Morbidity and mortality associated with pancreatogastrostomy and pancreatojejunostomy following partial pancreatoduodenectomy

Completion Pancreatectomy. Indications and Outcomes: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE (S)

Completion pancreatectomy (C.P.) is one acceptable treatment of choice in clinical scenarios such as management of post-pancreatectomy complications and recurrence in the pancreatic remnant. Studies referring to completion pancreatectomy as a distinct operation are limited, without emphasizing at the operation itself, rather reporting completion pancreatectomy as a possible option for treatment of various diseases. The identification of indications of CP in various pathologies and the clinical outcomes are therefore mandatory.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in the Pubmed and Scopus Databases (February 2020),guided by the PRISMA protocol, for all studies reporting CP as a surgical procedure with reference at indications for performing it combined with postoperative morbidity and/or mortality.

RESULTS

Out of 1647 studies, 32 studies from 10 countries with 2775 patients in total, of whom 561 (20.2%) CPs met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Inclusion year ranged from 1964 to 2018 and were published from 1992 until 2019. 17 studies with a total number of 249 CPs were performed for post-pancreatectomy complications. Mortality rate was 44.5% (111 out of 249). Morbidity rate was (72.6%). 12 studies with 225 CPs were performed for isolated local recurrence after initial resection with a morbidity rate of 21.5% and 0% mortality rate in the early postoperative period. Two studies with a total number of 12 patients reported CP as a treatment option for recurrent neuroendocrine neoplasms. The mortality in those studies was 8% (1/12) and the mean morbidity rate was 58.3% (7/12). Finally, CP for refractory chronic pancreatitis was presented in one study with morbidity and mortality rates of 19% and 0%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Completion pancreatectomy is a distinct treatment option for various pathologies. Morbidity and mortality rates depend on the indications of performing CP, the status performance of the patients and whether the operation is performed electively or urgently.

Management and outcomes of pseudoaneurysms presenting with late hemorrhage following pancreatic surgery: A six-year experience from a tertiary care center

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Late hemorrhage following pancreatic surgery is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Pseudoaneurysm (PSA) is an important source of late hemorrhage, which is effectively and safely managed by embolization. We aim to retrospectively review the outcomes of embolization for pseudoaneurysms causing late post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage over a period of six-years at our tertiary care center.

METHODS

Between 2014 and 2020, 616 pancreatic surgeries were performed and 25 patients had late hemorrhage (occurring > 24 hours post-operatively). The clinical parameters related to late hemorrhage, associated complications, embolization details, treatment success and their short-and long-term outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Sixteen of 25 patients had PSA on digital subtraction angiography. Embolization was performed in these patients with technical and clinical success rates of 94.1% and 100%, respectively. Compared to patients without PSA, patients with PSA had significant hemoglobin drop (2.5 g/dL vs. 1.5 g/dL, p = 0.01), higher incidence of sentinel bleed (50% vs. 11.1%, p = 0.05) and lower requirement for surgery for bleeding (0% vs. 44.4%, p = 0.02). Clincally relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula and bile leak were seen in 72% and 52% of patients, respectively. Eight of these embolized patients died due to sepsis. The long-term outcome was good, once the patients were discharged.

CONCLUSION

Late hemorrhage after pancreatic surgery was associated with high mortality due to complications such as pancreatic fistula and bile leak. Sentinel bleeding was an important clinical indicator of PSA. Angiographic embolization is safe and effective without any adverse short or long-term outcomes.

[Endoscopic management of complications in the hepatobiliary and pancreatic system and the tracheobronchial tree]

Endoscopic methods are nowadays a priceless tool for the treatment of postoperative complications after hepatobiliary, pancreatic and thoracic surgery. Endoscopic decompression of the biliary tract is the treatment of choice for biliary duct leakage after cholecystectomy, hepatic resection or liver transplantation. Postoperative biliary duct stenosis can also be successfully treated by endoscopic balloon dilatation and implantation of various endoprostheses in most of the patients. In the case of pancreatic fistulas, especially those occurring after central or distal pancreatic resections, endoscopic decompression of the pancreatic duct can significantly contribute to rapid healing. Additionally, interventional endosonography provides a valuable treatment option for transgastric drainage of postoperative fluid collections, which often accompany a pancreatic fistula. Various treatment alternatives have been described for the bronchoscopic treatment of bronchopleural and tracheoesophageal fistulas, which often lead to the rapid alleviation of symptoms and often to the definitive closure of the fistula.

Completion pancreatectomy or a pancreas-preserving procedure during relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy: a multicentre cohort study and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite the fact that primary percutaneous catheter drainage has become standard practice, some patients with pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy ultimately undergo a relaparotomy. The aim of this study was to compare completion pancreatectomy with a pancreas-preserving procedure in patients undergoing relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study of nine institutions included patients who underwent relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy from 2005-2018. Furthermore, a systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to the PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

From 4877 patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy, 786 (16 per cent) developed a pancreatic fistula grade B/C and 162 (3 per cent) underwent a relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula. Of these patients, 36 (22 per cent) underwent a completion pancreatectomy and 126 (78 per cent) a pancreas-preserving procedure. Mortality was higher after completion pancreatectomy (20 (56 per cent) versus 40 patients (32 per cent); P = 0.009), which remained after adjusting for sex, age, BMI, ASA score, previous reintervention, and organ failure in the 24 h before relaparotomy (adjusted odds ratio 2.55, 95 per cent c.i. 1.07 to 6.08). The proportion of additional reinterventions was not different between groups (23 (64 per cent) versus 84 patients (67 per cent); P = 0.756). The meta-analysis including 33 studies evaluating 745 patients, confirmed the association between completion pancreatectomy and mortality (Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model: odds ratio 1.99, 95 per cent c.i. 1.03 to 3.84).

CONCLUSION

Based on the current data, a pancreas-preserving procedure seems preferable to completion pancreatectomy in patients in whom a relaparotomy is deemed necessary for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy.

Contemporary Surgical, Oncological, and Survival Outcomes of Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Periampullary Tumours: a 5-Year Experience from Tertiary Cancer Center

With advances in surgical management of pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), mortality rate for PD has been reported to be less than 5%. Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains a major complication and morbidity after PD with incidence of up to 40%. This is a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent PD in a tertiary cancer referral center in southern India. Data was collected for the patients operated during the period from Jan 2014 to Dec 2018. Surgicopathological, oncological, and survival outcomes were described. Of 76 patients presumed as operable, 16 were excluded and data analyzed for 60 patients. Forty-four percent underwent classical Whipple's PD and 56% pylorus-preserving PD. The most common postoperative complications were wound infection (25%); pneumonia (20%); clinically relevant POPF (13%); and delayed gastric emptying (19%). Thirty-day in-hospital mortality was 5%, 90-day mortality was 8.3%, and fistula-related mortality was 1.6%. Ampullary cancer was the most common histology. Three-year survival rate was 23.3% with a mean overall survival of 33.2 months with significantly better survival in the node negative than positive group (41.3 vs 20.5 months, P = 0.003) and significantly lower survival in pancreatic head cancer than other tumor histologies (16.6 vs 37.3 months, P = 0.002). Multivariate analysis has shown pancreatic head histology (HR = 2.38, 95% CI (1.08-5.26), P = 0.033) and nodal positivity (HR = 2.38, 95% CI (1.27-4.44), P = 0.007) as poor prognostic factors. Pancreaticoduodenectomy is a safe operation in experienced hands. Adhering to a meticulous adaptable reproducible anastomotic technique with standard perioperative management strategies significantly decreases the operative morbidity and mortality.

