Prospective randomized comparison between pylorus-preserving and standard pancreaticoduodenectomy

Surgical techniques to prevent delayed gastric emptying after pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is one of the most common complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). DGE represents impaired gastric motility without significant mechanical obstruction and is associated with an increased length of hospital stay, increased healthcare costs, and a high readmission rate. We reviewed published studies on various technical modifications to reduce the incidence of DGE.

DATA SOURCES

Studies were identified by searching PubMed for relevant articles published up to December 2022. The following search terms were used: "pancreaticoduodenectomy", "pancreaticojejunostomy", "pancreaticogastrostomy", "gastric emptying", "gastroparesis" and "postoperative complications". The search was limited to English publications. Additional articles were identified by a manual search of references from key articles.

RESULTS

In recent years, various surgical procedures and techniques have been explored to reduce the incidence of DGE. Pyloric resection, Billroth II reconstruction, Braun's enteroenterostomy, and antecolic reconstruction may be associated with a decreased incidence of DGE, but more high-powered studies are needed in the future. Neither laparoscopic nor robotic surgery has demonstrated superiority in preventing DGE, and the use of staplers is controversial regarding whether they can reduce the incidence of DGE.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite many innovations in surgical techniques, there is no surgical procedure that is superior to others to reduce DGE. Further larger prospective randomized studies are needed.

A new technique of duodenojejunostomy may reduce the rate of delayed gastric emptying after pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy: The growth factor technique (with video)

BACKGROUND

Despite various technical modifications, delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is one of the most common complications after pancreatoduodenectomy. DGE results in longer hospital stay, higher cost, lower quality of life, and delay of adjuvant therapy. We have developed a modified duodenojejunostomy technique to reduce the incidence of DGE. Here we evaluate our 4-year experience with this technique.

METHODS

This study evaluated consecutive patients who underwent pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy using the growth factor technique. It consists of performing a posterior seromuscular running suture with a zigzag stitch that stretches the jejunum and allows future growth of the anastomosis. This results in a longer jejunal opening. The angles at the edge of the duodenum are cut to accommodate the duodenal opening to the longer jejunum (the growth factor). The anterior seromuscular layer is then performed with interrupted sutures to accommodate the larger anastomosis. These patients were compared with a cohort of patients (n = 103) before the introduction of this new technique using propensity score matching.

RESULTS

134 patients underwent pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy. Delayed gastric emptying occurred in only three patients (2.2%), one grade B and two grade C. Compared with the 103 patients in the control group with standard technique, the incidence of DGE was significantly higher (11.6%; P = 0.00318). The median hospital stay was also statistically longer in the control group (P = 0.048704). A similar trend was observed in the matched cohort; the proportion of patients who developed DGE was significantly (P = 0.005) lower in the growth factor technique group (2.1% vs. 12.9%). Hospital stay was significantly longer in the standard group (P = 0.008), and patients operated on with the standard technique resumed feeding later than those with the growth factor technique.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that the new technique of duodenojejunostomy can reduce the incidence and severity of DGE and allow earlier hospital discharge. Comparative studies are still needed to confirm these preliminary results.

Delayed gastric emptying after classical Whipple or pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy: a randomized clinical trial (QUANUPAD)

PURPOSE

Pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy (PPPD) has been the gold standard for pancreatic head lesion resection for several years. Some studies have noted that it involves more delayed gastric emptying (DGE) than classical Whipple (i.e., pancreatoduodenectomy with antrectomy). Our working hypothesis was that the classical Whipple has a lower incidence of DGE. We aimed to compare the incidence of DGE among pancreatoduodenectomy techniques.

METHODS

This pragmatic, randomized, open-label, single-center clinical trial involved patients who underwent classical Whipple (study group) or PPPD (control group). Gastric emptying was clinically evaluated using scintigraphy. DGE was defined according to the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) criteria. The secondary endpoints were postoperative morbidity, length of hospital stay, anthropometric measurements, and nutritional status.

RESULTS

A total of 84 patients were randomized (42 per group). DGE incidence was 50% (20/40, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 35-65%) in the study group and 62% (24/39, 95% CI: 46-75%) in the control group (p = 0.260). No differences were observed between both groups regarding postoperative morbidity or length of hospital stay. Anthropometric measurements at 6 months post-surgery: triceps fold measurements were 12 mm and 16 mm (p = 0.021). At 5 weeks post-surgery, triceps fold measurements were 13 mm and 16 mm (p = 0.020) and upper arm circumferences were 26 cm and 28 cm (p = 0.030). No significant differences were observed in nutritional status.

CONCLUSION

DGE incidence and severity did not differ between classical Whipple and PPPD. Some anthropometric measurements may indicate a better recovery with PPPD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03984734.

Impact of enhanced recovery protocols after pancreatoduodenectomy: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This individual-patient data meta-analysis investigated the effects of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols compared with conventional care on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched systematically for articles reporting outcomes of ERAS after pancreatoduodenectomy published up to August 2020. Comparative studies were included. Main outcomes were postoperative functional recovery elements, postoperative morbidity, duration of hospital stay, and readmission.

RESULTS

Individual-patient data were obtained from 17 of 31 eligible studies comprising 3108 patients. Time to liquid (mean difference (MD) -3.23 (95 per cent c.i. -4.62 to -1.85) days; P < 0.001) and solid (-3.84 (-5.09 to -2.60) days; P < 0.001) intake, time to passage of first stool (MD -1.38 (-1.82 to -0.94) days; P < 0.001) and time to removal of the nasogastric tube (3.03 (-4.87 to -1.18) days; P = 0.001) were reduced with ERAS. ERAS was associated with lower overall morbidity (risk difference (RD) -0.04, 95 per cent c.i. -0.08 to -0.01; P = 0.015), less delayed gastric emptying (RD -0.11, -0.22 to -0.01; P = 0.039) and a shorter duration of hospital stay (MD -2.33 (-2.98 to -1.69) days; P < 0.001) without a higher readmission rate.

CONCLUSION

ERAS improved postoperative outcome after pancreatoduodenectomy. Implementation should be encouraged.

Impact of gastric resection and enteric anastomotic configuration on delayed gastric emptying after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a network meta-analysis of randomized trials

Introduction

Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is frequent after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Several RCTs have explored operative strategies to minimize DGE, however, the optimal combination of gastric resection approach, anastomotic route, configuration and the use of enteroenterostomy remains unclear.

Methods

MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL databases were systematically searched for RCTs comparing gastric resection (classic Whipple, pylorus-resecting, pylorus-preserving), anastomotic route (antecolic, retrocolic), configuration (loop gastroenterostomy/Billroth II, Roux-en-Y), and use of enteroenterostomy (Braun). A random-effects, Bayesian network meta-analysis with non-informative priors was conducted to determine the optimal combination of approaches to PD for minimizing DGE.

Results

Twenty-four RCTs, including 2526 patients and 14 approaches were included. There was some heterogeneity, although inconsistency was low. The overall incidence of DGE was 25.6 per cent (647 patients). Pylorus-resecting, antecolic, Billroth II with Braun enteroenterostomy was associated with the lowest rates of DGE and ranked the best in 35 per cent of comparisons. Classic Whipple, retrocolic, Billroth II with Braun ranked the worst for DGE in 32 per cent of comparisons. Pairwise meta-analysis of retrocolic versus antecolic route for gastrojejunostomy found increased risk of DGE with the retrocolic route (odds ratio 2.10, 95 per cent credibility interval (cr.i.) 0.92 to 4.70). Pairwise meta-analysis of enteroenterostomy found a trend towards lower DGE rates when this was used (odds ratio 1.90, 95 per cent cr.i. 0.92 to 3.90). Having a Braun enteroenterostomy ranked the best in 96 per cent of comparisons.

