Evidence-based value of prophylactic intraperitoneal drainage following pancreatic resection: a meta-analysis

No Drain, No Problem: Serum-Based Marker Prediction of Clinically Relevant Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula

BACKGROUND

Postoperative day (POD) 1 drain amylase concentration (DAC) is considered the most accurate predictor for the development of a clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Recent studies have associated drain placement with negative postoperative outcomes. This study aims to evaluate multiple biochemical markers and their associations with CR-POPF development in order to identify a reliable, non-drain dependent alternative to DAC.

METHODS

This is a review of 53 consecutive PD patients between 2021 and 2022. Albumin, C-reactive protein (CRP), C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio (CAR), DAC, white blood cell count, and procalcitonin values were compared by CR-POPF status. The discriminatory abilities of CAR, CRP, and DAC for CR-POPF were compared using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

RESULTS

Six of 51 included patients developed a CR-POPF. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis produced an area under the curve of .977 for POD 1 DAC (cut-off 5131.0 IU/L, sensitivity 100%, specificity 95.5%), .858 for POD 1 CRP (cut-off 52.5 mg/L, sensitivity 100%, specificity 72.7%), and 1.000 for POD 3 CAR (cut-off 99.2, sensitivity and specificity 100%). POD 3 CAR produced a positive and negative predictive value of 100%.

CONCLUSION

The CAR and CRP provide early and accurate identification of patients with post-PD CR-POPFs. These markers offer a method of safe CR-POPF detection, when the gold standard DAC is unavailable, ultimately allowing for early intervention and patient rescue.

Prophylactic Intra-Peritoneal Drainage After Pancreatic Resection: An Updated Meta-Analysis

Introduction

Prophylactic intra-peritoneal drainage has been considered to be an effective measure to reduce postoperative complications after pancreatectomy. However, routinely placed drainage during abdominal surgery may be unnecessary or even harmful to some patients, due to the possibility of increasing complications. And there is still controversy about the prophylactic intra-peritoneal drainage after pancreatectomy. This meta-analysis aimed to analyze the incidence of complications after either pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) or distal pancreatectomy (DP) in the drain group and no-drain group.

Methods

Data were retrieved from four electronic databases PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science up to December 2020, including the outcomes of individual treatment after PD and DP, mortality, morbidity, clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF), bile leak, wound infection, postoperative hemorrhage, delayed gastric emptying (DGE), intra-abdominal abscess, reoperation, intervened radiology (IR), and readmission. Cochrane Collaboration Handbook and the criteria of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used to assess the quality of studies included.

Results

We included 15 studies after strict screening. 13 studies with 16,648 patients were analyzed to assess the effect of drain placement on patients with different surgery procedures, and 4 studies with 6,990 patients were analyzed to assess the effect of drain placement on patients with different fistula risk. For patients undergoing PD, the drain group had lower mortality but higher rate of CR-POPF than the no-drain group. For patients undergoing DP, the drain group had higher rates of CR-POPF, wound infection and readmission. There were no significant differences in bile leak, hemorrhage, DGE, intra-abdominal abscess, and IR in either overall or each subgroup. For Low-risk subgroup, the rates of hemorrhage, DGE and morbidity were higher after drainage. For High-risk subgroup, the rate of hemorrhage was higher while the rates of reoperation and morbidity were lower in the drain group.

Conclusions

Intraperitoneal drainage may benefit some patients undergoing PD, especially those with high pancreatic fistula risk. For DP, current evidences suggest that routine drainage might not benefit patients, but no clear conclusions can be drawn because of the study limitations.

Irrigation and passive drainage of pancreatic stump after distal pancreatectomy in high-risk patients: an innovative approach to reduce pancreatic fistula

INTRODUCTION

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) represents the most common form of morbidity after distal pancreatectomy (DP). The aim of this study was to illustrate an innovative technique of irrigation and passive drainage to reduce clinically relevant POPF (CR-POPF) incidence in high-risk patients undergoing DP.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twelve consecutive high-risk patients received irrigation and passive drainage of the pancreatic stump with a Salem sump drainage after DP. The Salem sump was irrigated with 100 ml/h of Ringer solution for 2 postoperative days (POD). In the case of low-drain amylase and lipase levels on POD 3, the irrigation was reduced to 50 ml/h. Persistence of low-drain pancreatic enzymes on POD 4 allowed for interruption of irrigation and subsequent removal of drainage from POD 7 onward in the absence of evidence of any pancreatic fistula.

RESULTS

Overall, 16.6% of the patients experienced a grade 3 or higher surgical complication. We experienced only one case of POPF: the fistula was classified as grade B and it was managed with radiologic drainage of the fluid collection. We did not experience any case of re-operation nor in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Irrigation with passive drainage of the pancreatic stump after DP is an interesting approach for CR-POPF prevention in high-risk patients.

