-
Updates in Surgery Apr 2022Artificial intelligence (AI), including machine learning (ML), is being slowly incorporated in medical practice, to provide a more precise and personalized approach.... (Review)
Review
Artificial intelligence (AI), including machine learning (ML), is being slowly incorporated in medical practice, to provide a more precise and personalized approach. Pancreatic surgery is an evolving field, which offers the only curative option for patients with pancreatic cancer. Increasing amounts of data are available in medicine: AI and ML can help incorporate large amounts of information in clinical practice. We conducted a systematic review, based on PRISMA criteria, of studies that explored the use of AI or ML algorithms in pancreatic surgery. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review on this topic. Twenty-five eligible studies were included in this review; 12 studies with implications in the preoperative diagnosis, while 13 studies had implications in patient evolution. Preoperative diagnosis, such as predicting the malignancy of IPMNs, differential diagnosis between pancreatic cystic lesions, classification of different pancreatic tumours, and establishment of the correct management for each of these lesions, can be facilitated through different AI or ML algorithms. Postoperative evolution can also be predicted, and some studies reported prediction models for complications, including postoperative pancreatic fistula, while other studies have analysed the implications for prognosis evaluation (from predicting a textbook outcome, the risk of metastasis or relapse, or the mortality rate and survival). One study discussed the possibility of predicting an intraoperative complication-massive intraoperative bleeding. Artificial intelligence and machine learning models have promising applications in pancreatic surgery, in the preoperative period (high-accuracy diagnosis) and postoperative setting (prognosis evaluation and complication prediction), and the intraoperative applications have been less explored.
Topics: Algorithms; Artificial Intelligence; Humans; Machine Learning; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 35237939
DOI: 10.1007/s13304-022-01255-z -
Medicine Jul 2022Clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) is a common and troublesome complication after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). We conducted a systematic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) is a common and troublesome complication after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify the risk factors of CR-POPF after PD.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for studies related to risk factors of CR-POPF after PD. Odds ratios (ORs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted from the included studies, then a meta-analysis was conducted. If necessary, sensitivity analysis would be performed by changing the effect model or excluding 1 study at a time. Publication bias was assessed by funnel plot and Begg test and Egger test.
RESULTS
A total of 27 studies with 24,740 patients were included, and CR-POPF occurred in 3843 patients (incidence = 17%, 95% CI: 16%-19%). Male (OR = 1.56, 95% CI: 1.42-1.70), body mass index >25 kg/m2 (OR = 1.98, 95% CI: 1.23-3.18), pancreatic duct diameter <3 mm (OR = 1.87, 95% CI: 1.66-2.12), soft pancreatic texture (OR = 3.49, 95% CI: 2.61-4.67), and blood transfusion (OR = 3.10, 95% CI: 2.01-4.77) can significantly increase the risk of CR-POPF. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma (OR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.47-0.61), vascular resection (OR = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.39-0.83), and preoperative chemoradiotherapy (OR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.57-0.81) can significantly decrease the factor of CR-POPF. Diabetes mellitus was not statistically associated with CR-POPF (OR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.40-1.08). However, the analysis of body mass index, pancreatic texture, and diabetes mellitus had a high heterogeneity, then sensitivity analysis was performed, and the result after sensitivity analysis showed diabetes mellitus can significantly decrease the risk of CR-POPF. There was no significant publication bias in this meta-analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
The current review assessed the effects of different factors on CR-POPF. This can provide a basis for the prevention and management of CR-POPF. Effective interventions targeting the above risk factors should be investigated in future studies for decreasing the occurrence of CR-POPF.
Topics: Adenocarcinoma; Humans; Male; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Postoperative Complications; Retrospective Studies; Risk Factors
PubMed: 35776984
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000029757 -
Polski Przeglad Chirurgiczny Jun 2021Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a potentially life-threatening complication after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). It is observed when the amylase activity in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a potentially life-threatening complication after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). It is observed when the amylase activity in the drain fluid exceeds three times the normal upper value. Grades B and C of POPF are considered as clinically relevant. Fistula might originate due to failure of healing of a pancreatic anastomosis or from raw pancreatic surface.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
18 retrospective and prospective studies published between 2015 and 2020 were included in this meta-analysis. Total number of patients was 5836. To investigate potential risk factors associated with the occurrence of POPF, odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. To compare discontinuous data, mean differences (MD) were calculated.
RESULTS
13 factors were divided into preoperative and intraoperative groups. Male sex, higher BMI, soft pancreatic texture and small pancreatic duct were considered as significant risk factors while vascular resection lowered the risk of development pancreatic fistula.
DISCUSSION
It is considered that the development of POPF is associated with intrapancreatic fat. More severe infiltration with fat tissue is responsible for soft texture of the gland, while higher BMI is one of the risk factors of increased pancreatic fat. On the contrary, diabetes is associated with fibrotic pancreas which could lower the risk of developing POPF.