Conclusion

Based on existing RCT evidence, a pylorus-resecting, antecolic, Billroth II with Braun enteroenterostomy seems to be associated with the lowest rates of DGE.

Preregistration

PROSPERO submitted 23 December 2020. CRD42021227637

Gastrostomy as a Preemptive Measure after Pancreatoduodenectomy against Delayed Gastric Emptying: A Small Case Series and a Review of the Literature

Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is a common (20–30%) postoperative complication following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) (Parmar et al., 2013). Various causes and preemptive measures have been suggested to decrease the occurrence of DGE. We added a simple step in the procedure of 26 consecutive pancreatic head resections, which seems to alleviate DGE and has never been highlighted before.

Clinical outcomes of pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma depending on preservation or resection of pylorus

Backgrounds/Aims

The comparative effectiveness of pylorus-resecting pancreaticoduodenectomy (PRPD) and pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPPD) in pancreatic head cancer is still disputed. The aim of this study was to analyze the data obtained from a large, single center with PPPD compared with PRPD in terms of postoperative outcomes, including blood glucose levels and survival in patients with pancreatic head cancer.

Methods

Between January 2007 and December 2016, a total of 556 patients with pancreatic head cancer underwent either PPPD or PRPD. We analyzed the clinicopathologic data to assess short- and long-term outcomes retrospectively.

Results

For underlying disease, patients with DM in PPPD were fewer than in PRPD (33.0% vs. 46.2%, p=0.002). The median value of CA19-9 was significantly higher in PRPD than in PPPD (129.36 vs. 86.47, p=0.037). The incidence of Clavien-Dindo grade III to V major complications in PPPD was significantly higher than in PRPD (20.4% vs. 13.4%, p=0.032). Resection of pylorus was shown to reduce complications in univariate and multivariate analyses (p=0.032 and = 0.021, respectively). The 5-year survival rates were 27.6% in the PPPD group and 22.4% in the PRPD group (p=0.015).

Conclusions

The results of PPPD and PRPD showed no significant differences from those reported conventionally in previous studies. Although further well-designed studies are needed, it is more important to select the range of surgical resection for the patient’s disease regardless of resection of pylorus.

Comparative Effectiveness of Pylorus-Preserving Versus Standard Pancreaticoduodenectomy in Clinical Practice

OBJECTIVES

We compared risk-adjusted short- and long-term outcomes between standard pancreaticoduodenectomy (SPD) and a pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPPD).

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was queried for the years 2004 to 2014 to identify patients with adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head undergoing SPD and PPD. Margin status, lymph node yield, length of stay (LOS), 30- and 90-day mortality, and overall survival were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 11,172 patients were identified, of whom 9332 (83.5%) underwent SPD and 1840 (16.5%) PPPD. There was no difference in patient age, sex, stage, tumor grade, radiation treatment, and chemotherapy treatment between the 2 groups. Total number of regional lymph nodes was examined, and surgical margin status and overall survival were also comparable. However, patients undergoing PPPD had a shorter LOS (11.3 vs 12.3 days, P < 0.001), lower 30-day mortality (2.5% vs 3.7%, P = 0.02), and 90-day mortality (5.5% vs 6.9%, P = 0.03). On multivariate analyses, patients undergoing SPD were at higher risk for 30-day mortality compared with PPPD (odds ratio, 1.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-2.13).

CONCLUSIONS

Standard pancreaticoduodenectomy and PPPD are oncologically equivalent, yet PPPD is associated with a reduction in postoperative mortality and shorter LOS.

Modified protocol for enhanced recovery after surgery is beneficial for Chinese cancer patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy

Radical surgical resection remains the only effective treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer. Effective protocols for recovery from post-operative complications that result in high rates of morbidity and mortality are therefore essential. The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol is an interdisciplinary multimodal concept based on modern anesthesia and analgesia combined with other fast rehabilitation parameters. It was first applied in the field of elective colorectal surgery, and eventually extended to several surgical diseases. In this study, we investigated the feasibility and safety of implementing the ERAS protocol in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). We randomly divided 159 patients who underwent PD into two groups who were managed using either ERAS or the conventional protocol. We observed that in those treated with the ERAS protocol several post-operative recovery factors were greatly improved, and there were no complications requiring readmission. We therefore propose that ERAS can improve post-operative recovery of PD patients and shorten the waiting time to chemotherapy, which may improve the overall survival of surgically treated pancreatic cancer patients.

Pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy versus standard pancreaticoduodenectomy in the treatment of duodenal papilla carcinoma

It is not known whether pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPPD) is as effective as the standard pancreaticoduodenectomy (SPD) in the treatment of duodenal papilla carcinoma (DPC). A retrospective cohort trial was undertaken to compare the results of these two procedures. Clinical data, histological findings, short-term results, survival and quality of life of all patients who had undergone surgery for primary DPC between January 2003 and February 2010 were analyzed. According to the inclusion criteria and the surgical methods, 116 patients were divided into the PPPD group (n=43) and the SPD group (n=73). There were no significant differences in various indices, including surgery duration, extent of intraoperative hemorrhage and postoperative pathological indexes. The incidence of postoperative complications, including pancreatic fistula and delayed gastric emptying, were also similar between the two groups (20.9 vs. 21.9%; P=0.900 and 11.6 vs. 5.4%; P=0.402). Long-term survival and quality of life were identical following a median follow-up of 45.6 months (range, 4-144 months). Within 6 months, there was a decreased loss of appetite following the pylorus-preserving procedure (26.9 vs. 49.3; P=0.003). The procedures were equally effective for the treatment of DPC. PPPD offers minor advantages in the early postoperative period but not in the long term.

Pylorus preservation pancreatectomy or not

Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is the treatment of choice for various benign and malignant tumors of the pancreatic head or the periampullary region, and the only hope for cure in patients with cancer at this side. While it has been associated with high morbidity and mortality rates in the last century, its centralization in specialized institutions together with refinements in the operative technique and better management of postoperative complications have made PD a standardized, safe procedure. Besides the classic Whipple procedure including distal gastrectomy, two variations of PD with or without pylorus resection, but preservation of the entire stomach in either procedure exist today. Pylorus-preserving PD has gained wide acceptance as standard procedure and is being performed by an increasing number of pancreatic surgeons. After its oncological adequacy was questioned initially, pylorus-preserving PD was shown to be equivalent to the classic Whipple procedure regarding tumor recurrence and long-term survival. Moreover, operation time and blood loss were shown to be reduced in the pylorus-preserving procedure and benefits in nutritional status and quality of life were observed. However, preservation of the pylorus has been suggested to result in an increased incidence of postoperative delayed gastric emptying (DGE). In this context, pylorus-resecting PD has become popular especially in Japan with the aim to prevent DGE by removal of the pylorus but preservation of the stomach. In contrast to positive results from early studies, latest high-quality randomized controlled trial (RCT) data show that pylorus resection does not reduce DGE compared to the pylorus-preserving operation. Non-superiority of pylorus resection was also confirmed in current meta-analysis on this topic. This article summarizes the existing evidence on PD with or without pylorus preservation and derives recommendations for daily practice.