Meta-analysis of modified Blumgart anastomosis and interrupted transpancreatic suture in pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains the main cause of surgery related mortality after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Various pancreatoenteric anastomosis methods have been developed to reduce the POPF rate. However, the optimum choice has not been clarified. A literature search is performed in electronic databases, including PubMed, Medline, Embase, CNKI and the Cochrane Library. Studies comparing modified Blumgart anastomosis with interrupted transpancreatic suture are included in this meta-analysis. Grade B/C POPF, overall POPF rate and overall sever complication rate (Clavien-Dindo classification IIIa or more) are measured as primary outcomes. Revman 5.3 was used to perform the analysis. Five retrospective comparative studies and 1 randomized controlled trial with a total number of 1409 patients are included in our analysis. Meta-analysis revealed that modified Blumgart anastomosis is associated with lower rate of grade B/C POPF [Odds Ratio (OR) 95% confidence interval (CI),0.32 (0.12-0.84); P = 0.02] and intra-abdominal abscess [OR 95%CI, 0.43 (0.29-0.65); P < 0.01] comparing with interrupted transpancreatic suture. However, this procedure could not reduce overall POPF [OR 95%CI,0.70 (0.34-1.44); P = 0.34] and overall sever complication rate [OR 95%CI,0.91 (0.48-1.72); P = 0.77]. At current level of evidence, modified Blumgart anastomosis is superior to interrupted transpancreatic suture in terms of grade B/C POPF and intra-abdominal abscess. However, high-grade evidence will be necessary to confirm these results.

Predictive value of post-operative drain amylase levels for post-operative pancreatic fistula

Backgrounds/Aims

Traditionally, surgically placed pancreatic drains are removed, at the discretion of the operating surgeon. Moving towards enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS), we looked for predictors for early drain removal. The purpose of this paper was to establish which postoperative days' (POD) drain amylase is most predictive against post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF).

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study of 196 patients who underwent pancreatic resection at our institute from January 2006 to October 2013. Drain amylase levels were routinely measured. The International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula (ISGPF) definition of POPF, and clinical severity grading were used.

Results

5.1% (10 of 196) patients developed ISGPF Grades B and C POPF. Negative predictive value of developing significant POPF, if drain amylase values were low on PODs 1 and 3 was 98.7% (95% CI: 0.93-1.00). This translated to confidence in removing surgically placed pancreatic drains, at POD 1 and 3 when drain amylase values are low.

Conclusions

Patients with low drain amylase values on POD 1 and 3, are unlikely to develop POPF and may have pancreatic drains removed earlier.

Evaluation of Drain Amylase Level after Pancreaticoduodenectomy with Special Reference to Delayed Pancreatic Fistula

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (PF) is a relatively frequent and occasionally fatal complication of pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). Several risk factors for PF have been reported, including high drain amylase level (D-AMY). Among the 140 consecutive patients who underwent PD, we analyzed 110 cases with D-AMY measurements over time after PD. According to the D-AMY change, we divided patients into five patterns and defined delayed PF cases. We analyzed clinical characteristics, including serum amylase and D-AMY, and examined the correlation between the period of drain insertion and PF grade. In 15 delayed PF cases, 12 cases were grade B or C, pancreatic cancer was less frequent, pancreatic ducts were smaller, and soft pancreas texture was more commonly observed. The D-AMYon postoperative day (POD) 1 was higher in cases of delayed PF compared with non-PF cases ( P < 0.0001). In 28 cases with drain removal before POD 7, grade B or C PF was not observed afterward. The average D-AMYon POD 1 in cases with drain removal before POD 1 was significantly lower than in delayed PF cases. Although further studies are required to determine the most appropriate timing of drain removal, it is thought that intra-abdominal drains should be removed within seven days of PD in cases without signs of PF. On the other hand, delayed PF should be considered in cases of soft pancreas texture and/or high D-AMY on POD 1, even if D-AMY levels are low on POD 3 or decreasing on POD 5.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Prophylactic Abdominal Drainage in Distal Pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

A method to completely prevent postoperative pancreatic fistula (PF) in distal pancreatectomy (DP) is lacking. Hence, prophylactic abdominal drains could be used to prevent PF from developing into life-threatening complications.

METHODS

In 152 consecutive patients undergoing DP, three drains were placed routinely toward the pancreatic stump, supra-pancreatic space, and left subphrenic space. Abdominal drains were removed after surgery gradually based on amylase levels and positivity for bacterial infection in abdominal fluids.

