Duct-to-mucosa versus invagination pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a meta-analysis

Monopolar electrocautery versus scalpel for pancreatic neck transection during open pancreatoduodenectomy: A retrospective, registry-based study

BACKGROUND

The method of transecting the pancreatic parenchyma during pancreatic resection may influence the rate of complications, including pancreatic fistula and bleeding. The objective of this study is to compare the transection of the pancreatic parenchyma during pancreatoduodenectomy with monopolar electrocautery versus scalpel in terms of postoperative complications.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients with open pancreatoduodenectomy from the German DGAV StuDoQ|Pancreas registry (January 2013 to December 2021) was performed. Transection of the pancreatic parenchyma with a scalpel versus monopolar electrocautery was compared regarding postoperative pancreatic fistula B/C, post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage B/C, and major complications (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥3) rates. Multivariable analysis with adjustment for potential confounders and surgical center cluster effect was performed.

RESULTS

Overall, 6,752 patients were included in the study. In 4,072 (60.3%), transection was performed with a scalpel and, in 2,680 (39.7%), with electrocautery. Transection with electrocautery was associated with higher postoperative pancreatic fistula B/C (15.4% vs 12.8%; P = .003), post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage B/C (11% vs 7.4%; P < .001), and major complications (33.4% vs 29.6%; P = .001) rates. In the multivariable analysis, after adjustment for potential confounders and surgical center, the association of the transection method with postoperative pancreatic fistula B/C (odds ratio = 1.01; 95% CI, 0.79-1.2; P = .962), post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage B/C (odds ratio = 1.23; 95% CI, 0.94-1.6; P = .127), and major complications (odds ratio = 1.09; 95% CI, 0.93-1.27; P = .297) was not significant.

CONCLUSION

The study found no significant association between transection of the pancreatic parenchyma during open pancreatoduodenectomy with a scalpel compared with monopolar electrocautery regarding pancreatic fistula, postoperative bleeding, or overall major complication rates.

Pancreaticogastrostomy versus Pancreaticojejunostomy and the Proposal of a New Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula Risk Score

Despite the substantial decrease in mortality rates following a pancreaticoduodenectomy to less than 5%, morbidity rates remain significant, reaching even 73%. Postoperative pancreatic fistula is one of the most frequent major complications and is significantly associated with other complications, including patient death. Currently, there is no consensus regarding the ideal type of pancreatic anastomosis, as the question of the choice between a pancreaticogastrostomy and pancreaticojejunostomy is still open. Furthermore, worldwide implementation of an ideal pancreatic fistula risk prediction score is missing. Our study found several significant predictive factors for the postoperative occurrence of fistulas, such as the soft consistency of the pancreas, non-dilated Wirsung duct, important intraoperative blood loss, other perioperative complications, preoperative patient hypoalbuminemia, and patient weight loss. Our study also revealed that for patients who exhibit fistula risk factors, pancreaticogastrostomy demonstrates a significantly lower pancreatic fistula rate than pancreaticojejunostomy. The occurrence of pancreatic fistulas has been significantly associated with the development of other postoperative major complications, and patient death. As the current pancreatic fistula risk scores proposed by various authors have not been consensually validated, we propose a simple, easy-to-use, and sensitive score for the risk prediction of postoperative pancreatic fistula occurrence based on important predictors from statistical analyses that have also been found to be significant by most of the reported studies. The new pancreatic fistula risk score proposed by us could be extremely useful for improved therapeutic management of cephalic pancreaticoduodenectomy patients.

Outcomes of Duct-to-Mucosa vs. Invagination Pancreatojejunostomy: Toward a Personalized Approach for Distal Pancreatic Stump Anastomosis in Central Pancreatectomy?