Pancreaticoduodenectomy for duodenal papilla carcinoma: A single-centre 9-year retrospective study of 112 patients with long-term follow-up

AIM

To retrospectively evaluate the factors that influence long-term outcomes of duodenal papilla carcinoma (DPC) after standard pancreaticoduodenectomy (SPD).

METHODS

This is a single-centre, retrospective study including 112 DPC patients who had a SPD between 2006 and 2015. Associations between serum levels of CA19-9 and CEA and various clinical characteristics of 112 patients with DPC were evaluated by the χ² test and Fisher’s exact test. The patients were followed-up every 3 mo in the first two years and at least every 6 mo afterwards, with a median follow-up of 60 mo (ranging from 4 mo to 168 mo). Survival analysis was conducted using the Kaplan-Meier survival and Cox proportional hazards model analysis. The difference in survival curves was evaluated with a log-rank test.

RESULTS

In 112 patients undergoing SPD, serum levels of CA19-9 was associated with serum levels of CEA and drainage mode (the P values were 0.000 and 0.033, respectively); While serum levels of CEA was associated with serum levels of CA19-9 and differentiation of the tumour (the P values were 0.000 and 0.033, respectively). The serum levels of CA19-9 and CEA were closely correlated (χ² = 13.277, r = 0.344, P = 0.000). The overall 5-year survival was 50.00% for 112 patients undergoing SPD. The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that increased serum levels of CA19-9, CEA, and total bilirubin were correlated with a poor prognosis, as well as a senior grade of infiltration depth, lymph node metastases, and TNM stage(the P values were 0.033, 0.018, 0.015, 0.000, 0.000 and 0.000, respectively). Only the senior grade of infiltration depth and TNM stage retained their significance when adjustments were made for other known prognostic factors in Cox multivariate analysis (RR = 2.211, P = 0.022 and RR = 2.109, P = 0.047).

CONCLUSION

For patients with DPC, the serum levels of CA19-9 and CEA were closely correlated, and play an important role in poor survival. Increased serum levels of total bilirubin and lymph node metastases were also correlated with a poor prognosis. The senior grade of infiltration depth and TNM stage can serve as independent prognosis indexes in the evaluation of patients with DPC after SPD.

Superiority of stapled side-to-side gastrojejunostomy over conventional hand-sewn end-to-side gastrojejunostomy for reducing the risk of primary delayed gastric emptying after subtotal stomach-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy

Background and purpose

Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is the most common complication following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). The clinical efficacy of stapled side-to-side anastomosis using a laparoscopic stapling device during alimentary reconstruction in PD is not well understood and its superiority over conventional hand-sewn end-to-side anastomosis remains controversial. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the stapled side-to-side anastomosis in preventing the development of DGE after PD.

Methods

The subjects of this retrospective study were 137 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy, as subtotal stomach-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (SSPPD; n = 130), or conventional whipple procedure (n = 7) with Child reconstruction, between January 2010 and May 2014. The patients were divided into two groups according to whether they had had a stapled side-to-side anastomosis (SA group; n = 57) or a conventional hand-sewn end-to-side anastomosis (HA group; n = 80).

Results

SA reduced the operative time (SA vs. HA: 508 vs. 557 min, p = 0.028) and the incidence of delayed gastric emptying (SA vs. HA: 21.1 vs. 46.3%, p = 0.003) and was associated with shorter hospitalization (SA vs. HA: 33 vs. 39.5 days, p = 0.007). In this cohort, SA was the only significant factor contributing to a reduction in the incidence of DGE (p = 0.002).

Conclusions

Stapled side-to-side gastrojejunostomy reduced the operative time and the incidence of DGE following PD with Child reconstruction, thereby also reducing the length of hospitalization.

Understanding Clinical Issues in Postoperative Nutrition After Pancreaticoduodenectomy

Postoperative nutrition support for patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (Whipple's procedure) may be complicated due to gastrointestinal tract dysfunction (gastroparesis, dumping, and malabsorption) subsequent to the procedure. Clinical management of these patients may be adversely affected by procedure-specific knowledge deficits (method of gastrointestinal [GI] reconstruction), common and expected surgical complications, and the available route for alimentation. It is the aim of this report to provide the reader with an overview of the procedure, common postoperative nutrition issues, and available interventions.

Case mix-adjusted cost of colectomy at low-, middle-, and high-volume academic centers

BACKGROUND

Efforts to regionalize surgery based on thresholds in procedure volume may have consequences on the cost of health care delivery. This study aims to delineate the relationship between hospital volume, case mix, and variability in the cost of operative intervention using colectomy as the model.

METHODS

All patients undergoing colectomy (n = 90,583) at 183 academic hospitals from 2009-2012 in The University HealthSystems Consortium Database were studied. Patient and procedure details were used to generate a case mix-adjusted predictive model of total direct costs. Observed to expected costs for each center were evaluated between centers based on overall procedure volume.

RESULTS

Patient and procedure characteristics were significantly different between volume tertiles. Observed costs at high-volume centers were less than at middle- and low-volume centers. According to our predictive model, high-volume centers cared for a less expensive case mix than middle- and low-volume centers ($12,786 vs $13,236 and $14,497, P < .01). Our predictive model accounted for 44% of the variation in costs. Overall efficiency (standardized observed to expected costs) was greatest at high-volume centers compared to middle- and low-volume tertiles (z score -0.16 vs 0.02 and -0.07, P < .01).

CONCLUSION

Hospital costs and cost efficiency after an elective colectomy varies significantly between centers and may be attributed partially to the patient differences at those centers. These data demonstrate that a significant proportion of the cost variation is due to a distinct case mix at low-volume centers, which may lead to perceived poor performance at these centers.

Delayed Gastric Emptying after Pancreatic Surgery: Analysis of Factors Determinant for the Short-term Outcome

Background

Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) frequently complicates pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). Mainly DGE develops as consequence of postoperative intra-abdominal complications (secondary), while the incidence of primary DGE (i.e., not related to surgical complications) has rarely been studied. Moreover, the pathogenesis of DGE is complex and needs to be further elucidated. The present study aimed at highlighting potential mechanisms behind primary and above all secondary DGE by studying a variety of different pancreatic surgical procedures.

Patients and methods

During the time period 2008–2011, 327 patients underwent pancreatic resective procedures at Karolinska University Hospital. Of these, 242 were PD and 56 tail resections, 17 had a duodenal preserving pancreatectomy for chronic pancreatitis, and 15 patients with familial duodenal polyposis had a pancreas preserving duodenectomy. All postoperative courses were assessed and scored according to Clavien–Dindo. The presence of DGE was evaluated and recorded according to the definition launched by the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS). Crude associations were studied in a univariate model, followed by a multivariate analysis of the respective factors. The associations were presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

In total DGE emerged during the postoperative course in about 40% of the PD cases. About half of those (n = 47) were scored as being primary. The majority of the primary DGEs were classified as A (n = 26) and only four as grade C, whereas among the secondary cases significantly more patients were scored as grade C (p < 0.01). In those submitted to a pancreatic body and tail resection 25% reported DGE. The distribution of the different grades of DGE in patients with a tail resection followed the same pattern with a predominance of Grade A cases with an equal distribution between those being scored as primary and secondary. Duodenal preservation, as well as keeping the pancreas intact following duodenectomy, was not followed by primary DGE. Multivariate risk factor analyses for the development of primary GE revealed no specific risk profile except for high age.

