External stenting of pancreaticojejunostomy anastomosis and pancreatic duct after pancreaticoduodenectomy

Stent A pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreatoduodenectomy: Is it always necessary?

The establishment of a postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is considered the most common and, concomitantly, the most serious complication associated with pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). The search for either technical modifications of the operative technique or pharmaceutical interventions that could possibly aid in decreasing the incidence of this often-devastating complication appears justified. The stenting of the pancreatic duct, with the use of either internal or external stents, has been evaluated in this direction. In theory, it is an approach that could eliminate many pathophysiological factors responsible for the occurrence of a POPF. The purpose of the present study was to review the current data regarding the role of pancreatic duct stenting on the incidence of POPF, after PD, by using PubMed and Reference Citation Analysis. In general, previous studies seem to highlight the superiority of external stents over their internal counterparts in regard to the incidence of POPF; this is at the cost, however, of increased morbidity associated mainly with the stent removal. Certainly, the use of an internal stent is a less invasive approach with acceptable results and is definitely deprived of the drawbacks arising through the complete diversion of pancreatic juice from the gastrointestinal tract. Bearing in mind the scarcity of high-quality data on the subject, an approach of reserving stent placement for the high-risk for POPF patients and individualizing the selection between the use of an internal or an external stent according to the distinct characteristics of each individual case scenario appears appropriate.

USE of Biodegradable STENTS in Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Initial Experience

Background. Plastic stents have been used to avoid postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) following Whipple's Pancreaticoduodenectomy (WPD), but they may cause some stent-related complications. Biodegradable stents have been recently introduced and might be a safe alternative. Here we present our initial experience with their use. Methods. Between March 1, 2020, and September 30, 2020, ten (10) consecutive patients underwent WPD. They all had conventional two-layer pancreaticojejunostomy with the placement of an internal biodegradable stent. They were assessed for technical feasibility, pancreatic leak, and stent-related complications. Results. The use of biodegradable stents was technically feasible in all patients, despite some difficulties in insertion due to stent stiffness and design. After a median follow-up period of 124 days, none of the patients suffered POPF. One patient had a biochemical pancreatic leak with no clinical significance. The median hospital stay was 7 days, and there were no stent-related complications. Conclusion. Biodegradable stents are technically feasible and safe in WPD with good short-term outcomes. They might provide a better alternative to plastic stents and their potential complications. Larger long-term studies are needed to validate efficacy and safety. Few modifications of the stent's design might be needed to facilitate use in open surgery.

Does pancreatic duct stent placement lead to decreased postoperative pancreatic fistula rates after pancreaticoduodenectomy? A meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness of pancreatic duct stent placement for preventing postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

METHODS

PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched up to February 26, 2022. Studies comparing outcomes following pancreaticoduodenectomy with or without pancreatic duct stents were included. The primary outcome measured was postoperative pancreatic fistula rate, and secondary outcomes were in-hospital mortality rate, reoperation rate, delayed gastric emptying rate and wound infection rate.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs involving 847 patients met the inclusion criteria. No statistically significant difference between the stent group and non-stent group was detected in the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula (RR = 0.85, 95%CI: 0.57-1.26, P = 0.41), in-hospital mortality, reoperation, delayed gastric emptying rate and wound infection. Subgroup analyses revealed that use of an external stent significantly reduced the incidence of pancreatic fistula (RR = 0.61, 95%CI: 0.43-0.86, P = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Our preliminary results from this systematic review and meta-analysis revealed that pancreatic duct stents did not reduce the risk of POPF and other complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy compared with no stents. External stents were associated with a reduced POPF rate compared with no stents. Large-scale RCTs are required to assess the effectiveness and assist in clarifying the real role of pancreatic duct stents with respect to the POPF rates after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

The prognostic value of external vs internal pancreatic duct stents after pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with FRS ≥ 4: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The prognostic value of external vs internal pancreatic duct stents after pancreaticoduodenectomy remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the benefits of external and internal stents using the Fistula Risk Score system with regard to the incidence of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula.

