Early drain removal after hepatectomy: an underutilized management strategy

Early drain removal after hepatectomy based on bile leakage prediction using drainage fluid volume and direct bilirubin level

AIMS

This study aimed to determine the value of the drainage fluid volume and direct bilirubin level for predicting significant bile leakage (BL) after hepatectomy and establish novel criteria for early drain removal.

METHODS

Data from 351 patients who underwent hepatic resection at Gunma University in Japan between October 2018 and March 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical characteristics and surgical outcomes of patients with and without significant BL were compared. Criteria for early drain removal were determined and verified.

RESULTS

Bile leakage occurred in 27 (7.1%) patients; 8 (2.3%) had grade A leakage and 19 (5.4%) had grade B leakage. The optimal cut-off value for the drainage fluid direct bilirubin level on postoperative day (POD) 2 was 0.16 mg/dL, which had the highest area under the curve and negative predictive value (NPV). Patients with BL had significantly larger drainage volumes on POD 2. The best cut-off value was 125 mL because it had the greatest NPV. Patients in both the primary and validation (n = 90) cohorts with bilirubin levels less than 0.16 mg/dL and drainage volumes less than 125 mL did not experience leakage.

CONCLUSIONS

A drainage fluid volume less than 125 mL and direct bilirubin level less than 0.16 mg/dL on POD 2 are criteria for safe early drain removal after hepatectomy.

Early drain removal after live liver donor hepatectomy is safe - a randomized controlled pilot study

INTRODUCTION

The current study aimed to assess the safety of early drain removal after live donor hepatectomy (LDH).

METHODS

One hundred eight consecutive donors who met the inclusion criteria were randomized to early drain removal (EDR - postoperative day (POD) 3 - if serous and the drain bilirubin level was less than 3 mg/dl - "3 × 3" rule) and routine drain removal (RDR - drain output serous and less than 100 ml). The primary outcome was to compare the safety. The secondary outcome was to compare the postoperative morbidity.

RESULTS

Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative parameters except for the timing of drain removal were comparable. EDR was feasible in 46 out of 54 donors (85.14%) and none required re-intervention after EDR. There was significantly better pain relief with EDR (p = 0.00). Overall complications, pulmonary complications, and hospital stay were comparable on intention-to-treat analysis. However, pulmonary complications (EDR - 1.9% vs RDR - 16.3% P = 0.030), overall complications (18.8% vs 36.3%, P = 0.043), and hospital stay (8 vs 9, P = 0.014) were more in the RDR group on per treatment analysis. Bile leaks were seen in three donors (3.7% in the EDR group vs 1.9% in RDR, P = 0.558), and none of them required endo-biliary interventions. Re-exploration for intestinal obstruction was required for 3 donors in RDR (0% vs 5.7%; p = 0.079).

CONCLUSION

EDR by the "3 × 3" rule after LDH is safe and associated with better pain relief. On per treatment analysis, EDR was associated with significantly less hospital stay and lower pulmonary and overall complications.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY

Clinical Trials.gov - NCT04504487.

Perioperative Blood Transfusions or Operative Time: Which Drives Post-Hepatectomy Outcomes?

BACKGROUND

Perioperative blood transfusions and operative time are surgical quality indicators. The aim of this analysis is to determine which of these variables drives post-hepatectomy outcomes.

METHODS

Patients undergoing major or partial hepatectomy were identified in the 2014-2018 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program hepatectomy targeted database. Prolonged operative time was defined as ≥ 240 minutes. Multivariable logistic regressions were performed for multiple postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 20 521 hepatectomies, 18% of patients received a perioperative transfusion, and the median operative time was 218 minutes. Patients receiving a transfusion had a significant (P < .001) increase in mortality (5.1% vs. .7%) and serious morbidity (43% vs. 16%). Prolonged operative time was associated with significantly (P < .001) increased mortality (2.4% vs. .8%) and serious morbidity (29% vs. 14%). Those with primary hepatobiliary cancer had the highest rates of postoperative morbidity and mortality compared to patients with metastatic and benign disease when a transfusion occurred. On multivariable regression analyses, perioperative transfusions conferred a higher risk (P < .001) than prolonged operative time for mortality (OR 5.02 vs. 1.47) and serious morbidity (OR 2.56 vs. 1.50).

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative blood transfusions are a more robust predictor of post-hepatectomy outcomes than increased operative time, especially in patients with primary hepatobiliary cancer.

Minimally Invasive Hepatectomy in North America: Laparoscopic Versus Robotic

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive hepatectomy has been shown to be associated with improved outcomes when compared with open surgery. However, data comparing laparoscopic and robotic hepatectomy is lacking and limited to single-center studies.

METHODS

Patients undergoing major (≥ 3 segments) or partial (≤ 2 segments) hepatectomy were identified in the 2014-2017 ACS-NSQIP hepatectomy targeted database. Patients undergoing laparoscopic and robotic approaches were compared, and propensity score matching was utilized to adjust for bias.

