-
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Aug 2023Reducing clinically relevant post-operative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) incidence after pancreatic resections has been a topic of great academic interest. Optimizing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Reducing clinically relevant post-operative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) incidence after pancreatic resections has been a topic of great academic interest. Optimizing post-operative drain management is a potential strategy in reducing this major complication.
METHODS
Studies involving pancreatic resections, including both pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) and distal pancreatic resections (DP), with intra-operative drain placement were screened. Early drain removal was defined as removal before or on the 3rd post-operative day (POD) while late drain removal was defined as after the 3rd POD. The primary outcome was CR-POPF, International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) Grade B and above. Secondary outcomes were all complications, severe complications, post-operative haemorrhage, intra-abdominal infections, delayed gastric emptying, reoperation, length of stay, readmission, and mortality.
RESULTS
Nine studies met the inclusion criteria and were included for analysis. The studies had a total of 8574 patients, comprising 1946 in the early removal group and 6628 in the late removal group. Early drain removal was associated with a significantly lower risk of CR-POPF (OR: 0.24, p < 0.01). Significant reduction in risk of post-operative haemorrhage (OR: 0.55, p < 0.01), intra-abdominal infection (OR: 0.35, p < 0.01), re-admission (OR: 0.63, p < 0.01), re-operation (OR: 0.70, p = 0.03), presence of any complications (OR: 0.46, p < 0.01), and reduced length of stay (SMD: -0.75, p < 0.01) in the early removal group was also observed.
CONCLUSION
Early drain removal is associated with significant reductions in incidence of CR-POPF and other post-operative complications. Further prospective randomised trials in this area are recommended to validate these findings.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy; Device Removal; Pancreas; Postoperative Complications; Postoperative Hemorrhage; Intraabdominal Infections
PubMed: 37587225
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-03053-6 -
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Aug 2023Most studies on minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) combine patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancers even though there is substantial heterogeneity... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The clinical implication of minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for non-pancreatic periampullary cancer: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Most studies on minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) combine patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancers even though there is substantial heterogeneity between these tumors. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the role of MIPD compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) in patients with non-pancreatic periampullary cancer (NPPC).
METHODS
A systematic review of Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases was performed by two independent reviewers to identify studies comparing MIPD and OPD for NPPC (ampullary, distal cholangio, and duodenal adenocarcinoma) (01/2015-12/2021). Individual patient data were required from all identified studies. Primary outcomes were (90-day) mortality, and major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo 3a-5). Secondary outcomes were postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), blood-loss, length of hospital stay (LOS), and overall survival (OS).
RESULTS
Overall, 16 studies with 1949 patients were included, combining 928 patients with ampullary, 526 with distal cholangio, and 461 with duodenal cancer. In total, 902 (46.3%) patients underwent MIPD, and 1047 (53.7%) patients underwent OPD. The rates of 90-day mortality, major morbidity, POPF, DGE, PPH, blood-loss, and length of hospital stay did not differ between MIPD and OPD. Operation time was 67 min longer in the MIPD group (P = 0.009). A decrease in DFS for ampullary (HR 2.27, P = 0.019) and distal cholangio (HR 1.84, P = 0.025) cancer, as well as a decrease in OS for distal cholangio (HR 1.71, P = 0.045) and duodenal cancer (HR 4.59, P < 0.001) was found in the MIPD group.
CONCLUSIONS
This individual patient data meta-analysis of MIPD versus OPD in patients with NPPC suggests that MIPD is not inferior in terms of short-term morbidity and mortality. Several major limitations in long-term data highlight a research gap that should be studied in prospective maintained international registries or randomized studies for ampullary, distal cholangio, and duodenum cancer separately.
PROTOCOL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO (CRD42021277495) on the 25th of October 2021.
Topics: Humans; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Duodenal Neoplasms; Prospective Studies; Pancreas; Postoperative Complications; Laparoscopy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37581763
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-03047-4 -
World Journal of Surgery Oct 2023Minimally-invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) is fraught with the risk of complication-related deaths (LEOPARD-2), a significant volume-outcome relationship and a long... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Minimally-invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) is fraught with the risk of complication-related deaths (LEOPARD-2), a significant volume-outcome relationship and a long learning curve. With rates of conversion for MIPD approaching 40%, the impact of these on overall patient outcomes, especially, when unplanned, are yet to be fully elucidated. This study aimed to compare peri-operative outcomes of (unplanned) converted MIPD against both successfully completed MIPD and upfront open PD.
METHODS
A systematic review of major reference databases was undertaken. The primary outcome of interest was 30-day mortality. Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to judge the quality of the studies. Meta-analysis was performed using pooled estimates, derived using random effects model.
