-
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi =... Feb 2023Radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer results in various post-operative complications, and the influencing factors are complicated. The diagnosis, treatment and...
Radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer results in various post-operative complications, and the influencing factors are complicated. The diagnosis, treatment and prevention of common complications have been reported in many literatures. However, there are few reports on the prevention and treatment of rare complications. Rare complications after radical gastrectomy are often overlooked due to their low incidence. In addition, there are few guidelines and expert consensus regarding to the rare complications. Therefore, clinicians may lack experience in the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of rare complications after radical gastrectomy. Based on the literature review and the author's experience, this article systematically reviews seven rare complications after radical gastrectomy (duodenal stump fistula, pancreatic fistula, chyle leakage, esophagomediastinal fistula, internal hernia, gastroparesis, and intussusception). This article aims to provide a comprehensive reference for the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of rare complications after radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer patients.
Topics: Humans; Stomach Neoplasms; Gastrectomy; Postoperative Complications; Duodenal Diseases; Laparoscopy; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 36797559
DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn441530-20221102-00448 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2022This meta-analysis compares the perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) to those of open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) for pancreatic and...
Laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic and periampullary tumor: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and non-randomized comparative studies.
OBJECTIVE
This meta-analysis compares the perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) to those of open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) for pancreatic and periampullary tumors.
BACKGROUND
LPD has been increasingly applied in the treatment of pancreatic and periampullary tumors. However, the perioperative outcomes of LPD versus OPD are still controversial.
METHODS
PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized comparative trials (NRCTs) comparing LPD versus OPD for pancreatic and periampullary tumors. The main outcomes were mortality, morbidity, serious complications, and hospital stay. The secondary outcomes were operative time, blood loss, transfusion, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), bile leak (BL), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), lymph nodes harvested, R0 resection, reoperation, and readmission. RCTs were evaluated by the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. NRCTs were assessed using a modified tool from the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies. Data were pooled as odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD). This study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022338832).
RESULTS
Four RCTs and 35 NRCTs concerning a total of 40,230 patients (4,262 LPD and 35,968 OPD) were included. Meta-analyses showed no significant differences in mortality (OR 0.91, = 0.35), serious complications (OR 0.97, = 0.74), POPF (OR 0.93, = 0.29), PPH (OR 1.10, = 0.42), BL (OR 1.28, = 0.22), harvested lymph nodes (MD 0.66, = 0.09), reoperation (OR 1.10, = 0.41), and readmission (OR 0.95, = 0.46) between LPD and OPD. Operative time was significantly longer for LPD (MD 85.59 min, < 0.00001), whereas overall morbidity (OR 0.80, < 0.00001), hospital stay (MD -2.32 days, < 0.00001), blood loss (MD -173.84 ml, < 0.00001), transfusion (OR 0.62, = 0.0002), and DGE (OR 0.78, = 0.002) were reduced for LPD. The R0 rate was higher for LPD (OR 1.25, = 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
LPD is associated with non-inferior short-term surgical outcomes and oncologic adequacy compared to OPD when performed by experienced surgeons at large centers. LPD may result in reduced overall morbidity, blood loss, transfusion, and DGE, but longer operative time. Further RCTs should address the potential advantages of LPD over OPD.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO, identifier CRD42022338832.
PubMed: 36761416
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.1093395 -
Digestive Surgery 2022Nowadays, minimally invasive intervention (MII) has largely replaced delayed open surgery in acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP). However, the timing of MII remains... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Nowadays, minimally invasive intervention (MII) has largely replaced delayed open surgery in acute necrotizing pancreatitis (ANP). However, the timing of MII remains unclear. The present study investigated the effect of early versus delayed MII on complications in ANP.
METHODS
Studies evaluating the impact of the timing of MII on complications in ANP patients were thoroughly searched on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science from inception to June 2022. The primary outcome of interest was mortality. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of complications.
RESULTS
Nine studies reporting 870 patients undergoing MII for ANP were included. No significant difference was found in mortality between the early and delayed intervention groups. In addition, the timing of MII was not associated with the incidence of new-onset respiratory failure, new-onset cardiovascular failure, new-onset renal failure, new-onset multiple organ failure, gastrointestinal fistula or perforation, pancreatic fistula, stent migration, bleeding, venous thrombosis, and new-onset pancreatic endocrine insufficiency. Notably, in the subgroup analysis of biliary and Asian ANP patients, early intervention was associated with a significantly higher risk of new-onset renal failure than delayed intervention.