Total pancreatectomy and pancreatic fistula: friend or foe?

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) still represents the major driver of surgical morbidity after pancreaticoduodenectomy. The purpose of this narrative review was to critically analyze current evidence supporting the use of total pancreatectomy (TP) to prevent the development of POPF in patients with high-risk pancreas, and to explore the role of completion total pancreatectomy (CP) in the management of severe POPF. Considering the encouraging perioperative outcomes, TP may represent a promising tool to avoid the morbidity related to an extremely high-risk pancreatic anastomosis in selected patients. Surgical management of severe POPF is only required in few critical scenarios. In this context, even if anecdotal, CP might play a role as last resort in expert hands.

Modified Technique for Wirsung-Pancreatogastric Anastomosis after Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Single Center Experience and Systematic Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

The mortality rate following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) has been decreasing over the past few years; nonetheless, the morbidity rate remains elevated. The most common complications after PD are post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) and delayed gastric emptying (DGE) syndrome. The issue as to which is the best reconstruction method for the treatment of the pancreatic remnant after PD is still a matter of debate. The aim of this study was to retrospectively analyze the morbidity rate in 100 consecutive PD reconstructed with Wirsung-Pancreato-Gastro-Anastomosis (WPGA), performed by a single surgeon applying a personal modification of the pancreatic reconstruction technique.

METHODS

During an 8-year period (May 2012 to March 2020), 100 consecutive patients underwent PD reconstructed with WPGA. The series included 57 males and 43 females (M/F 1.32), with a mean age of 68 (range 41-86) years. The 90-day morbidity and mortality were retrospectively analyzed. Additionally, a systematic review was conducted, comparing our technique with the existing literature on the topic.

RESULTS

We observed eight cases of clinically relevant POPF (8%), three cases of "primary" DGE (3%) and four patients suffering "secondary" DGE. The surgical morbidity and mortality rate were 26% and 6%, respectively. The median hospital stay was 13.6 days. The systematic review of the literature confirmed the originality of our modified technique for Wirsung-Pancreato-Gastro-Anastomosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our modified double-layer WPGA is associated with a very low incidence of POPF and DGE. Also, the technique avoids the risk of acute hemorrhage of the pancreatic parenchyma.

EUS-guided pancreatic ductal intervention: A comprehensive literature review

EUS has opened a new frontier in endoscopic techniques for accessing pancreatic ducts in patients with failed ERCP. The major indications of EUS-guided pancreatic duct intervention (EUS-PDI) are main pancreatic duct (MPD) strictures due to chronic pancreatitis or strictures of pancreaticojejunal or pancreaticogastric anastomosis after Whipple resection, which lead to recurrent acute pancreatitis. EUS-guided pancreaticogastro or duodenostomy offers an alternative to surgery when transpapillary drainage fails or is not possible. We provide an expert commentary and a brief overview on this relatively novel technique utilizing EUS-PDI creation in patients with impaired drainage of the MPD who have failed other conventional endoscopic techniques for MPD drainage and either are poor surgical candidates or are reluctant to undergo surgery.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic duct intervention and pancreaticogastrostomy using a novel cross-platform technique with small-caliber devices

Background and study aims  Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) has been used as an alternative to surgery to drain pancreatic ducts for treatment of disconnected pancreatic duct syndrome (DPDS). Previous techniques involved using needle-knife cautery, bougie dilation or a stent extraction screw to allow stent passage through the gastric wall and pancreatic parenchyma, with potential for severe complications including duct leak, especially if drainage fails. A novel technique employing EUS guided puncture of the main pancreatic duct (MPD) with a 19- or a 22-gauge needle, passage of an 0.018-guidewire, dilation of the tract with a small-diameter (4 F) angioplasty balloon and placement of 3F plastic stents with the pigtail curled inside the duct as an anchor. Methods  This is a retrospective case series at a single tertiary center. EUS-guided PG was considered when conventional endoscopic pancreatic duct drainage failed. Main outcomes included technical and clinic success and complications. Results  Eight patients underwent PG. Indications were DPDS (n = 4), stenotic pancreaticoenteral anastomosis after Whipple procedure (n = 3) and chronic pancreatitis with dilated MPD (n = 1). Median MPD diameter was 6.75 mm [IQR 2.8 - 7.6]. Technical success was achieved in seven of eight cases (88 %); angioplasty balloon passed into the pancreatic duct in all accessed ducts. There was one asymptomatic duct leak, and no major or delayed complications, with clinical improvement (complete or partial) in five of eight (71 %). Conclusions  EUS-guided PG using a small-caliber guidewire, 4F angioplasty balloon, and reverse 3F single pigtail stents offers a safe and atraumatic alternative without use of cautery.

Management of morbidity associated with pancreatic resection during cytoreductive surgery for epithelial ovarian cancer: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

In ovarian cancer (OC), survival benefit in case of complete cytoreduction with absence of residual tumor has been clearly demonstrated; however, it often requires extensive surgery. Particularly, pancreatic resection during cytoreduction, may severely impact perioperative morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate complication rates and related optimal management of ovarian cancer patients undergoing pancreatic resection as part of cytoreductive surgery.

METHODS

Literature was searched for relevant records reporting distal pancreatectomy for advanced ovarian cancer. All cohorts were rated for quality. We focused our analysis on complications related to pancreatic surgical procedures evaluating the following outcomes: pancreatic fistula (PF), abdominal abscess, pancreatitis, iatrogenic diabetes, hemorrhage from splenic vessels and pancreatic-surgery-related mortality.

RESULTS

The most frequent complication reported was PF. Similar rates of PF were reported after hand-sewn (20%) or stapled closure (24%). Continued drainage is the standard treatment, and often, the leak can be managed conservatively and does not require re-intervention. Abdominal abscess is the second most frequent complication and generally follows a non-adequately drained PF and often required re-laparotomy. Pancreatitis is a rare event that could be treated conservatively; however, death can occur in case of necrotic evolution. Cases of post-operative hemorrhage due to splenic vessel bleeding have been described and represent an emergency.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge of pancreatic surgery and management of possible complications ought to be present in the oncologic-gynecologic armamentarium. All patients should be referred to specialized, dedicated, tertiary centers in order to reduce, promptly recognize and optimally manage complications.