METHODS

A total of 382 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy with duct to mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy were retrospectively enrolled from January 2015 to October 2019. The receiver operating characteristic curve was performed for subgroup analysis of the patients at different levels of risk for pancreatic fistula.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in terms of pancreatic fistula or other postoperative complications. According to the receiver operating characteristic curve threshold of 3.5, 172 patients with a Fistula Risk Score ≥ 4 and 210 patients with a Fistula Risk Score < 4 were divided into separate groups. The number of valid cases was insufficient to support the subsequent research in patients with a Fistula Risk Score < 4. In patients with a Fistula Risk Score ≥ 4, the use of an external pancreatic duct stent was significantly more effective than the use of an internal stent, especially with regard to the risk for pancreatic fistula (Grade C) (P = 0.039), at ameliorating the incidence of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (P = 0.019). Additionally, the incidence of lymphatic leakage was significantly higher in the external stent group compared with the internal stent group (P = 0.040).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with internal stents, the use of an external stent could reduce the incidence of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula in patients with a Fistula Risk Score ≥ 4. More large-scale prospective clinical trials are warranted to further clarify our results.

Internal stenting across the pancreaticojejunostomy anastomosis and main pancreatic duct after pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pancreatic fistula is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Studies have reported internal stenting of the pancreaticojejunostomy anastomosis to reduce postoperative pancreatic fistula, but it is still controversial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty patients undergoing elective pancreaticoduodenectomy, were included. Patients were divided into 2 groups in randomized fashion; Group A (n-25) without internal stenting across the pancreaticojejunostomy anastomosis and Group B (n-25) with internal stenting of the pancreaticojejunostomy anastomosis. Primary endpoint was the occurrence of postoperative pancreatic fistula.

RESULT

Both the groups were comparable in demographics, co morbidities, pathologies, pancreatic texture and pancreatic duct diameter. Out of 50 patients studied, total 23(46.0%) patients developed postoperative pancreatic fistula. Ten (40%) in group A and 13 (52%) in group B (p 0.156). Sixteen patients (32%) developed Grade A and 7 (14%) patients had Grade B postoperative pancreatic fistula. In group A, 6 patients developed grade A and 4 patients developed grade B postoperative pancreatic fistula. In group B, 10 patients developed grade A and 3 patients developed grade B postoperative pancreatic fistula. There was no Grade C fistula. All patients had satisfactory recovery on conservative management. Eight patients (16%) developed delayed gastric emptying [5 in group A and 3 in group B; p-0.366]. Six patients developed superficial surgical site infection (2 in group A and 4 in group B; p-0.445). The length of hospital stay was comparable in two groups. There was no mortality.

CONCLUSION

Internal stenting of pancreaticojejunostomy anastomosis does not decrease the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Centralisation of Pancreatoduodenectomy in India: Where Do We Stand?

BACKGROUND

The volume-outcome relationship dictates that high-volume centres lead to improved patient outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). We conducted a retrospective review to fathom the situation in India for PD and whether referral to high-volume centres would make a positive impact.

METHOD

A systematic literature search in MEDLINE was performed, and all articles published from Indian centres from 01.03.2008 to 30.11.2019 were scrutinised. Any series with less than 20 patients, case reports, abstracts, unpublished data and personal communications were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 36 unique series including 6226 patients from 24 institutes across India were identified. Amongst the 24 institutes, 2 institutes reported less than 10 cases/year, 11 reported 10-25 cases/year and 11 reported ≥26 cases/year. Overall perioperative morbidity was 42.4%, 43.4% and 41% for centres doing <10, 10-25 and ≥26 cases/year, respectively. Operative mortality also improved with increasing number of cases/year (5.1% vs. 6.6% vs. 3.2%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

With increasing volume of cases per year, trend towards improved PD outcomes is observed. To optimise the use of healthcare facilities, it would be pragmatic to consider building an organised referral system for complex surgeries to deliver unsurpassed patient care with maximum utilisation of the available healthcare infrastructure.

The Prognostic Value of External vs Internal Pancreatic Duct Stents in CR-POPF after Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is no specific evidence regarding the benefits of external and internal pancreatic duct stents after pancreaticoduodenectomy since pancreatic fistula (grade A) have been redefined with no clinical treatment effect. We aimed to reevaluate the prognostic value of external and internal stents in clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula over pancreaticoduodenectomy.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database were specifically searched for pertinent and original articles published before May 2019. The project has been registered in PROSPERO (Registration number: CRD42019137579).

