Preliminary results of binding pancreaticojejunostomy

Secure reconstruction after pancreaticoduodenectomy: Review and improved our continuous duct-to-mucosa anastomosis

Pancreatic anastomotic leakage is the most common major complication after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). The incidence of pancreatic anastomotic leak or fistula has declined to less than 20%, and mortality from this complication has decreased to less than 10% in recent years. The ideal surgical procedures to achieve the most secure pancreaticojejunostomy were compared and reviewed. A single-institution and personal experience was retrogradely compared with two periods between 1988 and 2017, which involved 121 patients who were designed to compare the outcome of complications with or without pancreatic stump by four to six sutures before continuous duct-to-mucosa PD. The surgical reconstruction technique was standardized and unique, and the pancreaticojejunal anastomosis was created using the duct-to-mucosa without (group A, n = 62) and with (group B, n = 59) interrupted stump sutures. The rate of grade A pancreatic fistula was 6.9% in group A and 0% in group B (P < 0.05). Postoperative mortality was 0% in group B. No patient underwent reoperative PD due to pancreatic anastomotic leak. The length of stay during admission and after surgery was significant lower in group B, which was due to less complication after surgery. Interrupted suture of pancreatic stump with a continuous duct-to-mucosa end-to-side pancreaticojejunostomy plus external drainage is the best secure method for pancreaticojejunostomy after PD.

A Novel Anastomosis Technique for Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Case Series of Our Center's Experience

Background: Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy has developed rapidly in recent years. Postoperative pancreatic fistula is still the most dangerous complication of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Baumgart pancreaticojejunostomy is considered one of the safest anastomosis procedures, with low rates of pancreatic fistula. We modified Blumgart pancreaticojejunostomy and applied the modified procedure during laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy. The modified procedure entailed a longitudinal U-shaped suture through the pancreas for anastomosis of the pancreatic duct and the jejunal mucosa.

Methods: We prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed the data of 120 patients who underwent laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy from January 2016. The total operative time, time for complete pancreaticojejunostomy, postoperative pancreatic fistula rate, postoperative delayed gastric emptying, postoperative bleeding, postoperative length of hospital stays, and mortality within 90 days after surgery were analyzed. An analysis of laparoscopic pancreaticojejunostomy compared with open pancreaticojejunostomy is also reported.

Results: In the laparoscopic pancreaticojejunostomy group, the average total operative time, the average time for complete pancreaticojejunostomy, and the average intraoperative blood loss were 271 min, 35.3 min, and 184 ml, respectively. The total postoperative clinically relevant pancreatic fistula rate was 9.2% (Grade B and C fistulas). The incidence rates of postoperative delayed gastric emptying and postoperative biliary fistula were ~2.5 and 1.7%, respectively. The postoperative bleeding rate was 0.83%, and the average postoperative indwelling time of the abdominal drainage tube was 7.3 days. The postoperative length of hospital stay was 10.8 days, and the mortality rate within 90 days after surgery was 0.83%. The rates of clinically relevant postoperative clinically relevant pancreatic fistula are comparable between laparoscopic and open surgery, there were no other severe postoperative complications in either group. The mean postoperative length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic pancreaticojejunostomy group.

Conclusion: The modified laparoscopic-adapted Blumgart anastomosis simplifies and facilitates the creation of the pancreaticojejunostomy in laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy. The rates of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula are comparable with those obtained by open surgery, and length of stay are shoter.

[Pancreatodigestive anastomosis: from history to modernity]

This review is devoted to history of pancreatodigestive anastomoses (PDA), technique of the most popular PDA, causes of pancreatic fistula and its prevention. Contradictory data were obtained in randomized trials and meta-analyses devoted to pancreatic anastomoses. There is no optimal anastomosis excluding clinically significant postoperative pancreatic fistula. Therefore, further studies should be aimed at new approaches reducing the incidence of clinically significant postoperative pancreatic fistula.

Binding Pancreaticojejunostomy: Is It Safe?

Background:

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) or leak from pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) is one of the most common complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), with an incidence of 5%–30%. Various techniques have been advocated to bring down the incidence of POPF, but there is still none that can be called the “gold standard”. Peng's binding PJ (BPJ) was proposed as a good method of performing PJ with low fistula rates; we present our results with BPJ.

