black 6 mice

Treatment options for liver metastases (primarily colorectal cancer) are limited by high recurrence rates and persistent tumor progression. Surgical approaches to management of these metastases typically use heat energy including electrocautery, argon beam coagulation, thermal ablation of surgical margins for hemostasis, and preemptive thermal ablation to prevent bleeding or to effect tumor destruction. Based on high rates of local recurrence, these studies assess whether local effects of hepatic thermal injury (HTI) might contribute to poor outcomes by promoting a hepatic microenvironment favorable for tumor engraftment or progression due to induction of procancer cytokines and deleterious immune infiltrates at the site of thermal injury. To test this hypothesis, an immunocompetent mouse model was developed wherein HTI was combined with concomitant intrasplenic injection of cells from a well-characterized MC38 colon carcinoma cell line. In this model, HTI resulted in a significant increase in engraftment and progression of MC38 tumors at the site of thermal injury. Furthermore, there were local increases in expression of messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) for hypoxia-inducible factor-1α (HIF1α), arginase-1, and vascular endothelial growth factor α and activation changes in recruited macrophages at the HTI site but not in untreated liver tissue. Inhibition of HIF1α following HTI significantly reduced discreet hepatic tumor development (P = 0.03). Taken together, these findings demonstrate that HTI creates a favorable local environment that is associated with protumorigenic activation of macrophages and implantation of circulating tumors. Discrete targeting of HIF1α signaling or inhibiting macrophages offers potential strategies for improving the outcome of surgical management of hepatic metastases where HTI is used.

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 have been used in some centers to reduce postoperative pancreatic fistula. However, the use of fibrin sealants during pancreatic surgery is controversial. This is an update of a Cochrane Review last published in 2018.

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 (2019, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1946 to 13 March2019), Embase (1980 to 11 March 2019), Science Citation Index Expanded (1900 to 13 March 2019), and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) (1978 to 13 March 2019).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised 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 12 studies involving 1604 participants in the review. Application of fibrin sealants to pancreatic stump closure reinforcement after distal pancreatectomy We included seven studies involving 860 participants: 428 were randomised 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) or length of hospital stay (MD 0.99 days, 95% CI -1.83 to 3.82; 371 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 anastomosis reinforcement after pancreaticoduodenectomy We included four studies involving 393 participants: 186 were randomised to the fibrin sealant group and 207 to the control group after pancreaticoduodenectomy. We are uncertain whether fibrin sealants reduce postoperative pancreatic fistula (16.7% versus 11.7%; RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.28 to 4.69; 199 participants; two studies; very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether fibrin sealants reduce postoperative mortality (0.5% versus 2.4%; Peto OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.32; 393 participants; four studies; low-quality evidence) or length of hospital stay (MD 0.01 days, 95% CI -3.91 to 3.94; 323 participants; three studies; very low-quality evidence). There is probably little or no difference in overall postoperative morbidity (52.6% versus 50.3%; RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.24; 323 participants; three studies; moderate-quality evidence) between the groups. We are uncertain whether fibrin sealants reduce reoperation rate (5.2% versus 7.7%; RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.66; 323 participants; three 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 pancreaticoduodenectomy We included two studies involving 351 participants: 188 were randomised 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 (median 16 to 17 days versus 17 days; 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 (169 participants; low-quality evidence): 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.

A web-based overview, systematic review and meta-analysis of pancreatic anastomosis techniques following pancreatoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Many pancreatic anastomoses have been proposed to reduce the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreatoduodenectomy, but a complete overview is lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to provide an online overview of all pancreatic anastomosis techniques and to evaluate the incidence of clinically relevant POPF in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

A literature search was performed to December 2017. Included were studies giving a detailed description of the pancreatic anastomosis after open pancreatoduodenectomy and RCTs comparing techniques for the incidence of POPF (International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery [ISGPS] Grade B/C). Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 61 different anastomoses were found and summarized in 19 subgroups (www.pancreatic-anastomosis.com). In 6 RCTs, the POPF rate was 12% after pancreaticogastrostomy (n = 69/555) versus 20% after pancreaticojejunostomy (n = 106/531) (RR0.59; 95%CI 0.35-1.01, P = 0.05). Six RCTs comparing subtypes of pancreaticojejunostomy showed a pooled POPF rate of 10% (n = 109/1057). Duct-to-mucosa and invagination pancreaticojejunostomy showed similar results, respectively 14% (n = 39/278) versus 10% (n = 27/278) (RR1.40, 95%CI 0.47-4.15, P = 0.54).