Systematic review of the incidence, presentation and management of gastroduodenal artery pseudoaneurysm after pancreatic resection

Background

Gastroduodenal artery (GDA) pseudoaneurysm is a serious complication following pancreatic resection, associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. This review aimed to report the incidence of GDA pseudoaneurysm after pancreatic surgery, and describe clinical presentation and management.

Methods

MEDLINE and Embase were searched systematically for clinical studies evaluating postoperative GDA pseudoaneurysm. Incidence was calculated by dividing total number of GDA pseudoaneurysms by the total number of pancreatic operations. Additional qualitative data related to GDA pseudoaneurysm presentation and management following pancreatic resection were extracted and reviewed from individual reports.

Results

Nine studies were selected for systematic review involving 4227 pancreatic operations with 55 GDA pseudoaneurysms, with a reported incidence of 1·3 (range 0·2–8·3) per cent. Additional data were extracted from 39 individual examples of GDA pseudoaneurysm from 14 studies. The median time for haemorrhage after surgery was at 15 (range 4–210) days. A preceding complication in the postoperative period was documented in four of 21 patients (67 per cent), and sentinel bleeding was observed in 14 of 20 patients (70 per cent). Postoperative complications after pseudoaneurysm management occurred in two‐thirds of the patients (14 of 21). The overall survival rate was 85 per cent (33 of 39).

Conclusion

GDA pseudoaneurysm is a rare yet serious cause of haemorrhage after pancreatic surgery, with high mortality. The majority of the patients had a preceding complication. Sentinel bleeding was an important clinical indicator.

Randomized trial of oral versus enteral feeding for patients with postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Whether continued oral feeding may have a negative impact on healing of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is unclear. The aim was to test the hypothesis that oral feeding is non-inferior to enteral feeding in closure of POPF after pancreatoduodenectomy, and to clarify the effects of oral feeding on the duration and grade of POPF.

METHODS

This multicentre, non-inferiority randomized trial of oral or enteral feeding of patients with POPF after pancreatoduodenectomy recruited patients between August 2013 and September 2016. The primary efficacy outcome was the 30-day fistula closure rate. The prespecified non-inferiority margin was 15 per cent. Other efficacy outcomes included grade of fistula, and hospital stay and costs.

RESULTS

A total of 114 patients were included, and received oral (57) or enteral (57) feeding. The two groups were balanced in baseline characteristics and no patient was lost to follow-up. In intention-to-treat analysis, oral feeding was non-inferior to enteral feeding in terms of 30-day fistula closure rate (88 versus 89 per cent respectively; difference -1·8 per cent, lower limit of 95 per cent c.i. -14·4 per cent; P = 0·020 for non-inferiority). Compared with enteral feeding, oral feeding significantly reduced hospital costs and duration of stay. No significant differences were noted in the number of patients whose POPF evolved into grade B/C, or other outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Oral feeding in patients with POPF after pancreatoduodenectomy did not increase the duration or grade of POPF, and was associated with reduced duration of stay and hospital costs. Registration number: NCT01755260 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Laparoscopic Intracorporeal Pancreaticogastrostomy in Total Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy-A Novel Anastomotic Technique

Novel pancreaticogastric anastomosis technique in laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy which is simple, feasible to perform, provides secure fixation between stomach and pancreas. The aim of our article is to describe our technique of intracorporeal pancreaticogastrostomy as a promising approach for future widespread application.

Comparison of clinical outcomes between mesh-reinforced pancreatojejunostomy and pancreatogastrostomy following pancreaticoduodenectomy: a cohort study

Background

Postoperative complications, especially postoperative pancreatic fistulas, remain the major concern following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Mesh-reinforced pancreatic anastomoses, including pancreatojejunostomy (PJ) and pancreatogastrostomy (PG), are a new effective technique in PD. This study was conducted to analyze the safety and efficacy of this new technique and to compare the results of mesh-reinforced PJ vs PG.

Methods

A total of 110 patients who underwent PD between August 2005 and January 2016 were eligible in this study. Perioperative and postoperative data of patients with a mesh-reinforced technique were analyzed. Data were also grouped according to the procedure performed: mesh-reinforced PJ and mesh-reinforced PG.

Results

Among patients undergoing PD with the mesh-reinforced technique, 42 had postoperative complications, and the comprehensive complication index (CCI) was 32.7 ± 2.5. Only 10% of patients had pancreatic fistula; three were grade A, six were grade B, and two were grade C. Biliary fistula occurred in only 8.2% of patients. Patients undergoing mesh-reinforced PG showed a significantly lower rate of CCI than did mesh-reinforced PJ patients (27.0 ± 2.1 vs 37.0 ± 3.9, p < 0.05). The mesh-reinforced PG was also favored over mesh-reinforced PJ because of significant differences in intra-abdominal fluid collection (5.9% vs 18.6%, p < 0.05) and delayed gastric emptying (3.9% vs 15.3%, p < 0.05).

Conclusions

PD with the mesh-reinforced technique was a safe and effective method of decreasing postoperative pancreatic fistula. Compared with mesh-reinforced PJ, mesh-reinforced PG did not show significant differences in the rates of pancreatic fistula or biliary fistula. However, CCI, intra-abdominal fluid collection, and delayed gastric emptying were significantly reduced in patients with mesh-reinforced PG.

Efficacy of the prophylactic use of octreotide for the prevention of complications after pancreatic resection: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The use of octreotide prophylaxis in the prevention of complications after pancreatic resection remains controversial. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of octreotide prophylactic treatment to prevent complications after pancreatic resection.

METHODS

Five databases (PubMed, Medline, SinoMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library) were searched for eligible studies from 1980 to November 2016 with the limitation of human subjects and randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Data were extracted independently and were analyzed using RevMan statistical software version 5.3 (Cochrane Collaboration, http://tech.cochrane.org/revman/download). Weighted mean differences (WMDs), risk ratios (RRs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias.

RESULTS

Twelve RCTs comprising 1902 patients were identified as eligible. The methodological quality of the trials ranged from low to moderate. A pooled analysis of effectiveness based on the data from each study revealed that octreotide could significantly reduce the rate of pancreatic fistula (PF) after pancreatic resection (RR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.57-0.98, P = .04). The same findings were discovered in multicenter and European subgroups with a subgroup analysis; no obvious differences were noted in American, Asian, and single-center subgroup analyses. An equal effect was observed between the use or non-use of octreotide groups regarding mortality (RR = 1.24, 95% CI = 0.77-2.02, P = .38). Octreotide had no advantages in regards to mortality improvement. The total numbers of complications associated with the use or non-use of octreotide were similar (RR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.58-1.03, P = .08). Among the high-risk group, octreotide was more effective in reducing complications (RR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.46-0.82, P = .0009). Compared with the patients who did not receive prophylactic treatment, the patients who underwent pancreatic resection benefited from octreotide because it had better efficacy in preventing fluid collection and postoperative pancreatitis.