Topics: Amylases; Anastomosis, Surgical; Humans; Male; Pancreas; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Postoperative Complications; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Risk Factors
PubMed: 36169536
DOI: 10.5604/01.3001.0014.9659 -
Annals of Surgery Open : Perspectives... Mar 2022To depict and analyze learning curves for open, laparoscopic, and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and distal pancreatectomy (DP). (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To depict and analyze learning curves for open, laparoscopic, and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and distal pancreatectomy (DP).
BACKGROUND
Formal training is recommended for safe introduction of pancreatic surgery but definitions of learning curves vary and have not been standardized.
METHODS
A systematic search on PubMed, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases identified studies on learning curves in pancreatic surgery. Primary outcome was the number needed to reach the learning curve as defined by the included studies. Secondary outcomes included endpoints defining learning curves, methods of analysis (statistical/arbitrary), and classification of learning phases.
RESULTS
Out of 1115 articles, 66 studies with 14,206 patients were included. Thirty-five studies (53%) based the learning curve analysis on statistical calculations. Most often used parameters to define learning curves were operative time (n = 51), blood loss (n = 17), and complications (n = 10). The number of procedures to surpass a first phase of learning curve was 30 (20-50) for open PD, 39 (11-60) for laparoscopic PD, 25 (8-100) for robotic PD ( = 0.521), 16 (3-17) for laparoscopic DP, and 15 (5-37) for robotic DP ( = 0.914). In a three-phase model, intraoperative parameters improved earlier (first to second phase: operating time -15%, blood loss -29%) whereas postoperative parameters improved later (second to third phase: complications -46%, postoperative pancreatic fistula -48%). Studies with higher sample sizes showed higher numbers of procedures needed to overcome the learning curve (rho = 0.64, < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
This study summarizes learning curves for open-, laparoscopic-, and robotic pancreatic surgery with different definitions, analysis methods, and confounding factors. A standardized reporting of learning curves and definition of phases (competency, proficiency, mastery) is desirable and proposed.
PubMed: 37600094
DOI: 10.1097/AS9.0000000000000111 -
Updates in Surgery Dec 2023Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a severe complication after distal pancreatectomy (DP); however, it is unclear how to effectively reduce the incidence. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a severe complication after distal pancreatectomy (DP); however, it is unclear how to effectively reduce the incidence. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to determine whether reinforced stapling reduces POPF after DP. From February 2007 to April 2023, a comprehensive search of electronic data and references was conducted in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. In this study, the perioperative outcomes were evaluated for the reinforced stapler (RS) group and the standard stapler (SS) group in DP using Review Manager Software. Using fixed- or random-effects models, pooled odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. In total, three randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with 425 patients and five observational clinical studies (OCS) with 318 patients were included. In pooled meta-analyses from RCTs, there was no difference between the two groups in the incidence of POPF (OR = 0.79; 95% CI [0.47,1.35]; P = 0.39), intraoperative blood loss (MD = 10.66; 95% CI [- 28.83,50.16]; P = 0.6), operative time (MD = 9.88; 95% CI [- 8.92,28.67]; P = 0.3), major morbidity (OR = 1.12; 95% CI [0.67,1.90]; P = 0.66), reoperation (OR = 0.97; 95% CI [0.41,2.32]; P = 0.95), readmission (OR = 0.99; 95% CI [0.57,1.72]; P = 0.97) or hospital stay (MD = - 0.95; 95% CI [- 5.22,3.31]; P = 0.66). However, the results of POPF and readmission were favorable for RS in the OCS group.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreas; Postoperative Complications; Reoperation; Risk Factors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37950142
DOI: 10.1007/s13304-023-01691-5 -
BMC Gastroenterology Jul 2018Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) remains to be established as a safe and effective alternative to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) for pancreatic-head and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) remains to be established as a safe and effective alternative to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) for pancreatic-head and periampullary malignancy. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare LPD with OPD for these malignancies regarding short-term surgical and long-term survival outcomes.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted before March 2018 to identify comparative studies in regard to outcomes of both LPD and OPD for the treatment of pancreatic-head and periampullary malignancies. Morbidity, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), mortality, operative time, estimated blood loss, hospitalization, retrieved lymph nodes, and survival outcomes were compared.