Conclusion

DGE is frequently seen after different surgical procedures directed toward the pancreatic gland. DGE is most commonly seen after PD, and half of these cases are scored as primary DGE. Primary and secondary DGE are seen in one-quarter of the cases even after pancreatic tail resection emphasizing the complex nature of the pathogenesis. Resection of the duodenum as an important mechanism behind DGE is not supported by the present results.

The Standardization of Pancreatoduodenectomy: Where Are We?

Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) represents an important challenge for surgeons due to the complexity of the operation, requirement for technical skills and experience, and postoperative management involving important and life-threatening complications. Despite efforts to reduce mortality in high-volume centers, the morbidity rate is still high (approximately 40-50%). The PD standardization process of surgical aspects and preoperative and postoperative settings is essential to permit pancreatic surgeons to communicate in the same language, compare experiences and results, and to improve the short- and long-term outcomes. The aim of this article is to assess the state of the art practices for important matters of debate for PD (the role of mini invasive approach, the definition and the role of mesopancreas, the extent of lymphadenectomy, the different methods of reconstructions, the prophylactic drainage of the abdominal cavity), and to suggest possible future studies.

Pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (pp Whipple) versus pancreaticoduodenectomy (classic Whipple) for surgical treatment of periampullary and pancreatic carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth-leading cause of cancer death for both, men and women. The standard treatment for resectable tumours consists of a classic Whipple (CW) operation or a pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPW). It is unclear which of these procedures is more favourable in terms of survival, postoperative mortality, complications, and quality of life.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this systematic review was to compare the effectiveness of CW and PPW techniques for surgical treatment of cancer of the pancreatic head and the periampullary region.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted searches on 28 March 2006, 11 January 2011, 9 January 2014, and 18 August 2015 to identify all randomised controlled trials (RCTs), while applying no language restrictions. We searched the following electronic databases on 18 August 2015: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) from the Cochrane Library (2015, Issue 8); MEDLINE (1946 to August 2015); and EMBASE (1980 to August 2015). We also searched abstracts from Digestive Disease Week and United European Gastroenterology Week (1995 to 2010); we did not update this part of the search for the 2014 and 2015 updates because the prior searches did not contribute any additional information. We identified two additional trials through the updated search in 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs comparing CW versus PPW including participants with periampullary or pancreatic carcinoma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data from the included trials. We used a random-effects model for pooling data. We compared binary outcomes using odds ratios (ORs), pooled continuous outcomes using mean differences (MDs), and used hazard ratios (HRs) for meta-analysis of survival. Two review authors independently evaluated the methodological quality and risk of bias of included trials according to the standards of The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight RCTs with a total of 512 participants. Our critical appraisal revealed vast heterogeneity with respect to methodological quality and outcome parameters. Postoperative mortality (OR 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 1.54; P = 0.32), overall survival (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.16; P = 0.29), and morbidity showed no significant differences, except of delayed gastric emptying, which significantly favoured CW (OR 3.03, 95% CI 1.05 to 8.70; P = 0.04). Furthermore, we noted that operating time (MD -45.22 minutes, 95% CI -74.67 to -15.78; P = 0.003), intraoperative blood loss (MD -0.32 L, 95% CI -0.62 to -0.03; P = 0.03), and red blood cell transfusion (MD -0.47 units, 95% CI -0.86 to -0.07; P = 0.02) were significantly reduced in the PPW group. All significant results were associated with low-quality evidence based on GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) criteria.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests no relevant differences in mortality, morbidity, and survival between the two operations. However, some perioperative outcome measures significantly favour the PPW procedure. Given obvious clinical and methodological heterogeneity, future high-quality RCTs of complex surgical interventions based on well-defined outcome parameters are required.

Double loop reconstruction following pancreaticoduodenectomy for malignant tumor: Short-term outcome

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the use of a double loop reconstruction following pylorus preserving proximal pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPPPD).

METHODS

Morbidity and mortality were evaluated in 55 patients undergoing PPPPD for malignant tumors, followed by a double loop reconstruction.

RESULTS

The mean intra-operative blood loss was 908mL±531. In-hospital mortality was 5.4% (3/55 pts). The mean length of hospital stay was 17±5 days (range 12-45 days). Postoperative complications occurred in 25 patients (46.2%). Five patients developed an anastomotic leak, one biliary and four pancreatic (4/55; 7%). Delayed gastric emptying occurred in 8 patients (14.5%). Reoperation was required in two patients for hemorrhage.

CONCLUSIONS

A double loop alimentary reconstruction following PPPPD led to a low incidence of DGE and pancreatic fistula. Although mortality rate was higher than that reported by referral centres, this technique has been performed in a not specialized unit attaining acceptable results.

Pancreatic Fistula and Delayed Gastric Emptying After Pancreatectomy: Where do We Stand?

Pancreatic resection has become a feasible treatment of pancreatic neoplasms, and with improvements in surgical techniques and perioperative management, mortality associated with pancreatic surgery has decreased considerably. Despite this improvement, a high rate of complications is still associated with these procedures. Among these complications, delayed gastric emptying (DGE) and postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) have a substantial impact on patient outcomes and burden our healthcare system. Technical modifications and postoperative approaches have been proposed to reduce rates of both POPF and DGE in patients undergoing pancreatectomy; however, to date, their rates have remained unchanged. In the present study, we summarize the findings of the most significant studies that have investigated these complications. In particular, several studies focused on technical modifications including extent of dissection, stent placement, nature of anastomosis, type of reconstruction, and application of biological or non-biological agents to site of anastomosis. Moreover, postoperatively, drain placement, duration of drain usage, postoperative feeding, and use of pharmacological agents were studied to reduce rates of POPF and DGE. In this review, we summarize the most relevant literature on this fundamental aspect of pancreatic surgery. Despite studies identifying the potential benefit of technical modifications and postoperative approaches, these findings remain controversial and suggest need for further extensive investigation. Most importantly, we recommend that all surgeons performing these procedures base their practice on the most updated and highest available level of evidence.

Delayed Gastric Emptying After Pancreaticoduodenectomy: an Analysis of Risk Factors and Cost

INTRODUCTION

Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is a common complication after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), yet it remains incompletely understood. The International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) in 2007 defined a three-tiered grading system to standardize studies of DGE.

METHODS

In this study, 721 patients undergoing PD between 2006 and 2012 were retrospectively categorized by the ISGPS DGE criteria, as well as a modified grading system (termed primary DGE) if, on retrospective review, DGE was not believed to be a sequela of a separate complication. Predictive factors and associated outcomes were determined.

RESULTS

ISGPS-defined DGE occurred in 140 (19.4%) patients. In a multivariate analysis, predictors of ISGPS-defined DGE included abdominal infection (odds ratio (OR) 5.5, p < 0.001), male gender (OR 1.92, p = 0.007), smoking history (OR 1.75 p = 0.033), and periampullary adenocarcinoma (OR 1.66, p = 0.041). Primary DGE occurred in 12.2% of patients. Predictors included abdominal infection (OR 3.15, p < 0.001) and smoking history (OR 2.04, p = 0.008). Median hospital charges increased over $10,000 with each severity grade of DGE (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

DGE is common after PD and contributes substantially to cost. DGE is frequently a secondary complication of abdominal infection, and interventions that limit such complications may be the most effective strategy toward preventing DGE.