CONCLUSION

The prophylactic use of octreotide is suitable for preventing postoperative complications, especially PF and fluid collection as well as postoperative pancreatitis. However, no obvious differences were noted regarding mortality. In view of the clinical heterogeneity and varying definitions of PF, whether these conclusions are broadly applicable should be further determined in future studies.

Pancreatic anastomosis after pancreatoduodenectomy: A position statement by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS)

BACKGROUND

Clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (grades B and C of the ISGPS definition) remains the most troublesome complication after pancreatoduodenectomy. The approach to management of the pancreatic remnant via some form of pancreatico-enteric anastomosis determines the incidence and severity of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula. Despite numerous trials comparing diverse pancreatico-enteric anastomosis techniques and other adjunctive strategies (pancreatic duct stenting, somatostatin analogues, etc), currently, there is no clear consensus regarding the ideal method of pancreatico-enteric anastomosis.

METHODS

An international panel of pancreatic surgeons working in well-known, high-volume centers reviewed the best contemporary literature concerning pancreatico-enteric anastomosis and worked to develop a position statement on pancreatic anastomosis after pancreatoduodenectomy.

RESULTS

There is inherent risk assumed by creating a pancreatico-enteric anastomosis based on factors related to the gland (eg, parenchymal texture, disease pathology). None of the technical variations of pancreaticojejunal or pancreaticogastric anastomosis, such as duct-mucosa, invagination method, and binding technique, have been found to be consistently superior to another. Randomized trials and meta-analyses comparing pancreaticogastrostomy versus pancreaticojejunostomy yield conflicting results and are inherently prone to bias due to marked heterogeneity in the studies. The benefit of stenting the pancreatico-enteric anastomosis to decrease clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula is not supported by high-level evidence. While controversial, somatostatin analogues appear to decrease perioperative complications but not mortality, although consistent data across the more than 20 studies addressing this topic are lacking. The Fistula Risk Score is useful for predicting postoperative pancreatic fistula as well as for comparing outcomes of pancreatico-enteric anastomosis across studies.

CONCLUSION

Currently, no specific technique can eliminate development of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula. While consistent practice of any standardized technique may decrease the rate of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula, experienced surgeons can have lower postoperative pancreatic fistula rates performing a variety of techniques depending on the clinical situation. There is no clear evidence on the benefit of internal or external stenting after pancreatico-enteric anastomosis. The use of somatostatin analogues may be important in decreasing morbidity after pancreatoduodenectomy, but it remains controversial. Future studies should focus on novel approaches to decrease the rate of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula with appropriate risk adjustment.

An international multicenter study comparing EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage with enteroscopy-assisted endoscopic retrograde pancreatography after Whipple surgery

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic management of post-Whipple pancreatic adverse events (AEs) with enteroscopy-assisted endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (e-ERP) is associated with high failure rates. EUS-guided pancreatic duct drainage (EUS-PDD) has shown promising results; however, no comparative data have been done for these 2 modalities. The goal of this study is to compare EUS-PDD with e-ERP in terms of technical success (PDD through dilation/stent), clinical success (improvement/resolution of pancreatic-type symptoms), and AE rates in patients with post-Whipple anatomy.

METHODS

This is an international multicenter comparative retrospective study at 7 tertiary centers (2 United States, 2 European, 2 Asian, and 1 South American). All consecutive patients who underwent EUS-PDD or e-ERP between January 2010 and August 2015 were included.

RESULTS

In total, 66 patients (mean age, 57 years; 48% women) and 75 procedures were identified with 40 in EUS-PDD and 35 in e-ERP. Technical success was achieved in 92.5% of procedures in the EUS-PDD group compared with 20% of procedures in the e-ERP group (OR, 49.3; P < .001). Clinical success (per patient) was attained in 87.5% of procedures in the EUS-PDD group compared with 23.1% in the e-ERP group (OR, 23.3; P < .001). AEs occurred more commonly in the EUS-PDD group (35% vs 2.9%, P < .001). However, all AEs were rated as mild or moderate. Procedure time and length of stay were not significantly different between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-PDD is superior to e-ERP in post-Whipple anatomy in terms of efficacy with acceptable safety. As such, EUS-PDD should be considered as a potential first-line treatment in post-pancreaticoduodenectomy anatomy when necessary expertise is available.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreaticobiliary intervention in patients with surgically altered anatomy and inaccessible papillae: A review of current literature

The management of pancreaticobiliary disease in patients with surgically altered anatomy is a growing problem for gastroenterologists today. Over the years, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has emerged as an important diagnostic and therapeutic modality in the treatment of pancreaticobiliary disease. Patient anatomy has become increasingly complex due to advances in surgical resection of pancreaticobiliary disease and EUS has emerged as the therapy of choice when endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography failed cannulation or when the papilla is inaccessible such as in gastric obstruction or duodenal obstruction. The current article gives a comprehensive review of the current literature for EUS-guided intervention of the pancreaticobiliary tract in patients with altered surgical anatomy.

Pancreaticojejunostomy Versus Pancreaticogastrostomy After Pancreaticoduodenectomy: An Up-to-date Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The reconstruction of the pancreas after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is a crucial factor in preventing postoperative complications as pancreatic anastomosis failure is associated with a high morbidity rate and contributes to prolonged hospitalization and mortality. Several techniques have been described for the reconstruction of pancreatic digestive continuity in the attempt to minimize the risk of a pancreatic fistula. The aim of this study was to compare the results of pancreaticogastrostomy and pancreaticojejunostomy after PD.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to January 2015 comparing patients with pancreaticogastrostomy (PG group) versus pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ group). Two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility and quality of the studies. The meta-analysis was conducted using either the fixed-effect or the random-effect model.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs describing 1,211 patients were identified for inclusion in the study. The meta-analysis shows that the PG group had a significantly lower incidence rate of postoperative pancreatic fistulas [OR 0.64 (95% confidence interval 0.46-0.86), p = .003], intra-abdominal abscesses [OR 0.53 (95% CI, 0.33-0.85), p = .009] and length of hospital stay [MD -1.62; (95% CI 2.63-0.61), p = .002] than the PJ group, while biliary fistula, mortality, morbidity, rate of delayed gastric emptying, reoperation, and bleeding did not differ between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggests that the most effective treatment for reconstruction of pancreatic continuity after pancreatoduodenectomy is pancreaticogastrostomy. However, the advantage of the latter could potentially be demonstrated through further RCTs, including only patients at high risk of developing pancreatic fistulas.

In search of the best reconstructive technique after pancreaticoduodenectomy: pancreaticojejunostomy versus pancreaticogastrostomy

BACKGROUND

It has been suggested that pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) is a safer reconstruction than pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ), resulting in lower morbidity, including lower pancreatic leak rates and decreased postoperative mortality. We compared PJ and PG after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD).

