Modified duct-to-mucosa versus conventional pancreaticoenterostomy for pancreaticoduodenectomy: a retrospective cohort study based on propensity score matching analysis

A modified single-needle continuous suture of duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy in pancreaticoduodenectomy

Background

The pancreatic reconstruction technique decides the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistulas (POPF) in pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). This study aims to evaluate the safety of modified single-needle continuous suture (SNCS) of duct-to-mucosa and compare the efficacy with double-layer continuous suture (DLCS) of duct-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) in open PD (OPD).

Methods

A total of 266 patients that received PD between January 2019 and May 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 130 patients underwent DLCS, and 136 patients underwent SNCS [73 OPD and 63 laparoscopic PD (LPD)]. The primary outcome was clinically relevant POPF (CR-POPF) according to the definition of the revised 2016 International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula (ISGPF). Propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted to reduce confounding bias.

Results

A total of 66 pairs were successfully matched using PSM in OPD. No significant difference was observed in the occurrence of CR-POPF between the two groups (9.1% vs. 21.2%, P=0.052). However, the median duration of operation and PJ was shorter in the SNCS group. The incidence of CR-POPF in LPD was 9.5%. Furthermore, regarding the alternative fistula risk score (a-FRS), the CR-POPF rate were 2.1%, 10.5%, and 15.6% in low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups (P=0.067).

Conclusions

The SNCS is a facile, safe, and effective PJ technique and does not increase the incidence of POPF, regardless of a-FRS stratification, pancreatic texture, and main pancreatic duct (MPD) size.

Laparoscopic hepatopancreaticoduodenectomy for synchronous gallbladder cancer and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a case report

Background

Hepatopancreaticoduodenectomy (HPD) is one of the most complex procedures, and it is very rarely reported. Laparoscopic HPD (LHPD) is even rarer. To date, there are only 3 reports of LHPD for locally advanced gallbladder cancer (GBC) or extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ECC). This is the first report of LHPD for synchronous GBC and ECC.

Case presentation

A 75-year-old female patient complained of jaundice for 2 weeks without fever or abdominal pain. She was diagnosed with synchronous GBC and ECC. After a comprehensive preparation, she underwent a laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy and resection of hepatic segments of IVb and V, and her digestive tract reconstruction followed Child’s methods. She was discharged on the 12th day postoperatively without pancreatic leakage, biliary leakage, or liver failure.

Conclusions

LHPD is safe and feasible for selected cases of GBCs or ECCs.

Duct-to-mucosa versus other types of pancreaticojejunostomy for the prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula following pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pancreatic fistula is a common and serious complication following pancreaticoduodenectomy. Duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy has been used in many centers to reconstruct pancreatic digestive continuity following pancreatoduodenectomy, however, its efficacy and safety are uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy versus other types of pancreaticojejunostomy for the reconstruction of pancreatic digestive continuity in participants undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy, and to compare the effects of different duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy techniques.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library (2021, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1966 to 9 January 2021), Embase (1988 to 9 January 2021), and Science Citation Index Expanded (1982 to 9 January 2021).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy with other types of pancreaticojejunostomy (e.g. invagination pancreaticojejunostomy, binding pancreaticojejunostomy) in participants undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. We also included RCTs that compared different types of duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy in participants undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently identified the studies for inclusion, collected the data, and assessed the risk of bias. We performed the meta-analyses using Review Manager 5. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and the mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For all analyses, we used the random-effects model. We used the Cochrane RoB 1 tool to assess the risk of bias. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for all outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 RCTs involving a total of 1696 participants in the review. One RCT was a dual-center study; the other 10 RCTs were single-center studies conducted in: China (4 studies); Japan (2 studies); USA (1 study); Egypt (1 study); Germany (1 study); India (1 study); and Italy (1 study). The mean age of participants ranged from 54 to 68 years. All RCTs were at high risk of bias. Duct-to-mucosa versus any other type of pancreaticojejunostomy We included 10 RCTs involving 1472 participants comparing duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy with invagination pancreaticojejunostomy: 732 participants were randomized to the duct-to-mucosa group, and 740 participants were randomized to the invagination group after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Comparing the two techniques, the evidence is very uncertain for the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula (grade B or C; RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.64 to 3.26; 7 studies, 1122 participants; very low-certainty evidence), postoperative mortality (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.49; 10 studies, 1472 participants; very low-certainty evidence), rate of surgical reintervention (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.95; 10 studies, 1472 participants; very low-certainty evidence), rate of postoperative bleeding (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.42; 9 studies, 1275 participants; very low-certainty evidence), overall rate of surgical complications (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.36; 5 studies, 750 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and length of hospital stay (MD -0.41 days, 95% CI -1.87 to 1.04; 4 studies, 658 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The studies did not report adverse events or quality of life outcomes. One type of duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy versus a different type of duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy We included one RCT involving 224 participants comparing duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy using the modified Blumgart technique with duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy using the traditional interrupted technique: 112 participants were randomized to the modified Blumgart group, and 112 participants were randomized to the traditional interrupted group after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Comparing the two techniques, the evidence is very uncertain for the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula (grade B or C; RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.61 to 3.75; 1 study, 210 participants; very low-certainty evidence), postoperative mortality (there were no deaths in either group; 1 study, 210 participants; very low-certainty evidence), rate of surgical reintervention (RR 1.93, 95% CI 0.18 to 20.91; 1 study, 210 participants; very low-certainty evidence), rate of postoperative bleeding (RR 2.89, 95% CI 0.12 to 70.11; 1 study, 210 participants; very low-certainty evidence), overall rate of surgical complications (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.51; 1 study, 210 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and length of hospital stay (15 days versus 15 days; 1 study, 210 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not report adverse events or quality of life outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy compared to invagination pancreaticojejunostomy on any of the outcomes, including rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula (grade B or C), postoperative mortality, rate of surgical reintervention, rate of postoperative bleeding, overall rate of surgical complications, and length of hospital stay. The evidence is also very uncertain whether duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy using the modified Blumgart technique is superior, equivalent or inferior to duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy using the traditional interrupted technique. None of the studies reported adverse events or quality of life outcomes.