Reduction of the Incidence of Delayed Gastric Emptying in Side-to-Side Gastrojejunostomy in Subtotal Stomach-Preserving Pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

One of the most common morbidities of pancreaticoduodenectomies is delayed gastric emptying (DGE). The recent advent of subtotal stomach-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (SSPPD) attempts to lessen this troublesome complication; however, the incidence of DGE still remains to be 4.5-20%. This study aims to evaluate whether the incidence of DGE can be reduced by the side-to-side gastric greater curvature-to-jejunal anastomosis in comparison with the gastric stump-to-jejunal end-to-side anastomosis in SSPPD.

METHODS

Between October 2007 and September 2012, a total of 160 consecutive patients who had undergone SSPPD were analyzed retrospectively. In the first period (October 2007-March 2010), gastrojejunostomy was performed with end-to-side anastomosis in 80 patients (SSPPD-ETS group). In the second period (April 2010-September 2012), gastrojejunostomy was performed with the greater curvature side-to-jejunal side anastomosis in 80 patients (SSPPD-STS group). The postoperative data were collected prospectively in a database and reviewed retrospectively.

RESULTS

The incidence of DGE was 21.3% in the SSPPD-ETS group and 2.5% in the SSPPD-STS group (P = 0.0002). According to the classification of the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS), the incidence of DGE of grades A, B, and C were 5, 5, and 7 in the SSPPD-ETS group and 0, 2, and 0 in the SSPPD-STS group, respectively. The overall morbidity and postoperative hospital stay of the two groups were not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

The greater curvature side-to-side anastomosis of gastrojejunostomy is associated with a reduced incidence of DGE after SSPPD.

[Prevention of gastrostasis after pancreaticoduodenal resection: new technique of gastroenterostomy]

It was performed a retrospective comparative analysis of treatment results of 113 patients with pancreatic head and periampular cancer. The main group consisted of 58 patients in whom pancreaticoduodenal resection was performed according to an original technique of Russian Scientific Center of Surgery. Control group included 55 patients who underwent end-to-side gastrojejunostomy reconstruction. We have analyzed immediate postoperative complications in 2 groups without taking into consideration nosological forms of the disease. Pancreaticojejunostomy failure was diagnosed postoperatively in 5 (8.6%) patients in main group and in 10 (18.2%) patients in control group. There was no hepaticoentero- and gastroenterostomy failure in patients who underwent new technique of gastrojejunostomy while these events were observed in 8 (14.5%) and 3 (5.5%) patients respectively in control group. Mortality was 1.7% (n=1) in main group and 5.5% (n=3) in control group (p=0.29). Mild degree of gastrostasis (A class) was observed in 54 (93.7%) patients of main group and in 34 (61.8%) patients of control group (p=0.0004). There was B class of gastrostasis in 4 (6.9%) patients of main group. Severe gastrostasis (C class) was not revealed in any observation. In control group B class of gastrostasis was diagnosed in 14 (25.5%) patients, severe degree - in 7 (12.7%) patients. Univariant analysis showed hemotransfusion (p=0.037), pancreatic fistula (p=0.001), enteric fistula (p=0.005) and reconstruction technique (p=0.00004) as predictors of gastrostasis. Multivariant analysis defined pancreatic fistula (p=0.01), enteric fistula (p=0.04) and reconstruction technique (p=0.001) as significant predictors of gastrostasis. Thus, our study revealed significant decreasing gastrostasis incidence in case of original technique in comparison with conventional anastomosis, as well as demonstrated effect of anastomoses failure on augmentation of gastrostasis frequency after pancreaticoduodenal resection. Further randomized investigations are necessary to confirm our results.

Surgery for Pancreatic Cancer

Surgical resection remains the only potentially curative therapy for pancreatic cancer, despite a high rate of systemic recurrence. Because of local invasion or distant spread, a minority of patients presenting with pancreatic cancer are candidates for surgery. Although perioperative mortality is low in high-volume settings, pancreatic surgery remains associated with considerable morbidity. Minimally invasive and robotic surgical techniques are increasingly used for pancreatic resection, although not always applicable to all patients. Strategies to extend the benefits of margin-negative surgical resection to more patients include surgery with vascular resection and reconstruction for locally invasive tumors, and resection after neoadjuvant therapy.

[Surgery for pancreatic cancer: Evidence-based surgical strategies]

Pancreatic cancer surgery represents a challenge for surgeons due to its technical complexity, the potential complications that may appear, and ultimately because of its poor survival. The aim of this article is to summarize the scientific evidence regarding the surgical treatment of pancreatic cancer in order to help surgeons in the decision making process in the management of these patients .Here we will review such fundamental issues as the need for a biopsy before surgery, the type of pancreatic anastomosis leading to better results, and the need for placement of drains after pancreatic surgery will be discussed.

Pancreatic surgery: evolution and current tailored approach

Surgical resection of pancreatic cancer offers the only chance for prolonged survival. Pancretic resections are technically challenging, and are accompanied by a substantial risk for postoperative complications, the most significant complication being a pancreatic fistula. Risk factors for development of pancreatic leakage are now well known, and several prophylactic pharmacological measures, as well as technical interventions have been suggested in prevention of pancreatic fistula. With better postoperative care and improved radiological interventions, most frequently complications can be managed conservatively. This review also attempts to address some of the controversies related to optimal management of the pancreatic remnant after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (pp Whipple) versus pancreaticoduodenectomy (classic Whipple) for surgical treatment of periampullary and pancreatic carcinoma

Background Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer death for men and the fifth for women. The standard treatment for resectable tumours consists of a classic Whipple (CW) operation or a pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPW). It is unclear which of these procedures is more favourable in terms of survival, mortality, complications and quality of life.Objectives The objective of this systematic review is to compare the effectiveness of CW and PPW techniques for surgical treatment of cancer of the pancreatic head and the periampullary region.Search methods We conducted searches on 28 March 2006, 11 January 2011 and 9 January 2014 to identify all randomised controlled trials (RCTs),while applying no language restrictions. We searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects(DARE) from The Cochrane Library (2013, Issue 4); MEDLINE (1946 to January 2014); and EMBASE (1980 to January 2014). We also searched abstracts from Digestive Disease Week and United European Gastroenterology Week (1995 to 2010). We identified no additional studies upon updating the systematic review in 2014.Selection criteria We considered RCTs comparing CW versus PPW to be eligible if they included study participants with periampullary or pancreatic carcinoma. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently extracted data from the included studies. We used a random-effects model for pooling data. We compared binary outcomes using odds ratios (ORs), pooled continuous outcomes using mean differences (MDs) and used hazard ratios (HRs) for meta-analysis of survival. Two review authors independently evaluated the methodological quality and risk of bias of included studies according to the standards of The Cochrane Collaboration.Main results We included six RCTs with a total of 465 participants. Our critical appraisal revealed vast heterogeneity with respect to methodological quality and outcome parameters. In-hospital mortality (OR 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 1.40; P value 0.18), overall survival (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.16; P value 0.29) and morbidity showed no significant differences. However, we noted that operating time (MD -68.26 minutes, 95% CI -105.70 to -30.83; P value 0.0004) and intraoperative blood loss (MD -0.76 mL, 95%CI -0.96 to -0.56; P value < 0.00001) were significantly reduced in the PPW group. All significant results are associated with low quality of evidence as determined on the basis of GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) criteria.Authors' conclusions No evidence suggests relevant differences in mortality, morbidity and survival between the two operations. Given obvious clinical and methodological heterogeneity, future research must be undertaken to perform high-quality randomised controlled trials of complex surgical interventions on the basis of well-defined outcome parameters.