RESULTS
Among eleven identified studies, 1196 underwent LPD, and 8247 were operated through OPD. The pooled data showed that LPD was associated with less morbidity (OR = 0.57, 95%CI: 0.41~ 0.78, P < 0.01), less blood loss (WMD = - 372.96 ml, 95% CI, - 507.83~ - 238.09 ml, P < 0.01), shorter hospital stays (WMD = - 197.49 ml, 95% CI, - 304.62~ - 90.37 ml, P < 0.01), and comparable POPF (OR = 0.85, 95%CI: 0.59~ 1.24, P = 0.40), and overall survival (HR = 1.03, 95%CI: 0.93~ 1.14, P = 0.54) compared to OPD. Operative time was longer in LPD (WMD = 87.68 min; 95%CI: 27.05~ 148.32, P < 0.01), whereas R0 rate tended to be higher in LPD (OR = 1.17; 95%CI: 1.00~ 1.37, P = 0.05) and there tended to be more retrieved lymph nodes in LPD (WMD = 1.15, 95%CI: -0.16~ 2.47, P = 0.08), but these differences failed to reach statistical significance.
CONCLUSIONS
LPD can be performed as safe and effective as OPD for pancreatic-head and periampullary malignancy with respect to both surgical and oncological outcomes. LPD is associated with less intraoperative blood loss and postoperative morbidity and may serve as a promising alternative to OPD in selected individuals in the future.
Topics: Adenocarcinoma; Ampulla of Vater; Blood Loss, Surgical; Common Bile Duct Neoplasms; Humans; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Lymphatic Metastasis; Operative Time; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Postoperative Complications; Survival Analysis
PubMed: 29969999
DOI: 10.1186/s12876-018-0830-y -
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Mar 2016Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a frequent and clinically relevant problem after distal pancreatectomy. A variety of methods have been tested in the attempt... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a frequent and clinically relevant problem after distal pancreatectomy. A variety of methods have been tested in the attempt to prevent POPF, most of them without convincing results.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library to identify clinical studies comparing pancreatic stump closure with the addition of Tachosil(®) to conventional stump closure. The identified studies were critically appraised, and meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model. Dichotomous data were pooled using odds ratios, and weighted mean differences were calculated for continuous outcomes, together with the corresponding 95 % confidence intervals.
RESULTS
Four studies (two randomised controlled trials and two retrospective clinical studies) reporting data from 738 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall POPF, clinically-relevant POPF, mortality, reoperations, intraoperative blood loss and length of hospital stay did not differ significantly between conventional closure and additional covering of the pancreatic stump with Tachosil(®). A sensitivity analysis of only randomised controlled trials confirmed the results.
CONCLUSIONS
The application of Tachosil(®) to the pancreatic stump after distal pancreatectomy is a safe procedure but provides no relevant benefit in terms of POPF, mortality, reoperation rate, blood loss or length of hospital stay. Future research should concentrate on novel methods of pancreatic stump closure to prevent POPF after distal pancreatectomy.
Topics: Drug Combinations; Fibrinogen; Humans; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Postoperative Complications; Thrombin
PubMed: 26897031
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-016-1382-7 -
Medicine Aug 2015Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) holds high postoperative morbidity. How to resolve this issue is challenged. An additional anastomosis (Braun enteroenterostomy) following... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) holds high postoperative morbidity. How to resolve this issue is challenged. An additional anastomosis (Braun enteroenterostomy) following PD may decrease the postoperative morbidity, but holds conflicting results. The objective of this study is to investigate the advantages and disadvantages of Braun enteroenterostomy in PD.Clinical studies compared perioperative outcomes between the Braun group and the non-Braun group following PD before December 21, 2014 were retrieved and filtered from PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and Chinese electronic databases (VIP database, WanFang database, and CNKI database). Relevant data were extracted according to predesigned sheets. Blood loss, operating time, and postoperative mortality and morbidity were evaluated using odds ratio (OR), weighted mean difference, or standard mean difference (SMD).Ten studies concerning 1614 patients were included. No significant differences between the Braun and the non-Braun group were identified in mortality (OR: 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.26-1.60), intraoperative blood loss (SMD: -0.035, 95% CI: -0.253 to 0.183), postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) (OR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.35-1.67), bile leakage (OR: 0.537, 95% CI: 0.287-1.004), postoperative gastrointestinal hemorrhage (OR: 1.17, 95% CI: 0.578-2.385), intraabdominal abscesses (OR: 0.793, 95% CI: 0.444-1.419), wound complications (OR: 0.806, 95% CI: 0.490-1.325), and hospital stay (SMD: -0.098, 95% CI: -0.23 to 0.033). Braun enteroenterostomy extended operating time (SMD: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.02-0.78), but it was associated with lower reoperation rate (OR: 0.380, 95% CI: 0.149-0.968), lower morbidity rate (OR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.49-0.91), lower clinically relevant delayed gastric emptying (Grades B and C) (OR: 0.375, 95% CI: 0.164-0.858), lower nasogastric tube reinsertion (OR: 0.436, 95% CI: 0.232-0.818), and less postoperative vomiting (OR: 0.444, 95% CI: 0.262-0.755).Braun enteroenterostomy can be safely performed during PD. It is beneficial for patients and could be recommended in PD from the current published data.PROSPERO registration number: CRD42015016198.