CONCLUSION

The proposed online overview can be used as an interactive platform, for uniformity in reporting anastomotic techniques and for educational purposes. The meta-analysis showed no significant difference in POPF rate between pancreatic anastomosis techniques.

How to prevent the postoperative pancreatic fistula with an ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer (Onyx®): A proposal of a new technique

Backgrounds/Aims

Despite the advances in identifying risk factors, improving operative technique, and postoperative patient care, pancreatic leakage after pancreatic resection remains a highly debated topic. The aim of this study is to describe our technique and our initial experience with the intraoperative embolization of the main pancreatic duct with an Ethylene Vinyl Alcohol Copolymer (Onyx®).

Methods

Two patients of 63 and 64 years underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for a cholangiocarcinoma of the extrahepatic bile duct and a pancreatic adenocarcinoma, respectively. At the time of pancreatic parenchyma resection, a Wirsung duct was identified and catheterized. A wirsungography was done and then, embolization with Onyx® was carried out under fluoroscopic control.

Results

Neither of the patients developed a postoperative pancreatic fistula. They were discharged to home on the 17^th and 18^th postoperative day, respectively. At the last follow-up, no recurrence was found. The two patients became diabetics; both needed the support of supplementary pancreatic enzymes.

Conclusions

To our knowledge, we are the first to describe this technique, which seems safe and reliable. Studies on this subject with more patients are needed to confirm the validity of this procedure.

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.

Predictors of Short-Term Readmission After Pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Readmissions are a common complication after pancreaticoduodenectomy and are increasingly being used as a performance metric affecting quality assessment, public reporting, and reimbursement. This study aims to identify general and pancreatectomy-specific factors contributing to 30-day readmission after pancreaticoduodenectomy, and determine the additive value of incorporating pancreatectomy-specific factors into a large national dataset.

METHODS

Prospective American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS-NSQIP) data were retrospectively analyzed for patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) between 2011 and 2015. Additionally, a subset of patients with pancreatectomy-targeted data between 2014 and 2015 were analyzed.

RESULTS

Outcomes of 18,440 pancreaticoduodenectomies were analyzed, and found to have an 18.7% overall readmission rate. Multivariable modeling with pancreatectomy-specific variables increased the predictive value of the model (area under receiver operator characteristic 0.66 to 0.73). Statistically significant independent contributors to readmission included renal insufficiency, sepsis, septic shock, organ space infection, dehiscence, venous thromboembolism, pancreatic fistula, delayed gastric emptying, need for percutaneous drainage, and reoperation.

CONCLUSIONS

Large registry analyses of pancreatectomy outcomes are markedly improved by the incorporation of granular procedure-specific data. These data emphasize the need for prevention and careful management of perioperative infectious complications, fluid management, thromboprophylaxis, and pancreatic fistulae.

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.

The Cost of Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula Versus the Cost of Pasireotide: Results from a Prospective Randomized Trial

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to determine the costs of clinically significant postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) and to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of routine pasireotide use.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

We recently completed a prospective randomized trial that demonstrated an 11.7% absolute risk reduction of clinically significant POPF with use of perioperative pasireotide in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy or distal pancreatectomy [POPF: pasireotide (n = 152), 9% vs placebo (n = 148), 21%; P = 0.006].

METHODS

An institutional modeling system was utilized to obtain total direct cost estimates from the 300 patients included in the trial. This system identified direct costs of hospitalization, physician fees, laboratory tests, invasive procedures, outpatient encounters, and readmissions. Total direct costs were calculated from the index admission to 90 days after resection. Costs were converted to Medicare proportional dollars (MP$).