Does Braun enteroenterostomy reduce delayed gastric emptying after pancreaticoduodenectomy?

Whether an additional Braun enteroenterostomy is necessary in reducing delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) has not yet been well investigated. Herein, in this retrospective study, 395 consecutive cases of patients undergoing classic PD from 2009 to 2013 were reviewed. Patients with and without Braun enteroenterostomy were compared in preoperative baseline characteristics, surgical procedure, postoperative diagnosis, and morbidity including DGE. The DGE was defined and classified by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery recommendation. The incidence of DGE was similar in patients with or without Braun enteroenterostomy following PD (37/347, 10.7% vs 8/48, 16.7%, P = 0.220). The patients in the 2 groups were not different in patient characteristics, lesions, surgical procedure, or postoperative complications, although patients without Braun enteroenterostomy more frequently presented postoperative vomiting than those with Braun enteroenterostomy (33.3% vs 15.3%, P = 0.002). Bile leakage, pancreatic fistula, and intraperitoneal abscess were risk factors for postoperative DGE (all P < 0.05). Prokinetic agents and acupuncture were effective in symptom relief of DGE in 24 out of 45 patients and 12 out of 14 patients, respectively.The additional Braun enteroenterostomy following classic PD was not associated with a decreased rate of DGE. Postoperative abdominal complications were strongly correlated with the onset of DGE. Prokinetic agents and acupuncture could be utilized in some patients with DGE.

Prevention of delayed gastric emptying after pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy with antecolic reconstruction, a long jejunal loop, and a jejuno-jejunostomy

BACKGROUND

Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is one of the major complications following pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy (PPPD). It leads to significant patient distress and prolonged hospitalization and therefore increased treatment costs. DGE etiology remains unclear but seems to be multifactorial. In order to decrease DGE rates, reconstruction methods have been modified. The presented retrospective study was to evaluate outcomes of different surgical techniques at our institution with special emphasis on retrocolic and antecolic reconstruction types.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

One hundred thirteen consecutive patients underwent PPPD between September 2004 and December 2011 for periampullary and bile duct lesions of the pancreatic head and the papilla of Vater. These patients were reviewed for DGE occurrence and other factors. Four different types of reconstruction were applied: the classic retrocolic reconstruction using a short jejunal loop (short loop, n = 40) and three types of reconstructions using a long loop: one with a long loop and retrocolic duodenojejunostomy (n = 22), another with a long loop and an additional latero-lateral enterostomy (Braun's anastomosis, n = 23), and finally, an antecolic group with Braun's anastomosis (n = 28). Patients were reviewed for DGE incidence and severity following the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery definition of DGE.

RESULTS

The highest DGE occurrence was noted in the retrocolic group using a short jejunal loop (15 of 32 patients, 46.9%), whereas the reconstruction types using long loops showed a notable decrease: DGE occurred in 4 of 16 patients (25%) in the retrocolic group, in 6 of 21 patients (28.6%) in the retrocolic group with an additional latero-lateral enterostomy (Braun's anastomosis), and finally, only 1 of 22 patients (4.5%, p = 0.009) in the antecolic group with Braun's anastomosis presenting with DGE, grade A. However, neither hospitalization time nor days in the intensive care unit were significantly different. There was no difference in DGE rates between the retrocolic long-loop groups with and without Braun's anastomosis.

CONCLUSION

The results of this retrospective study suggest that the antecolic route with a long jejunal loop and Braun's anastomosis minimizes DGE rates.

Investigation and management of pancreatic tumours

Pancreatic cancer is the 10th most commonly diagnosed cancer in the UK and the fifth most common cause of cancer death. It remains one of the most aggressive cancers with over 95% of patients affected dying of their disease. Often presenting at an advanced stage of disease progression, there is currently no simple screening test available. Therefore a high clinical suspicion and prompt appropriate investigation is required from physicians when dealing with patients with symptoms in keeping with pancreatic cancer. The gastroenterology 2010 curriculum states that trainees should learn the presentation and multidisciplinary management of patients with pancreatic tumours. In this article we discuss the typical clinical presentations of common and less common pancreatic tumours followed by the investigation, staging and management required.

Pylorus-preserving versus pylorus-resecting pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary and pancreatic carcinoma: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the long-term survival, mortality, morbidity and the operation-related events in patients with periampullary and pancreatic carcinoma undergoing pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPPD) and pylorus-resecting pancreaticoduodenectomy (PRPD).

METHOD

A systematic search of literature databases (Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science) was performed to identify studies. Outcome measures comparing PPPD versus PRPD for periampullary and pancreatic carcinoma were long-term survival, mortality, morbidity (overall morbidity, delayed gastric emptying [DGE], pancreatic fistula, wound infection, postoperative bleeding, biliary leakage, ascites and gastroenterostomy leakage) and operation related events (hospital stays, operating time, intraoperative blood loss and red blood cell transfusions).

RESULTS

Eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including 622 patients were identified and included in the analysis. Among these patients, it revealed no difference in long-term survival between the PPPD and PRPD groups (HR = 0.23, p = 0.11). There was a lower rate of DGE (RR = 2.35, p = 0.04, 95% CI, 1.06-5.21) with PRPD. Mortality, overall morbidity, pancreatic fistula, wound infection, postoperative bleeding, biliary leakage, ascites and gastroenterostomy leakage were not significantly different between the groups. PPPDs were performed more quickly than PRPDs (WMD = 53.25 minutes, p = 0.01, 95% CI, 12.53-93.97); and there was less estimated intraoperative blood loss (WMD = 365.21 ml, p = 0.006, 95% CI, 102.71-627.71) and fewer red blood cell transfusions (WMD = 0.29 U, p = 0.003, 95% CI, 0.10-0.48) in patients undergoing PPPD. The hospital stays showed no significant difference.

CONCLUSIONS

PPPD had advantages over PRPD in operating time, intraoperative blood loss and red blood cell transfusions, but had a significantly higher rate of DGE for periampullary and pancreatic carcinoma. PPPD and PRPD had comparable mortality and morbidity including pancreatic fistulas, wound infections, postoperative bleeding, biliary leakage, ascites and gastroenterostomy leakage. Our conclusions were limited by the available data. Further evaluations of high-quality RCTs are needed.

Pancreatoduodenectomy - preventing complications

Increased awareness of periampullary & pancreatic head cancers, and the accompanying improved outcomes following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), has possibly led to an increase in patients seeking treatment for the same. While there has definitely been a reduction in morbidity rates following PD in the last few decades, this decline has not mirrored the drastic fall in mortality. Amongst the foremost in the factors responsible for this reduction in mortality is the standardization of surgical technique and development of dedicated teams to manage all aspects of this demanding procedure. This review intends to provide the reader with an overview of major complications following this major surgery and measures to prevent them based on the authors' experience.

Factors associated with delayed gastric emptying after pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

The factors associated with delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after a pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) are not definitively known.

METHODS

From November 2011 through to May 2012, data were prospectively collected on 711 patients undergoing a pancreaticoduodenectomy or total pancreatectomy as part of the American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Pancreatectomy Demonstration Project. Bivariate and multivariate models were employed to determine the factors that predicted DGE.