RESULTS

Of 3152 minimally invasive hepatectomies (MIHs), 86% (N = 2706) were partial and 14% (N = 446) were major. The laparoscopic approach was utilized in 92% of patients (N = 2905) and 8% were performed robotically (N = 247). The percentage of MIHs increased over time (p < 0.01). After matching, 240 were identified in each cohort. Compared with the robotic approach, patients undergoing laparoscopic hepatectomy had a significantly higher conversion rate (23% vs. 7.4%) but had shorter operative time (159 vs. 204 min) (p < 0.001). Laparoscopic cases undergoing an unplanned conversion to open were associated with increased morbidity (p < 0.001), but this difference was not observed in robotic cases. Both MIH approaches had low mortality (1.0%, p = 1.00), overall morbidity (17%, p = 0.47), and very short length of stay (3 days, p = 0.80).

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive hepatectomy is performed primarily for partial hepatectomies. Laparoscopic hepatectomy is associated with a significantly higher conversion rate, and converted cases have worse outcomes. Both minimally invasive approaches are safe with similar mortality, morbidity, and a very short length of stay. Graphical Abstract.

Fatty liver: The metabolic syndrome increases major hepatectomy mortality

BACKGROUND

As the obesity epidemic worsens, the prevalence of fatty liver disease has increased. However, minimal data exist on the impact of combined fatty liver and metabolic syndrome on hepatectomy outcomes. Therefore, the aim of this analysis is to measure the outcomes of patients who do and do not have a fatty liver undergoing hepatectomy in the presence and absence of the metabolic syndrome.

METHODS

Patients with fatty and normal livers undergoing major hepatectomy (≥3 segments) were identified in the 2014 to 2018 American College of Surgeon National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Patients undergoing partial hepatectomy and those with missing liver texture data were excluded. Propensity matching was used and adjusted for multiple variables. A subgroup analysis stratified by the metabolic syndrome (body mass index ≥30 kg/m², hypertension and diabetes) was performed. Demographics and outcomes were compared by χ² and Mann-Whitney tests.

RESULTS

Of 2,927 hepatectomies, 30% of patients (N = 863) had a fatty liver. The median body mass index was 28.6, and the metabolic syndrome was present in 6.3% of patients (N = 184). After propensity matching, 863 patients with fatty and 863 with normal livers were compared. Multiple outcomes were significantly worse in patients with fatty livers (P <.05), including serious morbidity (32% vs 24%), postoperative invasive biliary procedures (15% vs 10%), organ space infections (11% vs 7.8%), and pulmonary complications. Patients with fatty livers and the metabolic syndrome had significantly increased postoperative cardiac arrests, pulmonary embolisms, and mortality (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Fatty liver disease is associated with significantly worse outcomes after major hepatectomy. The metabolic syndrome confers an increased risk of postoperative mortality.

Use of primary surgical drains in synchronous resection for colorectal liver metastases: a NSQIP analysis of current practice paradigm

BACKGROUND

There are no studies examining the use of subhepatic drains after simultaneous resection of synchronous colorectal liver metastases (sCRLM). This study aimed to (1) describe the current practices regarding primary drain placement, (2) evaluate drain efficacy in mitigating postoperative complications, and (3) determine impact of drain maintenance duration on patient outcomes.

METHODS

The ACS-NSQIP targeted data from 2014 to 2017 were analyzed. Propensity score of surgical drain versus no drain cohorts was performed. Main study outcomes were mortality, major morbidity, organ/space surgical site infection (SSI), secondary drain/aspiration procedure, and any septic events. Additional univariate/multivariate logistic analyses were performed to identify associations with drain placement and duration. Major hepatectomy was defined as formal right hepatectomy and any trisectionectomy.

RESULTS

584 combined liver and colorectal resection (CRR) cases were identified. Open partial hepatectomy with colectomy was the most common procedure (70%, n = 407). Nearly 40% of patients received surgical drains (n = 226). Major hepatectomy, lower serum albumin, and no intraoperative portal vein occlusion (Pringle maneuver) were significantly associated with drain placement (p < 0.05). In the matched cohort (n = 190 in each arm), patients with surgical drains experienced higher rates of major morbidity (30% vs 12%), organ/space SSI (16% vs 6%), postoperative drain/aspiration procedures (9% vs 3%), and sepsis/septic shock (12% vs 4%) (all p < 0.05). Patients with severely prolonged drain removal, defined as after postoperative day 13 (POD13), had higher risk of postoperative morbidity compared to those with earlier drain removal (p < 0.01). 30-day mortality rate was not significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Primary surgical drains were placed in a substantial percentage of patients undergoing combined resection for sCRLM. This case-matched analysis suggested that surgical drains are associated with an increase in postoperative morbidity. Postoperative drain maintenance past 13 days is associated with worse outcomes compared to earlier removal.