RESULTS

Clinically significant POPF occurred in 45 of the 300 randomized patients (15%). The mean total cost for all patients was MP$23,400 (MP$8,000 - MP$202,500). The mean cost for those who developed clinically significant POPF was MP$39,700 (MP$13,800 - MP$202,500) versus MP$20,500 (MP$8,000 - MP$62,900) for those who did not (P = 0.001). The mean cost of pasireotide within the treatment group (n = 152) was MP$3,300 (MP$300 - MP$3,800). The mean cost was lower in the pasireotide (n = 152) group than the placebo (n = 148) group; however, this did not reach statistical significance (pasireotide, MP$22,800 vs placebo, MP$23,900: P = 0.571).

CONCLUSIONS

The development of POPF nearly doubled the total cost of pancreatic resection. In this randomized trial, the routine use of pasireotide significantly reduced the occurrence of POPF without increasing the overall cost of care.

Surgical management of the pancreatic stump following pancreato-duodenectomy

Pancreato-duodenectomy (PD) is the treatment of choice for periampullary tumors, and currently, indications have been extended to benign disease, including symptomatic chronic pancreatitis, paraduodenal pancreatitis, and benign periampullary tumors that are not amenable to conservative surgery. In spite of a significant decrease in mortality in high volume centers over the last three decades (from>20% in the 1980s to<5% today), morbidity remains high, ranging from 30% to 50%. The most common complications are related to the pancreatic remnant, such as postoperative pancreatic fistula, anastomotic dehiscence, abscess, and hemorrhage, and are among the highest of all surgical complications following intra-abdominal gastro-intestinal anastomoses. Moreover, pancreatico-enteric anastomotic breakdown remains a life-threatening complication. For these reasons, the management of the pancreatic stump following resection is still one of the most hotly debated issues in digestive surgery; more than 80 different methods of pancreatico-enteric reconstructions having been described, and no gold standard has yet been defined. In this review, we analyzed the current trends in the surgical management of the pancreatic remnant after PD.

Stents for the prevention of pancreatic fistula following pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Several studies have demonstrated that the use of pancreatic duct stents following pancreaticoduodenectomy is associated with a lower risk of pancreatic fistula. However, to date there is a lack of accord in the literature on whether the use of stents is beneficial and, if so, whether internal or external stenting, with or without replacement, is preferable. This is an update of a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of pancreatic stents in preventing pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and four major Chinese biomedical databases up to November 2015. We also searched several major trials registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the use of stents (either internal or external) versus no stents, and comparing internal stents versus external stents, replacement versus no replacement following pancreaticoduodenectomy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted the data. The outcomes studied were incidence of pancreatic fistula, need for reoperation, length of hospital stay, overall complications, and in-hospital mortality. We showed the results as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD), with 95% confidence interval (CI). We assessed the quality of evidence using GRADE (http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/).