RESULTS

In the 711 patients, the overall rate of DGE was 20.1%. In a bivariate analysis, intra-operative factors such as pylorus-preservation (47.1% versus 43.7%, P = 0.40), intra-operative drain placement (85.5%, versus 85.1%, P = 0.91) and an antecolic compared with a retrocolic gastrojejunostomy (60.1% versus 65.1%, P = 0.26) were not different between the DGE and no DGE groups. Pancreatic fistula formation (31.2% versus 10.1%), post-operative sepsis (21.7% versus 7.0%), organ space surgical site infection (SSI) (23.9% versus 7.9%), need for percutaneous drainage (23.0% versus 10.6%) and reoperation (10.6% versus 3.1%) were higher in patients with DGE (P < 0.0001). In a multivariable model, only pancreatic fistula, post-operative sepsis and reoperation were independently associated with DGE.

DISCUSSION

In this multicentre study, only post-operative complications were associated with DGE. Neither pylorus preservation nor route of enteric reconstruction (antecolic versus retrocolic) was associated with delayed gastric emptying.

External stent versus no stent for pancreaticojejunostomy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of an external pancreatic duct stent for reduction of the pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy remains controversial.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Reviews of each trial were conducted and data were extracted. The primary outcome was pancreatic fistula. Statistical pooling used the fixed or random effects model and reported as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with the corresponding 95 % confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Four RCTs including a total of 416 patients were detected. Methodological quality assessment revealed a better quality of all analyzed trials. Placing an external stent across pancreaticojejunal anastomosis could significantly reduce the incidence of pancreatic fistula (RR = 0.57, 95 % CI = 0.41-0.80, P = 0.001, I (2) = 0 %), overall morbidity (RR = 0.79, 95 % CI = 0.64-0.98, P = 0.03), and the length of hospital stay (MD = -3.98 days, 95 % CI = -6.42 to -1.54, P = 0.001, I (2) = 13 %). No significant difference was found in terms of hospital mortality, delayed gastric emptying, operation time, operative blood loss, blood replacement, and reoperation rate.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis provides compelling evidence that the application of an external pancreatic duct stent after pancreaticoduodenectomy can decrease the incidence of pancreatic leakage when compared with no stent. Moreover, the external drainage of pancreatic juice is associated with lower postoperative overall morbidity and shorter hospital stay.

Complications after pancreatic resection: diagnosis, prevention and management

BACKGROUND

Although mortality after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) or distal pancreatectomy (DP) has decreased, morbidity still remains high. The aim of this review article is to present, define, predict, prevent, and manage the main complications after pancreatic resection (PR).

METHODS

A non-systematic literature search on morbidity and mortality after PR was undertaken using the PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase databases.

RESULTS

The main complications after PR are delayed gastric emptying (DGE), pancreatic fistula (PF), and bleeding, as defined by the International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery. PF occurs in 10% to 15% of patients after PD and in 10% to 30% of patients after DP. The different techniques of pancreatic anastomosis and pancreatic remnant closure do not show significant advantages in the prevention of PF, nor does the perioperative use of somatostatin and its analogues. The trend is for conservative or interventional radiology therapy for PF (with enteral nutrition), which achieves a success rate of approximately 80%. DGE after PD occurs in 20% to 50% of patients. Prophylactic erythromycin may reduce the incidence of DGE. Gastric aspiration with erythromycin is usually effective in one to three weeks. Bleeding (gastrointestinal and intraabdominal) occurs in 4% to 16% of patients after PD and in 2% to 3% of patients after DP. Endovascular treatment can only be used for a haemodynamically stable patient. In cases of haemodynamic instability or associated septic complications, surgical treatment is necessary. In expert centres, the mortality rates can be less than 1% after DP and less than 3% after PD.

CONCLUSION

There is a need for improved strategies to prevent and treat complications after PR.

Pancreatic surgery: indications, complications, and implications for nutrition intervention

Pancreatic surgery is a complicated procedure leaving postoperative patients with an altered gastrointestinal (GI) anatomy and a potential for further surgical complications such as leaks and fistulas. Beyond surgical complications, these patients are prone to delayed gastric emptying, fat malabsorption, and hyperglycemia, with early satiety and poor appetite further compromising nutrition status. Many of these patients are malnourished prior to this major surgical procedure, and significant weight loss is common postoperatively. Does this affect their outcome? There seems to be a lack of consensus in this patient population regarding how to optimize nutrition and limit potential deleterious effects of this surgery. It is important to first understand the underlying disease condition and the effects to the gland, different forms of surgery with subsequent GI alterations, and common surgical and digestive complications. Once this is reviewed, existing nutrition support literature will be explored in attempts to determine the best nutrition management in this patient population.

Classic Whipple versus pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy in the ACS NSQIP

BACKGROUND

The classic Whipple operation carries substantial risk of complications. A pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy might confer the benefit of decreased perioperative morbidity, but existing data comparing both techniques are inconclusive.

METHODS

Using a propensity score model to adjust for potentially confounding differences in patient characteristics, 30-d mortality, operative time, red blood cell transfusion requirements, major complications, and length of hospital stay were compared between both techniques in the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Separate analyses were carried out for underlying malignancy or benign disease, as defined by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes.

RESULTS

A total of 6988 pancreaticoduodenectomies from 2005 through 2010 were included. In 5424 patients (77.6%) with underlying malignancy, there were no significant differences for 30-d mortality (2.4% versus 2.8%, P = 0.33) and major organ system complications (all P > 0.10). Patients undergoing the classic Whipple operation had a significantly longer operative time (389 versus 366 min, P < 0.01), longer length of hospital stay (13.1 versus 12.0 days, P < 0.01), and higher red blood cell transfusion requirements (1.0 versus 0.8 units, P < 0.01). Results were similar for 1564 patients (22.4%) with underlying benign disease, except for a higher occurrence of postoperative pulmonary (P = 0.02) and renal (P = 0.05) complications in patients undergoing the classic Whipple operation.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term outcomes after classic and pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy in this large, multicenter database are excellent, without significant differences in postoperative mortality and most major organ system complications. However, small advantages in resource and blood utilization may be accomplished with the pylorus-preserving technique.

Clinical risk factors of delayed gastric emptying in patients after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The clinical risk factors of delayed gastric emptying (DGE) in patients after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) remains controversial. Herein, we conducted a systematic review to quantify the associations between clinical risk factors and DGE in patients after conventional PD or pylorus preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPPD).

METHODS

A systematic search of electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, OVID, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library) for studies published from 1970 to 2012 was performed. Cohort, case-control studies, and randomized controlled trials that examined clinical risk factors of DGE were included.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies met final inclusion criteria (total n = 3579). From the pooled analyses, preoperative diabetes (OR 1.49, 95% CI, 1.03-2.17), pancreatic fistulas (OR 2.66, 95% CI, 1.65-4.28), and postoperative complications (OR 4.71, 95% CI, 2.61-8.50) were significantly associated with increased risk of DGE; while patients with preoperative biliary drainage (OR 0.68, 95% CI, 0.48-0.97) and antecolic reconstruction (OR 0.17, 95% CI, 0.07-0.41) had decreased risk of DGE development. Gender, malignant pathology, preoperative jaundice, intra-operative transfusion, PD vs. PPPD and early enteral feeding were not significantly associated with DGE development (all P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate that preoperative diabetes, pancreatic fistulas, and postoperative complications were clinical risk factors predictive for DGE. Antecolic reconstruction and preoperative biliary drainage result in a reduction in DGE. Knowledge of these risk factors may assist in identification and appropriate referral of patients at risk of DGE.