Establishment of risk prediction model of postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy: 2016 edition of definition and grading system of pancreatic fistula: a single center experience with 223 cases

Objective

To establish a risk prediction model for pancreatic fistula according to the pancreatic fistula standards of the 2016 edition.

Methods

Clinical data from 223 patients with PD admitted to Tianjin Third Central Hospital from January 2016 to December 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into modeling (January 2016 to December 2018) and validation (January 2019 to December 2020) sets according to the time of admission. The risk factors for postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) were screened by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses, and a risk prediction model for POPF was established in the modeling set. This score was tested in the validation set.

Results

Logistic regression analysis showed that the main pancreatic duct index and CT value were independent risk factors according to the 2016 pancreatic fistula grading standard, based on which a risk prediction model for POPF was established. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed that the area under the curve was 0.775 in the modeling set and 0.848 in the validation set.

Conclusion

The main pancreatic duct index and CT value of the pancreas are closely related to the occurrence of pancreatic fistula after PD, and the established risk prediction model for pancreatic fistula has good prediction accuracy.

Pancreatic outflow tract reconstruction after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

To evaluate the outcomes of pancreaticogastrostomy and pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreatoduodenectomy with the help of a meta-analysis.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials comparing pancreaticogastrostomy and pancreaticojejunostomy were searched electronically using PubMed, The Cochrane Library, and EMBASE. Fixed and random-effects were used to measure pooled estimates. Research indicators included pancreatic fistula, delayed gastric emptying, postoperative hemorrhage, intraperitoneal fluid collection, wound infection, overall postoperative complications, reoperation, and mortality.

Results

Overall, 10 randomized controlled trials were included in this meta-analysis, with a total of 1629 patients. The overall incidences of pancreatic fistula and intra-abdominal collections were lower in the pancreaticogastrostomy group than in the pancreaticojejunostomy group (OR=0.73, 95% CI 0.55~0.96, p=0.02; OR=0.59, 95% CI 0.37~0.96, p=0.02, respectively). The incidence of B/C grade pancreatic fistula in the pancreaticogastrostomy group was lower than that in the pancreaticojejunostomy group, but no significant difference was observed (OR=0.61, 95%CI 0.34~1.09, p=0.09). Postoperative hemorrhage was more frequent in the pancreaticogastrostomy group than in the pancreaticojejunostomy group (OR=1.52; 95% CI 1.08~2.14, p=0.02). No significant differences in terms of delayed gastric emptying, wound infection, reoperation, overall postoperative complications, mortality, exocrine function, and hospital readmission were observed between groups.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis suggests that pancreaticogastrostomy reduces the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula and intraperitoneal fluid collection but increases the risk of postoperative hemorrhage compared with pancreaticojejunostomy.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of factors associated with post-operative pancreatic fistula following pancreatoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Many studies have explored factors relating to post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF); however, the original definition (All-POPF) was revised to include only 'clinically relevant' (CR) POPF. This study identified variables associated with the two International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery definitions to identify which variables are more strongly associated with CR-POPF.

METHODS

A systematic review identified all studies reporting risk factors for POPF (using both International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula definitions) following pancreatoduodenectomy. The primary outcome was factors associated with CR-POPF. Meta-analyses (random effects models) of pre-, intra- and post-operative factors associated with POPF in more than two studies were included.

RESULTS

Among 52 774 patients All-POPF (n = 69 studies) and CR-POPF (n = 53 studies) affected 27% (95% confidence interval (CI_95% ) 23-30) and 19% (CI_95% 17-22), respectively. Of the 176 factors, 24 and 17 were associated with All- and CR-POPF, respectively. Absence of pre-operative pancreatitis, presence of renal disease, no pre-operative neoadjuvant therapy, use of post-operative somatostatin analogues, absence of associated venous or arterial resection were associated with CR-POPF but not All-POPF.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion this study demonstrates wide variation in reported rates of POPF and that several risk factors associated with CR-POPF are not used within risk prediction models. Data from this study can be used to shape future studies, research and audit across ethnic and geographic boundaries in POPF following pancreatoduodenectomy.