Topics: Anastomosis, Surgical; Enterostomy; Humans; Length of Stay; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Postoperative Complications; Reoperation
PubMed: 26266356
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000001254 -
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery :... Jan 2016Parenchyma-sparing local extirpation of benign tumors of the pancreatic head provides the potential benefits of preservation of functional tissue and low postoperative... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Parenchyma-sparing local extirpation of benign tumors of the pancreatic head provides the potential benefits of preservation of functional tissue and low postoperative morbidity.
METHODS
Medline/PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were surveyed for studies performing limited resection of the pancreatic head and resection of a segment of the duodenum and common bile duct or preservation of the duodenum and common bile duct (CBD). The systematic analysis included 27 cohort studies that reported on limited pancreatic head resections for benign tumors. In a subgroup analysis, 12 of the cohort studies were additionally evaluated to compare the postoperative morbidity after total head resection including duodenal segment resection (DPPHR-S) and total head resection conserving duodenum and CBD (DPPHR-T).
RESULTS
Three hundred thirty-nine of a total of 503 patients (67.4%) underwent total head resections. One hundred forty-seven patients (29.2%) of them underwent segmental resection of the duodenum and CBD (DPPHR-S) and 192 patients (38.2%) underwent preservation of duodenum and CBD. One hundred sixty-four patients experienced partial head resection (32.6%). The final histological diagnosis revealed in 338 of 503 patients (67.2%) cystic neoplasms, 53 patients (10.3%) neuroendocrine tumors, and 20 patients (4.0%) low-risk periampullary carcinomas. Severe postoperative complications occurred in 62 of 490 patients (12.7%), pancreatic fistula B + C in 40 of 295 patients (13.6%), resurgery was experienced in 2.7%, and delayed gastric emptying in 12.3%. The 90-day mortality was 0.4%. The subgroup analysis comparing 143 DPPHR-S patients with 95 DPPHR-T patients showed that the respective rates of procedure-related biliary complications were 0.7% (1 of 143 patients) versus 8.4% (8 of 95 patients) (p ≤ 0.0032), and rates of duodenal complications were 0 versus 6.3% (6 of 95 patients) (p ≤ 0.0037). DPPHR-S was associated with a higher rate of delay of gastric emptying compared to DPPHR-T (18.9 vs. 2.1%, p ≤ 0.0001).
CONCLUSION
Parenchyma-sparing, limited head resection for benign tumors preserves functional pancreatic and duodenal tissue and carries in terms of fistula B + C rate, resurgery, rehospitalization, and 90-day mortality a low risk of postoperative complications. A subgroup analysis exhibited after total pancreatic head resection that preserves the duodenum and CBD an association with a significant increase in procedure-related biliary and duodenal complications compared to total head resection combined with resection of the periampullary segment of the duodenum and resection of the intrapancreatic CBD.
Topics: Common Bile Duct; Duodenum; Humans; Pancreas; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 26525207
DOI: 10.1007/s11605-015-2981-2 -
Journal of Investigative Surgery : the... Dec 2023Our objective is to compare the early outcomes associated with passive (gravity) drainage (PG) and active drainage (AD) after surgery. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Our objective is to compare the early outcomes associated with passive (gravity) drainage (PG) and active drainage (AD) after surgery.
METHODS
Studies published until April 28, 2022 were retrieved from the PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, Web of Science databases.
RESULTS
Nine studies with 14,169 patients were identified. Two groups had the same intra-abdominal infection rate (RR: 0.55; = 0.13); In subgroup analysis of pancreaticoduodenectomy, active drainage had no significant effect on postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) rate (RR: 1.21; = 0.26) and clinically relevant POPF (CR-POPF) (RR: 1.05; = 0.72); Active drainage was not associated with lower percutaneous drainage rate (RR: 1.00; = 0.96), incidence of sepsis (RR: 1.00; = 0.99) and overall morbidity (RR: 1.02; = 0.73). Both groups had the same POPF rate (RR: 1.20; = 0.18) and CR-POPF rate (RR: 1.20; = 0.18) after distal pancreatectomy. There was no difference between two groups on the day of drain removal after pancreaticoduodenectomy (Mean difference: -0.16; = 0.81) and liver surgery (Mean difference: 0.03; = 0.99).
CONCLUSIONS
Active drainage is not superior to passive drainage and both drainage methods can be considered.
Topics: Humans; Abdomen; Pancreas; Drainage; Pancreatectomy; Postoperative Complications; Pancreaticoduodenectomy
PubMed: 37733388
DOI: 10.1080/08941939.2023.2180115