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight studies (1018 participants). The average age of the participants ranged from 56 to 68 years. Most of the studies were conducted in single centers in Japan (four studies), China (two studies), France (one study), and the USA (one study). The risk of bias was low or unclear for most domains across the studies. Stents versus no stentsThe effect of stents on reducing pancreatic fistula in people undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy was uncertain due to the low quality of the evidence (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.14; 605 participants; 4 studies). The risk of in-hospital mortality was 3% in people who did receive stents compared with 2% (95% CI 1% to 6%) in people who had stents (RR 0.73, 0.28 to 1.94; 605 participants; 4 studies; moderate-quality evidence). The effect of stents on reoperation was uncertain due to wide confidence intervals (RR 0.67, 0.36 to 1.22; 512 participants; 3 studies; moderate-quality evidence). We found moderate-quality evidence that using stents reduces total hospital stay by just under four days (mean difference (MD) -3.68, 95% CI -6.52 to -0.84; 605 participants; 4 studies). The risk of delayed gastric emptying, wound infection, and intra-abdominal abscess was uncertain (gastric emptying: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.24 to 2.35; moderate-quality evidence) (wound infection: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.32; moderate-quality evidence) (abscess: RR 1.38, 0.49 to 3.85; low-quality evidence). Subgroup analysis by type of stent provided limited evidence that external stents lead to lower risk of fistula compared with internal stents. External versus internal stentsThe effect of external stents on the risk of pancreatic fistula, reoperation, delayed gastric emptying, and intra-abdominal abscess compared with internal stents was uncertain due to low-quality evidence (fistula: RR 1.44, 0.94 to 2.21; 362 participants; 3 studies) (reoperation: RR 2.02, 95% CI 0.38 to 10.79; 319 participants; 3 studies) (gastric emptying: RR 1.65, 0.66 to 4.09; 362 participants; 3 studies) (abscess: RR 1.91, 95% CI 0.80 to 4.58; 362 participants; 3 studies). The rate of in-hospital mortality was lower in studies comparing internal and external stents than in those comparing stents with no stents. One death occurred in the external-stent group (RR 0.33, 0.01 to 7.99; low-quality evidence). There were no cases of pancreatitis in participants who had internal stents compared with three in those who had external stents (RR 0.15, 0.01 to 2.73; low-quality evidence). The difference between internal and external stents on total hospital stay was uncertain due to the wide confidence intervals around the average effect of 1.7 days fewer with internal stents (9.18 days fewer to 5.84 days longer; 262 participants; 2 studies; low-quality evidence). The analysis of wound infection could not exclude a protective effect with either approach (RR 1.41, 0.44 to 4.48; 319 participants; 2 studies; moderate-quality evidence). Operative replacement of pancreatic juice versus not replacing pancreatic juice There was insufficient evidence available from a small trial to ascertain the effect of replacing pancreatic juice.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review has identified limited evidence on the effects of stents. We have not been able to identify convincing direct evidence of superiority of external over internal stents. We found a limited number of RCTs with small sample sizes. Further RCTs on the use of stents after pancreaticoduodenectomy are warranted.

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.

Application of air insufflation to prevent clinical pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy

AIM: To introduce an air insufflation procedure and to investigate the effectiveness of air insufflation in preventing pancreatic fistula (PF).

METHODS: From March 2010 to August 2013, a total of 185 patients underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) at our institution, and 74 patients were not involved in this study for various reasons. The clinical outcomes of 111 patients were retrospectively analyzed. The air insufflation test was performed in 46 patients to investigate the efficacy of the pancreaticojejunal anastomosis during surgery, and 65 patients who did not receive the air insufflation test served as controls. Preoperative assessments and intraoperative outcomes were compared between the 2 groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify the risk factors for PF.

RESULTS: The two patient groups had similar baseline demographics, preoperative assessments, operative factors, pancreatic factors and pathological results. The overall mortality, morbidity, and PF rates were 1.8%, 48.6%, and 26.1%, respectively. No significant differences were observed in either morbidity or mortality between the two groups. The rate of clinical PF (grade B and grade C PF) was significantly lower in the air insufflation test group, compared with the non-air insufflation test group (6.5% vs 23.1%, P = 0.02). Univariate analysis identified the following parameters as risk factors related to clinical PF: estimated blood loss; pancreatic duct diameter ≤ 3 mm; invagination anastomosis technique; and not undergoing air insufflation test. By further analyzing these variables with multivariate logistic regression, estimated blood loss, pancreatic duct diameter ≤ 3 mm and not undergoing air insufflation test were demonstrated to be independent risk factors.

CONCLUSION: Performing an air insufflation test could significantly reduce the occurrence of clinical PF after PD. Not performing an air insufflation test was an independent risk factor for clinical PF.

Does fibrin glue sealant decrease the rate of anastomotic leak after a pancreaticoduodenectomy? Results of a prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of topical fibrin glue applied externally to all anastomoses after a pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) on drain lipase levels, anastomotic leaks, complication rates and length of hospital stay.