Pancreaticoduodenectomy for invasive pancreatic cancer (with video)

Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is the only treatment option that potentially provides a cure for pancreatic head cancer. Various arrangements and modifications have been proposed to achieve pathological margin negative (R0) resection safely. In this article, we introduce a standard procedure for PD, including pancreaticogastrostomy with invagination and mattress sutures (video clip provided), for invasive ductal carcinoma of the pancreatic head, with a description of the need-to-know pitfalls for Board-certified HBP surgeons in Japan. The important points in performing PD for pancreatic cancer are: (1) While dissecting connective tissue and nerve plexus as well as lymph nodes, maintain a dissection plane to expose the surfaces of vessels or other organs to be preserved to achieve R0 resection: i.e., while dissecting the anterior surface of the inferior vena cava and the right side of the superior mesenteric artery, these vessels should be completely exposed with the connective tissue and nerve plexuses being attached to the resection side. (2) There should be early interruption of the afferent blood supply via the inferior pancreaticoduodenal artery to reduce blood loss by avoiding congestion of the pancreatic head and to increase the operative safety (video clip provided). (3) Eligibility for PD should be carefully evaluated because there are many "resectable" but not many "curable" cases. In addition, the clinical significance of various modifications of the surgical techniques used for PD are also discussed.

Improvement of surgical and survival outcomes of patients with pancreatic cancer who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy: a Chinese experience

OBJECTIVE

To analyze our experience and the surgical and survival outcomes of patients with pancreatic carcinoma who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) by analysis of a retrospective cohort of 205 patients over a 10 years period.

METHODS

The patients were categorized into two 5-year periods: period 1, from 2000 January 1 to 2004 December 31(group 1, n = 48) and period 2, from 2005 January 1 to 2009 December 31(group 2, n = 157). We analysis the data using statistical software and find the improvement of surgical and survival outcomes of PD for pancreatic cancer in the past 10 years.

RESULTS

The two groups have similar age, sex distribution, comorbidity, preoperative serum tumor markers, patients number of preoperative biliary drainage and postoperative chemotherapy. More patients in group 2 underwent lymph nodes dissection (P = 0.031). And patients of group 2 had a better surgical outcomes and longer 5-year overall survival (8% vs. 19%, P = 0.036). The blood loss volume, transfusion volume, and the number of patients need blood transfusion were significantly fewer (P < 0.001) for the patients in group 2, however, the operation time was obviously lengthened (P = 0.002). Patients in Group 1 suffered more postoperative complications than those of the patients in group 2 (P = 0.021). A significant difference was reached for survival between the two group (P = 0.036).

CONCLUSIONS

A significant improvement of surgical and survival outcomes after PD for pancreatic cancer patients was achieved in the past 10 years. PD remains the only treatment option that potentially provides a cure for pancreatic head cancer, and postoperative chemotherapy may produce survival benefit.

The surgical management of pancreatic cancer

There have been significant advances made over the years in the areas of critical care, anesthesia, and surgical technique, which have led to improved mortality rates and survival after resection for pancreatic cancer. The standard of care is currently PD or PPPD for pancreatic cancers of the head, uncinate process, or neck and DP for pancreatic cancers of the body or tail. Resections are performed with the goals of negative margins and minimal blood loss, and referral to high-volume centers and surgeons is encouraged. However, 5-year survival rate after curative resection still remains at less than 20%. In an effort to improve survival and extend the limits of resectability, many centers have attempted extended lymphadenectomy and portal venous and even arterial resection and reconstruction. Extended lymphadenectomy has not led to improved survival for these patients. Portal vein resection has increased the number of patients amenable to resection, with equivalent survival rates compared with those of standard resections. Portal vein invasion is thus no longer considered a contraindication to resection at many large centers. Resection and reconstruction of involved arteries have been rarely performed and are currently not considerations for most patients. It is likely that future improvements in survival lie in the realm of adjuvant therapy. As chemotherapeutic and other tumor-directed agents continue to evolve and advance, this will hopefully lead to improved survival for patients undergoing surgical resection for pancreatic cancer.

Surgery for chronic pancreatitis

Chronic pancreatitis (CP) is progressive inflammatory process of the pancreas. Abdominal pain remains the most debilitating symptom affecting quality of life, apart from diabetes mellitus, steatorrhoea and weight loss. The treatment options have evolved over the past decades and are aimed to provide durable relief in pain with possible attempt to support or improve the failing endocrine and exocrine functions. Surgical treatment options have shown the potentials to provide superior long term results compared to the pharmacological and endoscopic modalities and are broadly divided in to drainage, resection and combination hybrid procedures. The choice is based on the morphology of the main pancreatic duct, presence of head mass and associated complication of CP. Knowing the basic nature of the disease, total pancreatectomy seems a curative option but not without significant morbidities. There is recent paradigm shift towards organ sparing surgical procedures with reasonable success. Despite recent advancement in the treatment modalities for CP the overall quality of life remains moderate which need further addressal.

Analysis of risk factors for delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after 387 pancreaticoduodenectomies with usage of 70 stapled reconstructions

BACKGROUND

Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is one of the most troublesome complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD).

METHODS

Between 2004 and 2009, 387 patients underwent PD and of these, 302 patients (78%) underwent pylorus-preserving PD. The stapled reconstruction of duodeno- or gastrojejunostomy was introduced in 2006, and 70 patients (18%) underwent stapled Roux-en-Y reconstruction. Postoperative DGE was defined based on the International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery classification, and grade B or C DGE was considered to be clinically relevant. Risk factors for DGE were evaluated using univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Four patients died in the hospital (1.0%). Postoperative DGE was found in 70 patients (18%). DGE was less frequently seen in stapled reconstruction than in hand-sewn reconstruction (7.2% vs. 21%, P < 0.001), and in single-layer anastomosis than in double-layer anastomosis (12% vs. 24%, P = 0.02). The multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the independent risk factors for DGE were postoperative pancreatic fistula (risk ratio [RR] 2.4, P = 0.002), hand-sewn reconstruction (RR 2.9, P = 0.03) and male (RR 2.2, P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

The method of alimentary reconstruction affected the occurrence of DGE. The incidence of DGE was less in stapled reconstruction than in hand-sewn reconstruction.

Delayed gastric emptying after pancreatoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Antecolic reconstruction after pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy (PPPD) has been reported to decrease the incidence of delayed gastric emptying (DGE), which is one of the main postoperative complications. Subtotal stomach-preserving PD (SSPPD), in which duodenum and pylorus ring were removed, was introduced for the purpose of decreasing the incidence of DGE. This prospective randomized control study was performed to assess whether antecolic reconstruction decreases the incidence of DGE compared with retrocolic reconstruction after SSPPD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-six patients were enrolled in this trial between May 2007 and June 2010. Twenty-two and 24 patients were randomized for the retrocolic and antecolic groups, respectively. The primary endpoint was DGE incidence.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of DGE in the retrocolic group was significantly higher than that in the antecolic group (50% versus 20.8%, P=0.0364). In particular, this difference was most striking in the incidence of DGE grade B/C (27.3% versus 4.2%, P=0.0234). Furthermore, patients in the retrocolic group required significantly longer time to full resumption of diet compared with the antecolic group. No significant difference was observed in other postoperative complications between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Antecolic reconstruction, and not retrocolic reconstruction, decreases DGE incidence after SSPPD.