Hemopatch® is effective and safe to use: real-world data from a prospective European registry study

Pancreatic stump closure after distal pancreatectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing non-autologous versus no reinforcement: Value of prediction intervals

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis of randomized trials aimed to assess the benefits and harms of non-autologous versus no reinforcement of the pancreatic stump following distal pancreatectomy (DP).

METHODS

It was performed in accordance with PRISMA 2020 and AMSTAR 2 Guidelines. (registered in PROSPERO ID: EROCRD42021286863).

RESULTS

Nine relevant articles (between 2009 and 2021) were retrieved, comparing non-autologous reinforcement (757 patients) with non-reinforcement (740 patients) after PD. Pooled analysis showed a statistically significant lower rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) in the reinforcement group (RR ​= ​0.677; 95 ​% CI [0.479, 0.956], p ​= ​0.027). The 95 ​% predictive interval (0.267-1.718) showed heterogeneity. Non-autologous reinforcement other than with "Tachosil®" was effective (subgroup analysis). No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups with regard to secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis showed that covering the stump with non-autologous reinforcement other than Tachosil® had a preventive effect on the onset of POPF.

Principles of minimize bleeding and the transfusion of blood and its components in operated patients - surgical aspects

One of the target of perioperative tratment in surgery is decreasing intraoperative bleeding, which increases the number of perioperative procedures, mortality and treatment costs, and also causes the risk of transfusion of blood and its components. Trying to minimize the blood loss(mainly during the operation) as well as the need to transfuse blood and its components (broadly understood perioperative period) should be standard treatment for a patient undergoing a procedure. In the case of this method, the following steps should be taken: 1) in the preoperative period: identyfication of risk groups as quickly as possible, detecting and treating anemia, applying prehabilitation, modyfying anticoagulant treatment, considering donating one's own blood in some patients and in selected cases erythropoietin preparations; 2) in the perioperative period: aim for normothermia, normovolemia and normoglycemia, use of surgical methods that reduce bleeding, such as minimally invasive surgery, high-energy coagulation, local hemostatics, prevention of surgical site infection, proper transfusion of blood and its components if it occurs; 3) in the postoperative period: monitor the condition of patients, primarily for the detection of bleeding, rapid reoperation if required, suplementation (oral administration preferred) nutrition with microelements (iron) and vitamins, updating its general condition. All these activities, comprehensively and in surgical cooperation with the anesthesiologist, should reduce the blood loss and transfusion of blood and its components.

Real-World Data on the Usage of Hemopatch® as a Hemostat and Dural Sealant in Cranial and Spinal Neurosurgery

Background and objectives Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage is a significant complication in cranial and spinal interventions. Hemostatic patches such as Hemopatch^® are therefore used to support the watertight closure of the dura mater. Recently, we published the results of a large registry documenting the effectiveness and safety of Hemopatch^® in various surgical specialties, including neurosurgery. Here we aimed to analyze the outcomes from the neurological/spinal cohort of this registry in more detail. Methods Based on the data from the original registry, we performed a post hoc analysis for the neurological/spinal cohort. The Hemopatch^® registry was designed as a prospective, multicenter, single-arm observational study. All surgeons were familiar with the application of Hemopatch^® and it was used at the discretion of the responsible surgeon. The neurological/spinal cohort was open for patients of any age if they had received Hemopatch^® during an open or minimally invasive cranial or spinal procedure. Patients with known hypersensitivity to bovine proteins or brilliant blue, intraoperative pulsatile severe bleeding, or an active infection at the potential target application site (TAS) were excluded from the registry. For the posthoc evaluation, we stratified the patients of the neurological/spinal cohort into two sub-cohorts: cranial and spinal. We collected information about the TAS, intraoperative achievement of watertight closure of the dura, and occurrence of postoperative CSF leaks. Results The registry comprised 148 patients in the neurological/spinal cohort when enrolment was stopped. The dura was the application site for Hemopatch^® in 147 patients (in one patient in the sacral region after tumor excision), of which 123 underwent a cranial procedure. Twenty-four patients underwent a spinal procedure. Intraoperatively, watertight closure was achieved in 130 patients (cranial sub-cohort: 119; spinal sub-cohort: 11). Postoperative CSF leakage occurred in 11 patients (cranial sub-cohort: nine; spinal sub-cohort: two). We observed no serious adverse events related to Hemopatch^®. Conclusion Our post hoc analysis of real-world data from a European registry confirms the safe and effective use of Hemopatch^® in neurosurgery, including cranial and spinal procedures, as also observed in some case series.