CONCLUSIONS
Early intervention is safe and recommended only for patients with indications for intervention, such as infection.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatitis, Acute Necrotizing; Pancreatic Fistula; Exocrine Pancreatic Insufficiency; Stents
PubMed: 36750033
DOI: 10.1159/000529465 -
World Journal of Emergency Surgery :... Jan 2023A series of randomized controlled trials have investigated the efficacy and safety of different timings of interventions and methods of intervention. However, the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
A series of randomized controlled trials have investigated the efficacy and safety of different timings of interventions and methods of intervention. However, the optimal treatment strategy is not yet clear.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov and the Cochrane Library until November 30, 2022. A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis were performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Trials comparing different treatment strategies for necrotizing pancreatitis were included. This study was registered in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022364409) to ensure transparency.
RESULTS
We analyzed a total of 10 studies involving 570 patients and 8 treatment strategies. Although no statistically significant differences were identified comparing odds ratios, trends were confirmed by the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) scores. The interventions with a low rate of mortality were delayed surgery (DS), delayed surgical step-up approach (DSU) and delayed endoscopic step-up approach (DEU), while the interventions with a low rate of major complications were DSU, DEU and DS. According to the clustered ranking plot, DSU performed the best overall in reducing mortality and major complications, while DD performed the worst. Analysis of the secondary endpoints confirmed the superiority of DEU and DSU in terms of individual components of major complications (organ failure, pancreatic fistula, bleeding, and visceral organ or enterocutaneous fistula), exocrine insufficiency, endocrine insufficiency and length of stay. Overall, DSU was superior to other interventions.
CONCLUSION
DSU was the optimal treatment strategy for necrotizing pancreatitis. Drainage alone should be avoided in clinical practice. Any interventions should be postponed for at least 4 weeks if possible. The step-up approach was preferred.
Topics: Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Bayes Theorem; Pancreatitis, Acute Necrotizing; Drainage
PubMed: 36707836
DOI: 10.1186/s13017-023-00479-7 -
Surgery May 2023The aim of this meta-analysis and systematic review was to evaluate the association between intraoperative bile cultures and postoperative complications of patients... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The aim of this meta-analysis and systematic review was to evaluate the association between intraoperative bile cultures and postoperative complications of patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy.
METHODS
A detailed literature search was performed from January 2015 to July 2022 in PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and EMBASE for related research publications. The data were extracted, screened, and graded independently. An analysis of pooled data was performed, and a risk ratio with corresponding confidence intervals was calculated and summarized.
RESULTS
A total of 8 articles were included with 1,778 pancreaticoduodenectomy patients who had an intraoperative bile culture performed. A systematic review demonstrated that some of the most common organisms isolated in a positive intraoperative bile culture were Enterococcus species, Klebsiella species, and E. coli. Four studies also showed that specific microorganisms were associated with specific postoperative complications (surgical site infection and intra-abdominal abscess). The postoperative complications that were evaluated for an association with a positive intraoperative bile culture were surgical site infections (risk ratio = 2.33, 95% confidence interval [1.47-3.69], P < .01), delayed gastric emptying (risk ratio = 1.23, 95% confidence interval [0.63-2.38], P = n.s.), 90-day mortality (risk ratio = 0.68, 95% confidence interval [0.01-52.76], P = n.s.), postoperative pancreatic hemorrhage (risk ratio = 1.70, 95% confidence interval [0.33-8.74], P = n.s.), intra-abdominal abscess (risk ratio = 1.70, 95% confidence interval [0.38-7.56], P = n.s.), and postoperative pancreatic fistula (risk ratio = 0.97, 95% confidence interval [0.72-1.32], P = n.s.).
CONCLUSION
The cumulative data suggest that a positive intraoperative bile culture has no association with predicting the postoperative complications of delayed gastric emptying, 90-day mortality, postoperative pancreatic hemorrhage, intra-abdominal abscess, or postoperative pancreatic fistula. However, the data also suggest that a positive intraoperative bile culture was associated with a patient developing a surgical site infection.