(1) Background: The jejunum is primarily used for distal pancreatic stump anastomoses after central pancreatectomy (CP). The study aimed to compare duct-to-mucosa (WJ) and distal pancreatic invagination into jejunum anastomoses (PJ) after CP. (2) Methods: All patients with CP and jejunal anastomoses (between 1 January 2002 and 31 December 2022) were retrospectively assessed and compared. (3) Results: 29 CP were analyzed: WJ-12 patients (41.4%) and PJ-17 patients (58.6%). The operative time was significantly higher in the WJ vs. PJ group of patients (195 min vs. 140 min, p = 0.012). Statistically higher rates of patients within the high-risk fistula group were observed in the PJ vs. WJ group (52.9% vs. 0%, p = 0.003). However, no differences were observed between the groups regarding the overall, severe, and specific postpancreatectomy morbidity rates (p values ≥ 0.170). (4) Conclusions: The WJ and PJ anastomoses after CP were comparable in terms of morbidity rates. However, a PJ anastomosis appeared to fit better for patients with high-risk fistula scores. Thus, a personalized, patient-adapted technique for the distal pancreatic stump anastomosis with the jejunum after CP should be considered. At the same time, future research should explore gastric anastomoses' emerging role.

Association of a Modified Blumgart Anastomosis With the Incidence of Pancreatic Fistula and Operation Time After Laparoscopic Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Cohort Study

Objective

To explore the association between a modified Blumgart anastomosis technique and the operative time and surgical complications.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study that analyzed the data of patients who underwent laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy from January 2015 to March 2021. The primary outcome was to explore the association between the modified Blumgart anastomosis technique and operative time.

Results

A total of 282 patients were enrolled. There were 177 cases of pancreatic duct-to-mucosa anastomosis in the traditional surgery group, and 105 cases of the modified three-step Blumgart anastomosis in the modified group. There were no statistically significant differences in the general and intraoperative characteristics found between the two groups (P > 0.05). The surgical method was an independent predictor of operative time. Overall complications postsurgery were less common in the modified group than in the traditional group. The incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula was higher in the traditional group than in the modified group (45 cases (25.4%) and 11 cases (10.5%), respectively). Fourteen cases (7.9%) in the traditional group and four case (3.8%) in the modified group had postoperative pancreatic fistula of grades B + C. The two groups had statistically significant differences (P < 0.05). The results of the linear regression showed that the type of surgical method was associated with operation time (95% CI, −73.074 to −23.941, β: −0.438, P < 0.001).

Conclusion

This modified three-step Blumgart pancreaticojejunostomy was associated with the operation time.

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.

Outcome of pancreatic anastomoses during pancreatoduodenectomy in two national audits

BACKGROUND

Evidence on the optimal pancreatic anastomosis during pancreatoduodenectomy is inconclusive. Large multicenter and nationwide registries may provide additional insights. The study compared the practice and outcome of different pancreatic anastomoses during pancreatoduodenectomy, focusing on the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula, in two large audits of pancreatic surgery.

METHODS

Posthoc analysis of patients after pancreatoduodenectomy in the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit and the German DGAV StuDoQ|Pancreas registries (January 2014 to December 2017). Postoperative pancreatic fistula (International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery B/C), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery B/C) and Clavien-Dindo ≥3 complications rates were compared for the three most common anastomoses: duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy, non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy, and non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatogastrostomy. Multivariable adjustment for potential confounders was performed.

RESULTS

Overall, 6,149 patients were included. The most common anastomosis was duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy (duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy 59.8%, non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy 21.1%, non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatogastrostomy 12.4%). The overall postoperative pancreatic fistula rate was 14%: duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy 12.9%, non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy 14.4% (P = .162), non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatogastrostomy 18.3% (P < .001). The rate of postpancreatectomy hemorrhage was the lowest after duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy: duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy 6.9%, non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy 10% (P < .001), non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatogastrostomy 17.9% (P < .001). The rate of Clavien-Dindo ≥3 complications was the lowest after duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy: duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy 28%, non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatojejunostomy 32.7% (P = .002), non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatogastrostomy 43.1% (P < .001). In the multivariable analysis, the risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula did not differ significantly between the three anastomoses. The risk of hemorrhage (odds ratio 2.4, 95% confidence interval 1.6-3.5, P < .001) and Clavien-Dindo ≥3 (odds ratio 1.6, 95% confidence interval 1.2-2.1, P = .001) remained significantly higher only for non-duct-to-mucosa pancreatogastrostomy.