RESULTS
Six studies involving 20,267 patients were included in the review. Pooled analysis demonstrated (unplanned) converted MIPD were associated with an increased 30-day (RR 2.83, CI 1.62- 4.93, p = 0.0002, I = 0%) and 90-day (RR 1.81, CI 1.16- 2.82, p = 0.009, I = 28%) mortality and overall morbidity (RR 1.41, CI 1.09; 1.82, p = 0.0087, I = 82%) compared to successfully completed MIPD. Patients undergoing (unplanned) converted MIPD experienced significantly higher 30-day mortality (RR 3.97, CI 2.07; 7.65, p < 0.0001, I = 0%), pancreatic fistula (RR 1.65, CI 1.22- 2.23, p = 0.001, I = 0%) and re-exploration rates (RR 1.96, CI 1.17- 3.28, p = 0.01, I = 37%) compared upfront open PD.
CONCLUSIONS
Patient outcomes are significantly compromised following unplanned intraoperative conversions of MIPD when compared to successfully completed MIPD and upfront open PD. These findings stress the need for objective evidence-based guidelines for patient selection for MIPD.
Topics: Humans; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Postoperative Complications; Databases, Factual; Patient Selection; Laparoscopy
PubMed: 37436469
DOI: 10.1007/s00268-023-07114-1 -
HPB : the Official Journal of the... Oct 2023Postoperative complications following distal pancreatectomy (DP) are common, especially postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). In order to design adequate prophylactic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Postoperative complications following distal pancreatectomy (DP) are common, especially postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). In order to design adequate prophylactic strategies, it is of relevance to determine the costs of these complications. An overview of the literature on the costs of complications following DP is lacking.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library (inception until 1 August 2022). The primary outcome was the costs (i.e. cost differential) of major morbidity, individual complications and prolonged hospital stay. Quality of non-RCTs were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Costs were compared with the use of Purchasing Power parity. This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021223019).
RESULTS
Overall, seven studies were included with 854 patients after DP. The rate POPF grade B/C varied between 13% and 27% (based on five studies) with a corresponding cost differential of EUR 18,389 (based on two studies). The rate of severe morbidity varied between 13% and 38% (based on five studies) with a corresponding cost differential of EUR 19,281 (based on five studies).
CONCLUSION
This systematic review reported considerable costs for POPF grade B/C and severe morbidity after DP. Prospective databases and studies should report on all complications in a uniform matter to better display the economic burden of complications of DP.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy; Pancreas; Pancreatic Fistula; Postoperative Complications; Morbidity; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37391314
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2023.03.007 -
Surgery Sep 2023Postoperative pancreatic fistula is a frequent and potentially lethal complication after pancreatoduodenectomy. Several models have been developed to predict...
A Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis analysis to evaluate the quality of reporting of postoperative pancreatic fistula prediction models after pancreatoduodenectomy: A systematic review.
BACKGROUND
Postoperative pancreatic fistula is a frequent and potentially lethal complication after pancreatoduodenectomy. Several models have been developed to predict postoperative pancreatic fistula risk. This study was performed to evaluate the quality of reporting of postoperative pancreatic fistula prediction models after pancreatoduodenectomy using the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) checklist that provides guidelines on reporting prediction models to enhance transparency and to help in the decision-making regarding the implementation of the appropriate risk models into clinical practice.
METHODS
Studies that described prediction models to predict postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy were searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The TRIPOD checklist was used to evaluate the adherence rate. The area under the curve and other performance measures were extracted if reported. A quadrant matrix chart is created to plot the area under the curve against TRIPOD adherence rate to find models with a combination of above-average TRIPOD adherence and area under the curve.
RESULTS
In total, 52 predictive models were included (23 development, 15 external validation, 4 incremental value, and 10 development and external validation). No risk model achieved 100% adherence to the TRIPOD. The mean adherence rate was 65%. Most authors failed to report on missing data and actions to blind assessment of predictors. Thirteen models had an above-average performance for TRIPOD checklist adherence and area under the curve.
CONCLUSION
Although the average TRIPOD adherence rate for postoperative pancreatic fistula models after pancreatoduodenectomy was 65%, higher compared to other published models, it does not meet TRIPOD standards for transparency. This study identified 13 models that performed above average in TRIPOD adherence and area under the curve, which could be the appropriate models to be used in clinical practice.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Prognosis; Checklist
PubMed: 37296054
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2023.04.058 -
International Journal of Surgery... Aug 2023Pancreatectomy is the only curative treatment available for pancreatic cancer and a necessity for patients with challenging pancreatic pathology. To optimize outcomes,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Pancreatectomy is the only curative treatment available for pancreatic cancer and a necessity for patients with challenging pancreatic pathology. To optimize outcomes, postsurgical complications such as clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) should be minimized. Central to this is the ability to predict and diagnose CR-POPF, potentially through drain fluid biomarkers. This study aimed to assess the utility of drain fluid biomarkers for predicting CR-POPF by conducting a diagnostic test accuracy systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
Five databases were searched for relevant and original papers published from January 2000 to December 2021, with citation chaining capturing additional studies. The QUADAS-2 tool was used to assess the risk of bias and concerns regarding applicability of the selected studies.