Topics: Humans; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Surgical Wound Infection; Pancreatic Fistula; Bile; Gastroparesis; Escherichia coli; Pancreatic Diseases; Postoperative Hemorrhage; Abdominal Abscess; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 36707272
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2022.12.012 -
Surgical Endoscopy May 2023Pancreaticoduodenectomy is the first choice surgical intervention for the radical treatment of pancreatic tumors. However, an anastomotic fistula is a common... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Pancreaticoduodenectomy is the first choice surgical intervention for the radical treatment of pancreatic tumors. However, an anastomotic fistula is a common complication after pancreaticoduodenectomy with a high mortality rate. With the development of minimally invasive surgery, open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD), laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD), and robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) are gaining interest. But the impact of these surgical methods on the risk of anastomosis has not been confirmed. Therefore, we aimed to integrate relevant clinical studies and explore the effects of these three surgical methods on the occurrence of anastomotic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was conducted for studies reporting the RPD, LPD, and OPD. Network meta-analysis of postoperative anastomotic fistula (Pancreatic fistula, biliary leakage, gastrointestinal fistula) was performed.
RESULTS
Sixty-five studies including 10,026 patients were included in the network meta-analysis. The rank of risk probability of pancreatic fistula for RPD (0.00) was better than LPD (0.37) and OPD (0.62). Thus, the analysis suggests the rank of risk of the postoperative pancreatic fistula for RPD, LPD, and OPD. The rank of risk probability for biliary leakage was similar for RPD (0.15) and LPD (0.15), and both were better than OPD (0.68).
CONCLUSIONS
This network meta-analysis provided ranking for three different types of pancreaticoduodenectomy. The RPD and LPD can effectively improve the quality of surgery and are safe as well as feasible for OPD.
Topics: Humans; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Network Meta-Analysis; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Anastomosis, Surgical; Postoperative Complications; Laparoscopy; Retrospective Studies; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Length of Stay
PubMed: 36627536
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09832-4 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2022To evaluate the consistencies and inconsistencies between distal cholangiocarcinoma (DCCA) and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDCA) regarding their biological...
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the consistencies and inconsistencies between distal cholangiocarcinoma (DCCA) and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDCA) regarding their biological features and long-term prognosis.
METHODS
PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE were searched to find comparative studies between DCCA and PDCA. RevMan5.3 and Stata 13.0 software were used for the statistical analyses.
RESULTS
Eleven studies with 4,698 patients with DCCA and 100,629 patients with PDCA were identified. Pooled results indicated that patients with DCCA had a significantly higher rate of preoperative jaundice (p = 0.0003). Lymphatic metastasis (p < 0.00001), vascular invasion (p < 0.0001), and peri-neural invasion (p = 0.005) were more frequently detected in patients with PDCA. After curative pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), a significantly higher R0 rate (p < 0.0001) and significantly smaller tumor size (p < 0.00001) were detected in patients with DCCA. Patients with DCCA had a more favorable overall survival (OS) (p < 0.00001) and disease-free survival (DFS) (p = 0.005) than patients with PDCA. However, postoperative morbidities (p = 0.02), especially postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) (p < 0.00001), more frequently occurred in DCCA.
CONCLUSION
Patients with DCCA had more favorable tumor pathological features and long-term prognosis than patients with PDCA. An early diagnosis more frequently occurred in patients with DCCA. However, postoperative complications, especially POPF, were more frequently observed in patients with DCCA.
PubMed: 36578941
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.1042493 -
Annals of Surgery May 2023To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials compared laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) versus open pancreatoduodenectomy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials compared laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) in patients with periampullary tumors.
BACKGROUND
LPD has gained attention; however, its safety and efficacy versus OPD remain debatable.
METHODS
We searched PubMed and Embase. Primary outcomes were the length of hospital stay (LOS) (day), Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III complications, and 90-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were blood loss (milliliter), blood transfusion, duration of operation (minute), readmission, reoperation, comprehensive complication index score, bile leak, gastrojejunostomy or duodenojejunostomy leak, postoperative pancreatic fistula, postpancreatectomy hemorrhage, delayed gastric emptying, surgical site infection, intra-abdominal infection, number of harvested lymph nodes, and R0 resection. Pooled odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD) of data was calculated using the random-effect model. The grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation approach was used for grading the level of evidence.
RESULTS
Four randomized controlled trials yielding 818 patients were included, of which 411 and 407 patients underwent LPD and OPD, respectively. The meta-analysis concluded that 2 approaches were similar, except in the LPD group, the LOS tended to be shorter [MD=-2.54 (-5.17, 0.09), P =0.06], LOS in ICU was shorter [MD=-1 (-1.8, -0.2), P =0.01], duration of operation was longer [MD=75.16 (23.29, 127.03), P =0.005], blood loss was lower [MD=-115.40 (-152.13, -78.68), P <0.00001], blood transfusion was lower [OR=0.66 (0.47, 0.92), P =0.01], and surgical site infection was lower [OR=0.35 (0.12, 0.96), P =0.04]. The overall certainty of the evidence was moderate.