METHODS

A randomized clinical trial was designed. It was stopped with 50% accrual. Patients underwent either PG or PJ reconstruction. The primary outcome was the pancreatic fistula rate, and the secondary outcomes were overall morbidity and mortality. We used the Student t, Mann-Whitney U and χ(2) tests for intention to treat analysis. The effect of randomization, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, soft pancreatic texture and use of pancreatic stent on overall complications and fistula rates was calculated using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Our trial included 98 patients. The rate of pancreatic fistula formation was 18% in the PJ and 25% in the PG groups (p = 0.40). Postoperative complications occurred in 48% of patients in the PJ and 58% in the PG groups (p = 0.31). There were no significant predictors of overall complications in the multivariate analysis. Only soft pancreatic gland predicted the occurrence of pancreatic fistula (odds ratio 5.89, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

There was no difference in the rates of pancreatic leak/fistula, overall complications or mortality between patients undergoing PG and and those undergoing PJ after PD.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of somatostatin analogues in the prevention of postoperative complication after pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

The use of somatostatin analogues (SAs) following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is controversial.

METHOD

Literature databases were searched systematically for relevant articles. A meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating prophylactic SAs in PD was performed.

RESULTS

Fifteen RCTs involving 1,352 patients were included. There was a towards reduced incidences of pancreatic fistulas (p = 0.26), clinically significant pancreatic fistulas (p = 0.08), and bleeding (p = 0.05) in prophylactic SAs group. In subgroup analyses, prophylactic somatostatin significantly reduced the incidence of pancreatic fistulas(p = 0.02), with a nonsignificant trend toward reduced incidence of clinically significantly pancreatic fistulas (p = 0.06).Pasireotide significantly reduced the incidence of clinically significantly pancreatic fistulas (p = 0.03). Octreotide had no influence on the incidence of pancreatic fistulas.

CONCLUSION

The current best evidence suggests prophylactic treatment with somatostatin or pasireotide has a potential role in reducing the incidence of pancreatic fistulas, while octreotide had no influence on the incidence of pancreatic fistulas.High-quality RCTs assessing the role of somatostatin and pasireotide are required for further verification.

Laparoscopic pancreatic reconstruction technique following laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy

With the advance of laparoscopic experiences and techniques, it is carefully regarded that laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (lap-PD) is feasible and safe in managing perimapullary pancreatic pathology. Especially, laparoscopic management of remnant pancreas can be a critical step toward completeness of minimally invasive PD. According to available published reports, there is a wide range of technical differences in choosing surgical options in managing remnant pancreas after lap-PD. For the evidence-based surgical approach, it would be ideal to test potential techniques by randomized controlled trials, but, currently, it is thought to be very difficult to expect those clinical trials to be successful because there are still a lack of expert surgeons with sound surgical techniques and experience. In addition, lap-PD is so complicated and technically demanding that many surgeons are still questioning whether this surgical approach could be standardized and popular like laparoscopic cholecystectomy. In general, surgical options are usually chosen based on following question: (1) Is it simple? (2) Is it easy and feasible? (3) Is it secure and safe? (4) Is there any supporting scientific evidence? It would be interesting to estimate which surgical technique would be appropriate in managing remnant pancreas under these considerations. It is hoped that a well standardized multicenter-based randomized control study would be successful to test this fundamental issues based on sound surgical techniques and scientific background.

Evaluation of a new modification of pancreaticogastrostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy: anastomosis of the pancreatic duct to the gastric mucosa with invagination of the pancreatic remnant end into the posterior gastric wall for patients with cancer head of pancreas and periampullary carcinoma in terms of postoperative pancreatic fistula formation

Background/Objectives. Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains the main problem after pancreaticoduodenectomy and determines to a large extent the final outcome. We describe a new modification of pancreaticogastrostomy which combines duct to mucosa anastomosis with suturing the pancreatic capsule to posterior gastric wall and then invaginating the pancreatic remnant into the posterior gastric wall. This study was designed to assess the results of this new modification of pancreaticogastrostomy. Methods. The newly modified pancreaticogastrostomy was applied to 37 consecutive patients after pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary cancer (64.86%) or cancer head of the pancreas (35.14%). Eighteen patients (48.65%) had a soft pancreatic remnant, 13 patients (35.14%) had firm pancreatic remnant, and 6 patients (16.22%) had intermediate texture of pancreatic remnant. Rate of mortality, early postoperative complications, and hospital stay were also reported. Results. Operative mortality was zero and morbidity was 29.73%. Only three patients (8.11%) developed pancreatic leaks; they were treated conservatively. Eight patients (16.1%) had delayed gastric emptying, one patient (2.70%) had minor hemorrhage, one patient (2.70%) had biliary leak, and four patients (10.81%) had superficial wound infection. Conclusions. The new modified pancreatogastrostomy seems safe and reliable with low rate of POPF. However, further prospective controlled trials are essential to support these results.

Pancreaticogastrostomy versus pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The aim of this systematic review was to compare postoperative outcomes between pancreaticogastrostomy and pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

METHODS

Six databases were systematically reviewed to identify randomized controlled trials comparing pancreaticogastrostomy and pancreaticojejunostomy. Studies reporting postoperative complications, reoperations, and mortality were included (PROSPERO registration number CRD42013005383).

RESULTS

The search provided a total of 1,646 references. Seven studies were selected including 1,121 patients, 562 in the pancreaticogastrostomy group and 559 in the pancreaticojejunostomy group. Overall incidence of pancreatic fistula and the incidence of more severe fistulas (grade B/C) were lower in the pancreaticogastrostomy group (relative risk 0.67; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52 to 0.86; p = 0.002 and relative risk 0.61; 95 % CI 0.40 to 0.93; p = 0.02). Abdominal collections were more frequent in the pancreaticojejunostomy group. However, pancreaticogastrostomy was associated with an increased risk of postoperative intraluminal hemorrhage, and there were no differences in overall morbidity, reoperations, or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, a reduction in the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula in the pancreaticogastrostomy group was observed. Although this evidence comes from randomized trials, pancreaticogastrostomy cannot be considered superior to pancreaticojejunostomy due to the presence of clinical heterogeneity among studies and the absence of differences in overall morbidity, reoperations, and mortality.

Meta-analysis of pancreaticogastrostomy versus pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Surgical reconstruction following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Because of great variability in definitions of specific complications, it remains unclear whether there is a difference in complication rates following the two commonest types of reconstruction, pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) and pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ). Published consensus definitions for postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) have led to a series of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) uniquely placed to address this question.

METHODS

A literature search was carried out to identify all RCTs comparing postoperative complications of PG versus PJ reconstruction following PD published between January 1995 and December 2013. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95 percent confidence intervals (c.i.) were calculated using fixed-effect or random-effects models.