METHODS

A standardized non-pylorus preserving PD was performed with or without fibrin glue applied to each anastomosis.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven patients were randomized: 32 with and 25 without TISSEEL. There were no statistical differences in each group with respect to drain lipase levels (high 40% versus 43%, P = 0.794), complications including gastric or biliary leaks (24% versus 28%, P = 1.00), wound infection (16% versus 9%, P = 0.28) and a Clavien score of 3 or more (16% versus 25%, P = 0.757) or hospital stay (12 versus 17 days, P = 0.777). Most patients with elevated drain lipase levels had an unaltered clinical course not predictive of adverse outcomes. However, the operative finding of a soft pancreas (27 out of 57 patients) was associated with post-operative complications (P = 0.002). There were no peri-operative deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

Fibrin glue application to all anastomoses does not alter drain lipase levels. Drain lipase levels are not a significant surrogate marker for clinically significant anastomotic leaks or complications. Fibrin glue application did not reduce the incidence of an anastomotic leak or complications.

Stents for the prevention of pancreatic fistula following pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Several studies have demonstrated that the use of pancreatic duct stents following pancreaticoduodenectomy is associated with a lower risk of pancreatic fistula. However, to date, there is a lack of accord in the literature on whether the use of stents is beneficial and, if so, whether internal or external stenting is preferable.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of pancreatic stents in preventing pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science and four major Chinese biomedical databases were searched up to February 2011. We also searched four major trials registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the use of stents (either internal or external) versus no stents, and comparing internal stents versus external stents following pancreaticoduodenectomy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors extracted the data independently. The outcomes studied were incidence of pancreatic fistula, need for reoperation, length of hospital stay, overall complications, and in-hospital mortality. The results were shown as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 656 patients were included in the systematic review. Overall, the use of stents (both external and internal) was not associated with a statistically significant change in any of the studied outcomes. In a subgroup analysis, it was found that the use of external, but not internal, stents is associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of pancreatic fistulae (RR 0.33; 95% CI 0.11 to 0.98, P = 0.04), the incidence of complications (RR 0.48; 95% CI 0.25 to 0.92, P = 0.03) and length of hospital stay (RR -0.57; 95% CI -0.94 to -0.21, P = 0.002). In RCTs on the use of internal versus external stents, no statistically significant difference was found in terms of any of the studied outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review suggests that the use of external stents following pancreaticoduodenectomy may be beneficial. However, only a limited number of RCTs with rather small sample sizes were available. Further RCTs on the use of stents after pancreaticoduodenectomy are warranted.

Prevention of leakage by sealing colon anastomosis: experimental study in a mouse model

BACKGROUND

In colorectal surgery, anastomotic leakage (AL) is the most significant complication. Sealants applied around the colon anastomosis may help prevent AL by giving the anastomosis time to heal by mechanically supporting the anastomosis and preventing bacteria leaking into the peritoneal cavity. The aim of this study is to compare commercially available sealants on their efficacy of preventing leakage in a validated mouse model for AL.

METHODS

Six sealants (Evicel, Omnex, VascuSeal, PleuraSeal, BioGlue, and Colle Chirurgicale Cardial) were applied around an anastomosis constructed with five interrupted sutures in mice, and compared with a control group without sealant. Outcome measures were AL, anastomotic bursting pressure, and death.

RESULTS

In the control group there was a 40% death rate with a 50% rate of AL. None of the sealants were able to diminish the rate of AL. Furthermore, use of the majority of sealants resulted in failure to thrive, increased rates of ileus, and higher mortality rates.

CONCLUSIONS

If sealing of a colorectal anastomosis could achieve a reduction of incidence of clinical AL, this would be a promising tool for prevention of leakage in colorectal surgery. In this study, we found no evidence that sealants reduce leakage rates in a mouse model for AL. However, the negative results of this study make us emphasize the need of systemic research, investigating histologic tissue reaction of the bowel to different sealants, the capacity of sealants to form a watertight barrier, their time of degradation, and finally their results in large animal models for AL.