CONCLUSIONS
Within the hands of highly skilled surgeons in high-volume centers, LPD is feasible and as safe and efficient as OPD.
Topics: Humans; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Pancreas; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Pancreatic Fistula; Surgical Wound Infection; Laparoscopy; Postoperative Complications; Length of Stay; Retrospective Studies; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36519444
DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000005785 -
Canadian Journal of Surgery. Journal... 2022Patients should be informed beforehand of the risk factors for exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (ExoPI) after pancreatic surgery; however, there are no clear identified... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Patients should be informed beforehand of the risk factors for exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (ExoPI) after pancreatic surgery; however, there are no clear identified risk factors for this condition. This study aimed to identify the preoperative, perioperative and postoperative risk factors for ExoPI after pancreatic surgery.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, SAGE, CINAHL Plus and Taylor & Francis from inception to Mar. 7, 2021, for full-text articles that included patients who had undergone pancreatic surgery. The primary outcome was the number of ExoPI events and any risk factors evaluated. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to assess study quality.
RESULTS
Twenty studies involving 4131 patients (2312 [52.3%] male, mean age 60.12 [standard deviation 14.07] yr) were included. Of the 4131 patients, 1651 (40.0%) had postoperative ExoPI. Among the 11 factors evaluated, the significant risk factors were preoperative main pancreatic duct (MPD) diameter greater than 3 mm (odds ratio [OR] 4.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-19.05), pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) as the surgical treatment procedure (OR 3.31, 95% CI 1.92-5.68), pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) as the anastomotic procedure (OR 3.13, 95% CI 1.83-5.35), hard pancreatic texture (OR 2.93, 95% CI 1.99-4.32) and adjuvant chemotherapy (OR 2.50, 95% CI 1.54-4.04). Gender, history of diabetes mellitus or endocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EndoPI), underlying diseases, de novo diabetes or EndoPI, pylorus-preserving PD and postoperative pancreatic fistula were not risk factors for ExoPI after pancreatic surgery.
CONCLUSION
Preoperative MPD diameter greater than 3 mm, PD, PG reconstruction, hard pancreatic texture and adjuvant chemotherapy were risk factors for the development of ExoPI after pancreatic surgery. The findings should provide useful information for patients to reduce postoperative dissatisfaction and improve quality of life.
Topics: Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Female; Quality of Life; Exocrine Pancreatic Insufficiency; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Pancreatectomy; Pancreas; Postoperative Complications; Pancreatic Diseases
PubMed: 36384688
DOI: 10.1503/cjs.010621 -
Life (Basel, Switzerland) Nov 2022Background and Aims: Recent single-center retrospective studies have focused on laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) in elderly patients, and compared the outcomes... (Review)
Review
Background and Aims: Recent single-center retrospective studies have focused on laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) in elderly patients, and compared the outcomes between the laparoscopic and open approaches. Our study aimed to determine the outcomes of LPD in the elderly patients, by performing a systematic review and a meta-analysis of relevant studies. Methods: A comprehensive literature review was conducted utilizing the Embase, Medline, PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane databases to identify all studies that compared laparoscopic vs. open approach for pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). Results: Five retrospective studies were included in the final analysis. Overall, 90-day mortality rates were significantly decreased after LPD in elderly patients compared with open approaches (RR = 0.56; 95%CI: 0.32−0.96; p = 0.037, I2 = 0%). The laparoscopic approach had similar mortality rate at 30-day, readmission rate in hospital, Clavien−Dindo complications, pancreatic fistula grade B/C, complete resection rate, reoperation for complications and blood loss as the open approach. Additionally, comparing with younger patients (<70 years old), no significant differences were seen in elderly cohort patients regarding mortality rate at 90 days, readmission rate to hospital, and complication rate. Conclusions: Based on our meta-analysis, we identify that LPD in elderly is a safe procedure, with significantly lower 90-day mortality rates when compared with the open approach. Our results should be considered with caution, considering the retrospective analyses of the included studies; larger prospective studies are required.
PubMed: 36362961
DOI: 10.3390/life12111810