RESULTS
Seventy-eight papers were included in the meta-analysis, encompassing six drain biomarkers and 30 758 patients with a CR-POPF prevalence of 17.42%. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for 15 cut-offs were determined. Potential triage tests (negative predictive value >90%) were identified for the ruling out of CR-POPF and included postoperative day 1 (POD1) drain amylase in pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) patients (300 U/l) and in mixed surgical cohorts (2500 U/l), POD3 drain amylase in PD patients (1000-1010 U/l) and drain lipase in mixed surgery groups (180 U/l). Notably, drain POD3 lipase had a higher sensitivity than POD3 amylase, while POD3 amylase had a higher specificity than POD1.
CONCLUSIONS
The current findings using the pooled cut-offs will offer options for clinicians seeking to identify patients for quicker recovery. Improving the reporting of future diagnostic test studies will further clarify the diagnostic utility of drain fluid biomarkers, facilitating their inclusion in multivariable risk-stratification models and the improvement of pancreatectomy outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreas; Pancreatectomy; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Postoperative Complications; Drainage; Biomarkers; Amylases; Risk Factors
PubMed: 37216227
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000482 -
Annals of Surgery Oct 2023Examine the potential benefit of total pancreatectomy (TP) as an alternative to pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) in patients at high risk for postoperative pancreatic fistula... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Role of Total Pancreatectomy as an Alternative to Pancreatoduodenectomy in Patients at High Risk for Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula: Is it a Justifiable Indication?
OBJECTIVE
Examine the potential benefit of total pancreatectomy (TP) as an alternative to pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) in patients at high risk for postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF).
SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA
TP is mentioned as an alternative to PD in patients at high risk for POPF, but a systematic review is lacking.
METHODS
Systematic review and meta-analyses using Pubmed, Embase (Ovid), and Cochrane Library to identify studies published up to October 2022, comparing elective single-stage TP for any indication versus PD in patients at high risk for POPF. The primary endpoint was short-term mortality. Secondary endpoints were major morbidity (i.e., Clavien-Dindo grade ≥IIIa) on the short-term and quality of life.
RESULTS
After screening 1212 unique records, five studies with 707 patients (334 TP and 373 high-risk PD) met the eligibility criteria, comprising one randomized controlled trial and four observational studies. The 90-day mortality after TP and PD did not differ (6.3% vs. 6.2%; RR=1.04 [95%CI 0.56-1.93]). Major morbidity rate was lower after TP compared to PD (26.7% vs. 38.3%; RR=0.65 [95%CI 0.48-0.89]), but no significance was seen in matched/randomized studies (29.0% vs. 36.9%; RR = 0.73 [95%CI 0.48-1.10]). Two studies investigated quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30) at a median of 30-52 months, demonstrating comparable global health status after TP and PD (77% [±15] vs. 76% [±20]; P =0.857).
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review and meta-analysis found no reduction in short-term mortality and major morbidity after TP as compared to PD in patients at high risk for POPF. However, if TP is used as a bail-out procedure, the comparable long-term quality of life is reassuring.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Quality of Life; Pancreas; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 37161977
DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000005895 -
The American Surgeon Nov 2023To evaluate comparative outcomes of complete and partial excision of infected mesh following abdominal wall hernia repair. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
To evaluate comparative outcomes of complete and partial excision of infected mesh following abdominal wall hernia repair.
METHODS
A systematic search of electronic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL, and bibliographic reference lists with application of a combination of free text and controlled vocabulary search adapted to thesaurus headings, search operators and limits was conducted. Surgical site infection chronic sinus formation, recurrent hernia, and need for reoperation were the evaluated outcome measures.
RESULTS
Six comparative observational studies were identified, reporting a total of 317 patients of whom 193 underwent complete mesh excision and the remaining 123 patients underwent partial mesh excision for an infected mesh following abdominal wall hernia repair. The complete mesh excision was associated with significantly lower rates of SSIs (OR: .36; 95% CI, .16-.81, = .01), chronic sinus formation (OR: .11; 95% CI, .02-.71, = .02), and reoperation (OR: .10; 95% CI, .03-.33, = .0001) compared to the partial mesh excision. There was no significant difference in hernia recurrence rate (OR: 3.96.16, 95% CI .62-25.44, = .15) between two groups. The between-study heterogeneity was moderate in all the analyses.
CONCLUSIONS
Complete mesh excision may be associated with lower SSI, chronic sinus formation and need for reoperation when compared to the partial mesh excision in an infected mesh event. However, the available evidence has failed to report the outcomes with respect to the main confounding factors which, together with other important outcomes such as fistula formation, should be considered by future high quality research.
Topics: Humans; Abdominal Wall; Digestive System Surgical Procedures; Hernia, Ventral; Herniorrhaphy; Recurrence; Surgical Mesh; Surgical Wound Infection
PubMed: 35722833
DOI: 10.1177/00031348221109816