RESULTS

In total, seven RCTs with 1121 patients were included. Four of these trials applied definitions as published by the International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula (ISGPF). Using ISGPF definitions, the incidence of POPF was lower in patients undergoing PG than in those having PJ (OR 0·50, 95 per cent c.i. 0·34 to 0·73; P < 0·001). Using definitions applied by each individual study, PG was associated with significantly lower rates of POPF (OR 0·51, 0·36 to 0·71; P < 0·001), intra-abdominal fluid collection (OR 0·50, 0·34 to 0·74; P < 0·001) and biliary fistula (OR 0·42, 0·18 to 0·93; P = 0·03) than PJ.

CONCLUSION

Meta-analysis of four RCTs based on ISGPF criteria, and seven RCTs using non-standard criteria, revealed that PG reduced the incidence of POPF after PD compared with PJ.

Pancreaticogastrostomy versus pancreaticojejunostomy

BACKGROUND

It has long been debated whether pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) or pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) is the better choice for reconstruction after pancreaticoduodenectomy. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the two techniques.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PG with PJ published from January 1995 to January 2014 were searched electronically using PubMed, Medline, and Cochrane Library. Published data of these RCTs were analyzed using either fixed-effects model or random-effects model.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs were included in this meta-analysis, with a total of 1121 patients (562 in PG, 559 in PJ). The incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula and intra-abdominal fluid collection were significantly lower in PG than in PJ (respectively: odds ratio = 0.53 [0.37, 0.74], P < 0.001; odds ratio = 0.48 [0.30, 0.76], P < 0.01), no significant difference could be found for delayed gastric emptying, hemorrhage, morbidity, reoperation rate, and mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence from RCTs suggests that PG technique is associated with a lower rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula and intra-abdominal fluid collection than PJ.

Randomized clinical trial of pancreaticogastrostomy versus pancreaticojejunostomy on the rate and severity of pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leakage of pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) remains the single most important source of morbidity after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). The primary aim of this randomized clinical trial comparing PG with PJ after PD was to test the hypothesis that invaginated PG would result in a lower rate and severity of pancreatic fistula.

METHODS

Patients undergoing PD were randomized to receive either a duct-to-duct PJ or a double-layer invaginated PG. The primary endpoint was the rate of pancreatic fistula, using the definition of the International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula. Secondary endpoints were the evaluation of severe abdominal complications (Clavien-Dindo grade IIIa or above), endocrine and exocrine function.

RESULTS

Of 123 patients randomized, 58 underwent PJ and 65 had PG. The incidence of pancreatic fistula was significantly higher following PJ than for PG (20 of 58 versus 10 of 65 respectively; P = 0.014), as was the severity of pancreatic fistula (grade A: 2 versus 5 per cent; grade B-C: 33 versus 11 per cent; P = 0.006). The hospital readmission rate for complications was significantly lower after PG (6 versus 24 per cent; P = 0.005), weight loss was lower (P = 0.025) and exocrine function better (P = 0.022).

CONCLUSION

The rate and severity of pancreatic fistula was significantly lower with this PG technique compared with that following PJ.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN58328599 (http://www.controlled-trials.com).

Pancreatic fistula after a pancreaticoduodenectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma and its association with morbidity: a multicentre study of the French Surgical Association

BACKGROUNDS

A pancreatic fistula (PF) is the most relevant complication after a pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). This retrospective multicentric study attempts to elucidate the risk factors and complications of a PF in a large cohort of patients undergoing a PD for ductal adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

Using a survey tool, clinical data of 1325 patients undergoing a PD for ductal adenocarcinoma at 37 institutions, between January 2004 and December 2009, were collected. Peri-operative risk factors associated with PF and its association with morbidity and mortality were assessed. Morbidity and PF were graded according to the ISGPF (International Study group for pancreatic fistula) definition and the Dindo-Clavien classification.

RESULTS

Overall PF, mortality, morbidity and relaparotomy rates were 14.3%, 3.8%, 54.4% and 11.7%, respectively. PF occurred more frequently after a pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) compared with a pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) (16.8% vs. 10.4%; P = 0.0012). Independent risk factors for PF by multivariate analysis were absence of pre-operative diabetes (P = 0.0014), PJ reconstruction (P = 0.0035), soft pancreatic parenchyma (P < 0.0001) and low-volume centre (P = 0.0286). Clinically relevant PF (grade B and C) and severe complications (Dindo-Clavien grade IIIB, IV, V) were significantly more frequent after PJ than PG (71.6% vs. 28.3%; P = 0.030 and 24.8% vs. 19.1%; P = 0.015, respectively). Overall mortality and relaparotomy rates were similar after PG and PJ.

CONCLUSIONS

A soft pancreatic parenchyma, the absence of pre-operative diabetes, PJ and low-volume centre are independent risk factors for PF after PD for ductal adenocarcinoma. A significantly higher incidence and clinical severity of PF are associated with PJ.

Pancreatoduodenectomy--current status of surgical and perioperative techniques in Germany

BACKGROUND

Pancreatoduodenectomy in Germany is performed by a broad range of hospitals. A diversity of operative techniques is employed as no guidelines exist for intra- and perioperative management. We carried out a national survey to determine the de facto German standards for pancreatoduodenectomy, assess quality assurance measures, and identify relevant issues for further investigation.

METHODS

A questionnaire evaluating major outcome variables, case load, preferred surgical procedures, and perioperative management during pancreatoduodenectomy was developed and sent to 211 German hospitals performing >12 pancreatoduodenectomies per year (requirement for certification as a pancreas center). Statistical analysis was carried out using the Fisher Exact, Mann-Whitney U, and Spearman tests.

RESULTS

The final response rate was 86 % (182/211). The preferred technique and de facto German standard for pancreatoduodenectomy was pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy with pancreatojejunostomy carried out via duct-to-mucosa anastomosis with interrupted sutures using PDS 4.0. The minority of German pancreas centers were certified (18-48 %). The certification rate increased with higher capacity levels and case load (P < 0.05); however, significant correlations between the fistula rate and hospital case load, hospital capacity level, or hospital certification status were not seen.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed a distinct variety of management strategies for pancreatic surgery and available evidence-based data was not necessarily translated into clinical practice. The limited certification rate represented a shortcoming of quality assurance. The data emphasize the need for further trials to answer the questions whether hospital certifications and omission of drains improve outcome after pancreatoduodenectomy and for the establishment of guidelines for pancreatoduodenectomy.

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.

Surgical treatment of severe pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy by wirsungostomy and repeat pancreatico-jejunal anastomosis

BACKGROUND

After pancreaticoduodenectomy, severe pancreatic fistula may require salvage relaparotomy in patients with largely disrupted pancreaticojejunal anastomosis. Completion pancreatectomy remains the gold standard but yields high mortality and severe long-term repercussions. The authors report the results of a pancreas-preserving strategy used in this life-threatening condition.