RESULTS

Postoperative symptomatic PF occurred in 57 of 152 patients (37.5 %). Prevalence of severe postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ IIIa) was 16 %, with surgery-associated mortality observed in one patient (0.7 %). Prevalence of infection in drained abdominal fluids increased gradually and was >10 % on postoperative day (POD)-7. Severe postoperative complications led to longer postoperative hospital stays and higher treatment costs. Multivariate analyses revealed that a body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m(2), serum albumin level ≤ 3.8 g/dL, and white blood cell count at POD-3 ≥ 15,000/μL were independent predictors for development of severe postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

Use of prophylactic abdominal drains in DP seems to be effective for preventing PF from developing into fatal complications. However, definitive criteria should be established for enhancing safety and cost efficiency of DP through selective use and early removal of prophylactic drains.

Risk factors and preventive strategies for post-operative pancreatic fistula after pancreatic surgery: a comprehensive review

BACKGROUND

Pancreas surgery has developed into a fairly safe procedure in terms of mortality, but is still hampered by considerable morbidity. Among the most frequent and dreaded complications are the development of a post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF). The prediction and prevention of POPF remains an area of debate with several questions yet to be firmly addressed with solid answers.

METHODS

A systematic review of systematic reviews/meta-analyses and randomized trials in the English literature (PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane library, EMBASE) covering January 2005 to December 2015 on risk factors and preventive strategies for POPF.

RESULTS

A total of 49 systematic reviews and meta-analyses over the past decade discussed patient, surgeon, pancreatic disease and intraoperative related factors of POPF. Non-modifiable factors (age, BMI, comorbidity) and pathology (histotype, gland texture, duct size) that indicates surgery are associated with POPF risk. Consideration of anastomotic technique and use of somatostatin-analogs may slightly modify the risk of fistula. Sealant products appear to have no effect. Perioperative bleeding and transfusion enhance risk, but is modifiable by focus on technique and training. Drains may not prevent fistulae, but may help in early detection. Early drain-amylase may aid in detection. Predictive scores lack uniform validation, but may have a role in patient information if reliable pre-operative risk factors can be obtained.

CONCLUSIONS

Development of POPF occurs through several demonstrated risk factors. Anastomotic technique and use of somatostatin-analogs may slightly decrease risk. Drains may aid in early detection of leaks, but do not prevent POPF.

Laparoscopic Left Pancreatectomy in the United Kingdom: Analysis of a Six-Year Experience in a Single Tertiary Center

OBJECTIVES

Laparoscopic techniques have been slow to establish a role in pancreatic surgery. Worldwide, laparoscopic left pancreatectomy (LLP) is gaining in popularity; however, there remains little published data from the United Kingdom.We aimed to evaluate the results of LLP performed in a single UK pancreatic unit.

METHODS

Patients undergoing LLP for lesions in the body and tail of the pancreas between April 2009 and April 2015 were identified. Patient records were reviewed retrospectively.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic left pancreatectomy was performed on 46 patients, median age, 62 years (range, 19-84). The spleen was preserved in 27 patients (93% of planned), and 6 (13%) operations were converted to open. The overall morbidity rate was 39%; 28 patients had no complications. Significant complications were seen in 7 (15%) patients; this included 3 pancreatic fistula (6.5%) and 1 mortality (2%). Median length of stay was 6 days (range, 3-28). Histology revealed 15 neuroendocrine tumors, 8 adenocarcinomas, 4 mucinous cystadenomas, 1 intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm, 2 metastases, and 16 other benign pathologies.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic pancreatic surgery has a low risk of significant complications. Our results offer encouragement to identify LLP as the gold standard approach for premalignant lesions. Further work should clarify the outcomes for malignant lesions.

Intra-abdominal drainage following pancreatic resection: A systematic review

AIM

To study all the aspects of drain management in pancreatic surgery.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review according to the PRISMA guidelines. We searched the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, Web of Science, and PubMed (MEDLINE) for relevant articles on drain management in pancreatic surgery. The reference lists of relevant studies were screened to retrieve any further studies. We included all articles that reported clinical studies on human subjects with elective pancreatic resection and that compared various strategies of intra-abdominal drain management, such as drain vs no drain, selective drain use, early vs late drain extraction, and the use of different types of drains.

RESULTS

A total of 19 studies concerned with drain management in pancreatic surgery involving 4194 patients were selected for this systematic review. We included studies analyzing the outcomes of pancreatic resection with and without intra-abdominal drains, studies comparing early vs late drain removal and studies analyzing different types of drains. The majority of the studies reporting equal or superior results for pancreatic resection without drains were retrospective and observational with significant selection bias. One recent randomized trial reported higher postoperative morbidity and mortality with routine omission of intra-abdominal drains. With respect to the timing of drain removal, all of the included studies reported superior results with early drain removal. Regarding the various types of drains, there is insufficient evidence to determine which type of drain is more suitable following pancreatic resection.

CONCLUSION

The prophylactic use of drains remains controversial. When drains are used, early removal is recommended. Further trials comparing types of drains are ongoing.