CONCLUSION

Data from two national audits showed no difference in the risk-adjusted postoperative pancreatic fistula rate among the three most used pancreatic anastomoses during pancreatoduodenectomy. Pancreatogastrostomy was inferior to pancreatojejunostomy regarding bleeding and overall major complications.

The optimal choice for pancreatic anastomosis after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains a major cause of morbidity following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). This network meta-analysis (NMA) compared techniques of pancreatic anastomosis following PD to determine the technique with the best outcome profile.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic literature search was performed on the Scopus, EMBASE, Medline and Cochrane databases to identify RCTs employing the international study group of pancreatic fistula(ISGPF) definition of POPF. The main outcomes were POPF and clinically relevant POPF.

RESULTS

Three techniques of pancreatic anastomosis following PD were directly compared in 16 RCTs comprising 2365 patients.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Overall, 929 patients underwent duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy(PJ DTM), 760 patients invagination pancreaticojejunostomy(PJ Inv), and 676 patients underwent pancreatogastrostomy(PG). The results of comparisons of POPF, clinically relevant POPF, biliary leakage, delayed gastric emptying(DGE), in hospital mortality, internal hemorrhage, reoperation in our network meta-analysis suggested there were no significant differences among the 3 procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

There are no significant differences among PJ DTM, PJ Inv and PG in the prevention of POPF, clinically relevant POPF, biliary leakage, DGE, internal hemorrhage and reoperation. However, further randomized controlled trials should be undertaken to ascertain these findings.

A propensity score analysis of over 12,000 pancreaticojejunal anastomoses after pancreaticoduodenectomy: does technique impact the clinically relevant fistula rate?

BACKGROUND

Clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) remains a major cause of morbidity in patients undergoing pancreatic surgery. Controversy exists as to whether there is any difference in CR-POPF with a Duct-to-Mucosa (DTM) versus an Invagination (IG) pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ).

METHODS

Demographic, perioperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data were captured from the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) 2014-2017 databases. Potential confounders were included in a logistic regression and a propensity score model. The primary outcome was CR-POPF.

RESULTS

A total of 12,361 pancreaticojejunal anastomoses were performed with 11,168 patients undergoing DTM (90%) and 1193 undergoing IG (10%) after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Amongst all patients, there was no significant difference in CR-POPF between DTM and IG on multivariate (OR = 0.95, p = 0.64) or propensity score analysis (OR = 0.99, p = 0.93). After stratification by pancreatic gland texture and duct size, there was a decrease in CR-POPF with DTM amongst patients with duct size greater than 6 mm on multivariate analysis (OR = 0.35, p = 0.009) and propensity score analysis (OR = 0.40, p = 0.018). There were no significant differences in any other strata.

CONCLUSION

DTM or IG technique are not associated with CR-POPF for patients with average size pancreatic ducts; however, DTM is preferable in patients with large pancreatic duct diameter (>6 mm).

Critical appraisal of the techniques of pancreatic anastomosis following pancreaticoduodenectomy: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains a major cause of morbidity following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). This network meta-analysis (NMA) compared techniques of pancreatic anastomosis following PD to determine the technique with the best outcome profile.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed on the Scopus, EMBASE, Medline and Cochrane databases to identify RCTs employing the international study group of pancreatic fistula (ISGPF) definition of POPF. The primary outcome was clinically relevant POPF.