METHODS

Two hundred fifty-four pancreaticoduodenectomies with pancreaticojejunal anastomosis were performed between 2005 and 2011; 21 patients underwent salvage relaparotomy for grade C pancreatic fistula. Largely dehiscent pancreaticojejunal anastomoses were dismantled in 16 patients. Four patients underwent completion pancreatectomy, whereas in 12 patients detailed here, the remaining pancreas was preserved and drained by wirsungostomy with exteriorization or closure of the jejunal stump. Repeat pancreaticojejunal anastomosis was later planned to preserve pancreatic function.

RESULTS

One patient died of recurrent hemorrhage on day 1 after wirsungostomy (8.3%). All but 1 survivor developed postoperative complications, and 3 needed reoperation before hospital discharge. The median hospital stay was 62 days (range, 29 to 156 days). After a median delay of 130 days (range, 91 to 240 days) from salvage relaparotomy, repeat pancreaticojejunostomy was attempted in 10 patients and was successful in 9 (1 completion pancreatectomy was performed). One patient died postoperatively (10%). Long-term endocrine function was unaltered in 66% of patients who benefited from this conservative strategy.

CONCLUSIONS

This pancreas-preserving strategy yielded a whole mortality rate of 17% for largely disrupted pancreaticojejunal anastomosis requiring salvage relaparotomy. It compares favorably with systematic completion pancreatectomy and achieved preservation of remnant pancreatic function in 75% of patients.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided pancreatic duct access: techniques and literature review of pancreatography, transmural drainage and rendezvous techniques

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided (EUS)-guided pancreatic interventions have gained increasing attention. Here we review EUS-guided pancreatic duct (PD) access techniques and outcomes. EUS-guided PD intervention is divided into two types, antegrade and rendezvous techniques, following EUS-guided pancreatography. In the antegrade technique, pancreaticoenterostomy is carried out by stent placement between the PD and the stomach, duodenum, or jejunum. Transenteric antegrade PD stenting is conducted by stent placement, advancing anteriorly into the PD through the pancreatic tract. The rendezvous technique is carried out by using a guidewire through the papilla or anastomotic site for retrograde stent insertion. In terms of EUS-guided PD stenting, 11 case reports totaling 75 patients (35 normal anatomy, 40 altered anatomy) have been published. The technical success rate was greater than 70%. Early adverse events, including severe hematoma and severe pancreatitis,occurred in seven (63.6%) of 11 reports. Regarding the rendezvous technique, 12 case reports totaling 52 patients (22 normal anatomy, 30 altered anatomy) have been published. The technical success rate ranged from 25% to 100%. It was 48% in one report that involved more than 20 cases. Once stents were placed, all patients became free of symptoms. Early mild adverse events occurred in four (36.4%) of 11 reports. In conclusion, although it can be risky because of possible serious or even fatal adverse events, including pancreatic juice leakage, perforation and severe acute pancreatitis, EUS-PD access seems to be promising for treating symptomatic pancreatic diseases caused by PD stricture and pancreaticoenterostomy stricture.

Prediction of pancreatic anastomotic failure after pancreatoduodenectomy: the use of preoperative, quantitative computed tomography to measure remnant pancreatic volume and body composition

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether remnant pancreatic volume (RPV), subcutaneous/visceral adipose tissue(SAT/VAT) area, and skeletal muscle (SM) area calculated from preoperative computed tomography (CT) can predict the occurrence of pancreatic anastomotic failure (PAF) after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD).

BACKGROUND

Increased body mass index, small main pancreatic duct, and soft pancreatic texture are well-established predictors of PAF after PD. The impact on PAF of anthropomorphic measurements, such as RPV and body composition, is unknown.

METHODS

In 173 patients undergoing PD from 2004 to 2009, cross sections of SAT/VAT/SM area were quantitated volumetrically, respectively, from preoperative CT. RPV was calculated from the CT as the sum of pancreatic tissue area to the left of the presumed pancreatic transection site. The predictive ability for multiple models using combinations of body mass index, RPV, SAT/VAT area, SM area, main pancreatic duct size, and pancreatic gland texture was described using a concordance index (c-index).

RESULTS

Clinically relevant PAF occurred in 22 patients (13%). Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified RPV (P = 0.0012), VAT area (P = 0.0003), and SM area (P = 0.0006) as independent predictors of PAF. Using previously identified risk factors, the best 2-predictor model (body mass index and pancreatic duct size) resulted in a c-index of 0.748. Using anthropomorphic factors, however, the 2-predictor model using VAT and SM areas revealed a superior c-index of 0.959.

CONCLUSIONS

Our 2-predictor model using VAT area and SM area based on volumetric quantification using preoperative CT may offer clinical benefit as an objective prognostic measure to predict clinically relevant PAF after PD.

Options and limitations in applying the fistula classification by the International Study Group for Pancreatic Fistula

BACKGROUND

Because of its retrospective character, the classification system of the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula (ISGPF) lacks prognostic capacity regarding fistula-related complications. This study aimed to evaluate the options and limitations of the ISGPF classification system and to identify risk factors with respect to clinical decision making.

METHODS

Between 1992 and 2009, 1966 patients underwent surgery of the pancreas. All patient data were entered into a prospective clinical data management system.

RESULTS

After surgery, 276 patients (14%) developed postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). ISGPF type A fistula was seen in 69 patients (25%), type B in 110 (39.9%), and type C in 97 (34.1%). Solely due to their death, 16 patients had to be classified as type C fistula, even though they suffered only type A or B. Compared to genuine C fistulas, we were not able to detect any significant predictors, which may allow to distinguish the development in their further clinical course. The level of drainage amylase is of no use, whereas univariate analysis identified underlying disease, type of operation, and high levels of serum amylase or bilirubin on the day of onset of POPF to be prognostic parameters for reoperation. Multivariate analysis found elevated serum C-reactive protein to be an independent factor for increased in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The ISGPF classification system has its limitations in clinical decision making, because it does not adequately describe a large subgroup of patients. To improve clinical decision making about management of patients, it is crucial that the ISGPF classification system is merged with newer clinical data.

Toward defining grade C pancreatic fistula following pancreaticoduodenectomy: incidence, risk factors, management and outcome

BACKGROUND

In 2005 the International Study Group for Pancreatic Fistula (ISGPF) created a definition and grading system for pancreatic fistulae (PF) in which grade C denotes the most severe and potentially life-threatening type. Factors and outcomes associated with grade C fistulae have been ill defined.

METHODS

Systematic searches of PubMed and EMBASE were conducted by two independent reviewers utilizing the keywords 'pancreaticoduodenectomy' (PD) and 'pancreatic fistula'. Inclusion criteria were: (i) a sample of ≥100 patients; (ii) consecutive accrual of all pathologies, and (iii) use of the ISGPF definition and grading system. Quality appraisal and data extraction were performed using pilot-tested templates.

RESULTS

Fourteen articles describing a total of 2706 PDs met the study entrance criteria. Pancreatic fistulae occurred in 479 patients (18%) and included 71 grade C PF that were directly responsible for 25 deaths (35% mortality rate). Only two studies analysed risk factors; these found soft pancreatic texture and histology other than adenocarcinoma to be the most common risk factors. Ten studies reported management strategies and indicated that 51% of patients required reoperation.