Methods:

The data of all patients who underwent PD with BPJ between January 2016 and March 2018 were retrospectively analyzed for demographics, clinical features, type of procedure performed, complications (especially POPF), hospital stay, morbidity, and mortality.

Results:

A total of 24 patients (18 males and 6 females) were identified. The mean age at the diagnosis was 65.5 ± 6.4 years. Majority of the patients had ampullary carcinoma (62.5%). The most common postoperative complication was delayed gastric emptying seen in 10 patients, whereas only 2 (8.33%) had POPF and there was one mortality.

Conclusion:

BPJ is safe and is associated with a low incidence of POPF.

Pancreaticojejunostomy-a review of modern techniques

Background

Pancreaticojejunal anastomosis is one of the most demanding procedures in surgery. Up to now, no technique has been proven to reduce the incidence of POPF when compared to the other methods.

Purpose

The aim of this review was to provide a concise and illustrated description of the most recent methods of pancreaticojejunostomy. Their development was directly related to the still ongoing search by surgeons for such a technique of anastomosis that would eliminate the problem of POPF.

Conclusions

Knowledge of various techniques of anastomosis may help the surgeon to find the most suitable and optimal method of pancreatic-intestinal anastomosis for the patient.

Selection of pancreaticojejunostomy technique after pancreaticoduodenectomy: duct-to-mucosa anastomosis is not better than invagination anastomosis: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

One of the most clinically significant current discussions is the optimal pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) technique for pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). We performed a meta-analysis to compare duct-to-mucosa and invagination techniques for pancreatic anastomosis after PD.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov up to June 1, 2018 was performed. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing duct-to-mucosa versus invagination PJ were included. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs involving 1099 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) was not significantly different between the duct-to-mucosa PJ (110/547, 20.10%) and invagination PJ (98/552, 17.75%) groups in all 8 studies (risk ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.89-1.44; P = .31). The subgroup analysis using the International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula criteria showed no significant difference in POPF between duct-to-mucosa PJ (97/372, 26.08%) and invagination PJ (78/377, 20.68%). No significant difference in clinically relevant POPF (CR-POPF) was found between the 2 groups (55/372 vs 40/377, P = .38). Additionally, no significant differences in delayed gastric emptying, post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage, reoperation, operation time, or length of stay were found between the 2 groups. The overall morbidity and mortality rates were not significantly different between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

The duct-to-mucosa technique seems no better than the invagination technique for pancreatic anastomosis after PD in terms of POPF, CR-POPF, and other main complications. Further studies on this topic are therefore recommended.

The optimal choice for pancreatic anastomosis after pancreaticoduodenectomy: A network meta-analysis of randomized control trials

BACKGROUND

A number of pancreatic anastomosis methods for pancreaticoduodenectomy including pancreaticogastrostomy(PG), duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy(duct-to-mucosa PJ), invagination pancreaticojejunostomy(invagination PJ) and binding pancreaticojejunostomy(BPJ), but the optimal choice remains unclear. We performed a network meta-analysis to synthesize direct and indirect evidence to identify the optimal choice for pancreatic anastomosis after pancreaticoduodenectomy METHODS: We searched the Embase, PubMed and Cochrane library databases for randomized control trials. The relative risk (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. The primary outcome is postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF).

RESULT

In total, 16 RCT studies, including a total of 2396 patients, met our criteria. The results showed that PG is not superior to invagination PJ (RR 0.70 95%CI: 0.35-1.39) and duct-to-mucosa PJ (RR 0.58 95%CI: 0.30-1.10) according to the ISGPS definition. Furthermore PG cannot reduce the POPF rates than invagination PJ (RR 0.51 95%CI: 0.2-1.21) and duct-to-mucosa PJ (RR 0.46 95%CI: 0.16-1.14) according to the soft pancreatic texture. BPJ might reduce the incidence of POPF than duct-to-mucosa PJ (RR 0.00 95%CI: 0.00-0.04), invagination PJ (RR 0.00 95%CI: 0.00-0.03), PG (RR 0.00 95%CI: 0.00-0.03), but the results have major limitations with only one RCT reported BPJ and different definition of POPF.

CONCLUSION

There are no significant differences among BPJ, duct-to-mucosa PJ, invagination PJ and PG in the prevention of POPF, overall morbidity, mortality and DGE. However, further randomized controlled trials should be undertaken to ascertain these findings, especially for BPJ.