RESULTS

Five techniques of pancreatic anastomosis following PD were directly compared in 15 RCTs comprising 2428 patients. Panreatojejunostomy (PJ) end-to-side invagination vs. PJ end-to-side duct-to-mucosa was the most frequent comparison (n = 7). Overall, 971 patients underwent PJ end-to-side duct-to-mucosa, 791 patients PJ end-to-side invagination, 505 patients pancreatogastrostomy (PG) end-to-side invagination, 98 patients PG end-to-side duct-to-mucosa, and 63 patients PJ end-to-side single layer. PG duct-to-mucosa was associated with the lowest rates of clinically relevant POPF, delayed gastric emptying, intra-abdominal abscess, all postoperative morbidity and postoperative mortality, the shortest operative time and postoperative hospital stay and the lowest volume of intra-operative blood loss.

CONCLUSION

Duct-to-mucosa pancreaticogastrostomy was associated with the lowest rates of clinically relevant POPF and had the best outcome profile among all techniques of pancreatico-anastomosis following PD.

Pancreatic reconstruction techniques after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a review of the literature

Introduction: Postoperative pancreatic fistula is the most troublesome complication after pancreaticoduodenectomy, and is an on-going area of concern for pancreatic surgeons. The specific pancreatic reconstruction technique is an important factor influencing the development of postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Areas covered: In this paper, we briefly introduced the definition and relevant influencing factors of postoperative pancreatic fistula. We performed a search of all meta-analyses published in the last 5 years and all published randomized controlled trials comparing different pancreatic anastomotic techniques, and we evaluated the advantages and disadvantages of different techniques. Expert opinion: No individual anastomotic method can completely avoid postoperative pancreatic fistula. Selecting specific techniques tailored to the patient's situation intraoperatively may be key to reducing the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula.

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

BACKGROUND

Clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) remains the most common neopathy after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). An ideal pancreaticoenterostomy (PE) which can effectively reduce the incidence of CR-POPF and its potential neopathy is needed. We aimed to assess the efficacy of our modified duct-to-mucosa PE in the PD.

METHOD

From January 2011 to December 2017, 233 consecutive patients with PD were retrospectively included from Shenzhen People's Hospital. After propensity score matching (PSM), there were 82 patients in both the modified duct-to-mucosa PE group (group A) and the conventional end-to-side inserting PE group (group B), respectively. The clinical course and the incidence of postoperative neopathy were compared between groups. Logistic regression method was utilized to analyze the association between PE approach and CR-POPF.

RESULTS

The PE time was shorter in group A (9.3 ± 1.8 min vs. 21.5 ± 2.8 min, P < 0.001). The group A had significantly lower incidence of severe neopathy (Clavien-Dindo grade > II) [7.3% (5/82) vs. 17.1% (14/82), P = 0.028] and incidence of CR-POPF [1.2% (1/82) vs. 19.5% (12/82), P < 0.001] than the group B. Our modified duct-to-mucosa PE technique was associated with a reduced risk for CR-POPF (OR, 0.11 [95% CI, 0.02-0.57]; P = 0.009) as compared with the conventional end-to-side inserting PE.

CONCLUSION

Compared with conventional end-to-side inserting PE, our modified duct-to-mucosa PE technique can effectively reduce the incidences of postoperative neopathy and CR-POPF.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Researchregistry3877 . Registered 24 March 2018. Retrospectively registered.

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.

Postoperative pancreatic fistula: a review of traditional and emerging concepts

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains the major cause of morbidity after pancreatic resection, affecting up to 41% of cases. With the recent development of a consensus definition of POPF, there has been a large number of reports examining various risk factors, prediction models, and mitigation strategies for this costly complication. Despite these strategies, the rates of POPF have not significantly diminished. Here, we review the literature and evidence regarding both traditional and emerging concepts in POPF prediction, prevention, and management. In particular, we review the evidence for the association between postoperative pancreatitis and POPF, and present a novel proposed mechanism for the development of POPF.