CONCLUSIONS

Grade C PF: (i) accounts for 15% of fistulae following PD and has an associated mortality rate of 35%; (ii) occurs most commonly in pathology associated with a soft remnant, and (iii) requires reoperation in approximately one half of patients. The published literature incompletely describes grade C PF.

A simple and safe anastomosis for pancreatogastrostomy using one binding purse-string and two transfixing mattress sutures

Pancreatic anastomotic leakage remains a persistent problem after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), especially in the presence of a soft, nonfibrotic pancreas. A modified technique for pancreatogastrostomy was devised, which combines one binding purse-string and two transfixing mattress sutures between the pancreatic stump and the posterior gastric wall. This technique was applied in 35 patients after PD for malignant and benign diseases of whom 10 (28.6%) had a soft pancreas. Median time for the anastomosis was 18 minutes. Operative mortality was zero, and morbidity was 34.3%. Three (8.6%) patients developed a pancreatic fistula (2 type A, 1 type B) as classified according to the International Study Group on pancreatic fistula. All fistulas resolved without further intervention. The described technique is a simple and safe reconstruction procedure after PD that warrants further evaluation.

Reconstruction by Pancreaticogastrostomy versus Pancreaticojejunostomy following Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objectives. The aim of our study was to evaluate and compare the results of pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) and pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Methods. Published data of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the clinically relevant outcomes of PG versus PJ after PD were analyzed. Two reviewers assessed the quality of each trial and collected data independently. The Cochrane Collaboration's RevMan 5.0 software was used for statistical analysis. Proportions were combined, and the odds ratio (OR) with its 95% CI was used as the effect size estimate. Results. Four RCTs published in 1995 or later were included in this meta-analysis, in which 276 patients underwent PG and 277 patients underwent PJ followed PD. In the combined results of PG versus PJ, a significant difference in the morbidity of intra-abdominal complications (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.23–0.49; P < 0.00001) was found, but no significant difference could be found for pancreatic fistula (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.42–1.12 , P = 0.13) mortality (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.42–2.83; P = 0.87), recovery with no complications (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.90–1.78; P = 0.18), biliary fistula (OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.22–1.35; P = 0.19), or in delayed gastric emptying (OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.33–1.01; P = 0.06). Conclusions. Current RCTs suggest that PG is better than PJ for pancreatic reconstruction after PD.

The methods of reconstruction of pancreatic digestive continuity after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic fistula (PF) is an important factor responsible for the considerable morbidity associated with pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). There have been many techniques proposed for the reconstruction of pancreatic digestive continuity to prevent fistula formation but which is best is still highly debated. We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effectiveness of methods of anastomosis after PD.

METHODS

A full literature search was conducted in the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register Databases, Medline, and other resources irrespective of language. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were considered for inclusion. Analyses were carried out using RevMan software.

RESULTS

In all, ten RCTs that included a total of 1,408 patients were included. The meta-analysis showed that the PF, postoperative complications, biliary fistula, mortality, reoperation, and length of hospital stay were not statistically different between the pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) and pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) groups. The PF, postoperative complications, mortality, and reoperation were not statistically different between the duct-to-mucosa PJ and PJ groups. Binding PJ significantly decreased the PF and postoperative complications compared with conventional PJ. The PF, postoperative complications, and mortality were not statistically different between ligation of the pancreatic duct without anastomosis versus PJ.

CONCLUSION

No pancreatic reconstruction technique after PD was found to be applicable to all kinds of pancreatic remnants in our systematic review and meta-analysis. Some new approaches such as binding PJ and modified PG will be considered for study in the future.

Outcomes comparing a pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) and a pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) after a pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD)

BACKGROUND

The advantage of a pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) over a pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) after a pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is not clear.

AIM

The aim of the present study was to compare the pancreatic fistula (PF, defined according to the International Study Group for Pancreatic Fistula classification) rate and other complications between both methods.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of 424 [median: 65 years (17-83)] patients who underwent PG (239, 56.4%) and PJ (185, 43.6%) reconstruction between January 2005 and December 2009.

RESULTS

PF occurred in 55 (23.5%) in the PG and 30 (16.2%, P= 0.067) patients in the PJ group. Grade A PF occurred in 19 (7.9%), B in 22 (9.2%) and C in 14 (5.8%) in the PG compared with 5 (2.7%), 12 (6.5%) and in 13 (7.0%), respectively, in the PJ group. The median hospital was 10 days in both groups. The morbidity was higher in the PG group (108, 45.2 vs. 62, 33.5%, P= 0.015). However, there was no significant difference in the 90-day mortality between both groups (PG-17, 7.0% vs. PJ-16, 8.6%, P= 0.558).

CONCLUSION

There was no difference in the overall PF rate, hospital stay and overall mortality between PG and PJ reconstruction methods. However, the grade A PF rate was higher in the PG group.

[Pancreaticogastrostomy versus pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy: critical analysis of prospective randomised trials]

This is a critical analysis of prospective randomised trials that compare pancreatic reconstruction techniques with the stomach and the intestine, after pancreaticoduodenectomy. A questionnaire with questions from the Evidence Based Medicine Centre of Oxford University (PICO analysis) was used, following the criteria for the evaluation of randomised prospective studies for surgical interventions of the McMaster University in Ontario. It was found that the studies differed in methodological aspects, the most important being the lack of a uniform definition of a pancreatic fistula. The techniques for performing pancreaticogastrostomy and pancreaticojejunostomy were not homogeneous. There were no differences in the percentage of pancreatic fistula in three of these studies; one which modified the pancreaticogastrostomy technique had more favourable results. New comparative studies should use new definitions of the complications of pancreaticoduodenectomy and standardise the pancreatic reconstruction technique.

Analysis of pancreatic fistula according to the International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula classification scheme for 294 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy in a single center

OBJECTIVES

The purposes of this study were to validate the value of the International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula (ISGPF) classification scheme for pancreatic fistula (PF) and to identify predictive factors for clinically significant PF.

METHODS

From January 2000 to December 2007, 294 consecutive patients underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy in a single medical center. Pancreatic fistula was evaluated by the ISGPF criteria and Johns Hopkins Hospital's definition (JHH). Then, logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictive factors for PF development. Our own management strategies with PF were also discussed.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of PF was 19.4% (57/294) according to the ISGPF criteria, and 8.8% (26/294) using the JHH definition. Thirty-one patients with PF classified by the ISGPF were missed by the JHH definition. By logistic regression analysis, we found that besides the lack of cardiovascular disease and malignant diseases, our single-layer continuous circular invaginated pancreaticojejunostomy was another independent factor for the lowered incidence of PF.

CONCLUSIONS

The ISGPF classification scheme was accurate for evaluating PF. Single-layer continuous circular invaginated pancreaticojejunostomy may be a promising method that may have been responsible for the lower incidence of PF in this study.