RESULTS

Four randomized controlled trials and six nonrandomized controlled trials with a total of 2101 patients were enrolled in this meta-analysis. The use of an external stent resulted in better performance than the use of an internal stent in terms of pancreatic fistula (grade C) (OR 0.58, P = 0.03) but did not reduce the rate of pancreatic fistula (grade B) (OR 0.99, P = 0.94) in all studies. The meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials found that the use of an external stent approached a level of significance for an increased rate of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula compared to the use of an internal stent (OR 1.40, P = 0.10) but had no significant effect on pancreatic fistula (grade B) (OR 1.34, P = 0.26) or pancreatic fistula (grade C) (OR 1.68, P = 0.62).

CONCLUSION

Compared with internal stents, the use of external stent might be associated with a lower rate of pancreatic fistula (grade C). More randomized clinical trials are warranted to further explore safety and efficacy of pancreatic duct external stents.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of postoperative pancreatic fistula rates using the updated 2016 International Study Group Pancreatic Fistula definition in patients undergoing pancreatic resection with soft and hard pancreatic texture

BACKGROUND

In 2016, the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula (ISGPS) proposed an updated definition for postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). Pancreas texture (PT) is an established risk factor of POPF. The definition of soft vs. hard texture, however, remains elusive.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed to identify PT definitions and a meta-analysis linking POPF to PT using the updated ISGPS definition.

RESULTS

122 studies including 22 376 patients were identified. Definition criteria for PT varied among studies and most classified PT in hard and soft based on intraoperative subjective assessment. The total POPF rate (pooled grades B and C) after pancreatoduodenectomy was 14.5% (n = 10 395) and 15.5% (n = 3767) after distal pancreatectomy. In pancreatoduodenectomy, POPF rate was higher in soft compared to hard pancreas (RR, 4.4, 3.3 to 6.1; p < 0.001; n = 6393), where PT grouped as soft and hard. No data were available for intermediate PT.

CONCLUSION

The reported POPF rates may be used in planning future prospective studies. A widely accepted definition of PT is lacking and a correlation with the risk of POPF is based on subjective evaluation, which is still acceptable. Classification of PT into 2-groups is more reasonable than classification into 3-groups.

Internal compared with external drainage of pancreatic duct during pancreaticoduodenectomy: a retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

To compare internal with external drainage of the pancreatic duct during pancreaticoduodenectomy with regard to the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) and other complications.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 316 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy with a placed drainage tube (external, n=128; internal, n=188) in the pancreatic duct from 1 January 1999 to 31 December 2011 in Tianjin Third Central Hospital of China. The incidence of POPF and some other complications were compared.

RESULTS

There was no difference in the incidence rates of POPF between those given an internal or external drainage tube (P=0.788), but POPF was more severe in the former (P=0.014). Intraperitoneal bleeding rate was also higher in the patients with internal drainage (P=0.040), but operative time and postoperative hospitalization were longer in those with external drainage (P=0.002 and P=0.007, respectively). There was no difference between the groups with regard to the incidence rates of gastrointestinal bleeding, delayed gastric emptying, pulmonary infection, or incision infection and in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

External drainage of the pancreatic duct during pancreaticoduodenectomy can decrease the severity of POPF, but operative time and postoperative hospitalization will be extended.

Pancreaticodigestive anastomosis and the postoperative management strategies to prevent postoperative pancreatic fistula formation after pancreaticoduodenectomy

Over the past 100 years, advances in surgical techniques and perioperative management have reduced the morbidity and mortality after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Many techniques have been proposed for the reconstruction of the pancreaticodigestive anastomosis to prevent the development of a postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), but which is the best approach is still highly debated. We carried out a systematic review to determine and compare the effectiveness of various methods of anastomosis after PD. A meta-analysis and most randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showed that the mortality, POPF rate and incidence of other postoperative complications were not statistically different between the pancreaticogastrostomy and pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) groups. One RCT showed that a binding PJ significantly decreased the risk of POPF and other postoperative complications compared with conventional PJ. External duct stenting reduced the risk of clinically relevant POPF in a meta-analysis and RCTs. The prophylactic use of octreotide after PD does not result in a reduced incidence of POPF. In conclusion, our findings suggest that the successful management of pancreatic anastomoses may depend more on the meticulous surgical technique, surgical volume, and other management parameters than on the type of technique used. However, some new approaches, such as binding PJ, and the use of external stents should be considered in further RCTs.