-
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 -
Updates in Surgery Jan 2023Robotic surgery has become a promising surgical method in minimally invasive pancreatic surgery due to its three-dimensional visualization, tremor filtration, motion... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Robotic surgery has become a promising surgical method in minimally invasive pancreatic surgery due to its three-dimensional visualization, tremor filtration, motion scaling, and better ergonomics. Numerous studies have explored the benefits of RDP over LDP in terms of perioperative safety and feasibility, but no consensus has been achieved yet. This article aimed to evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of RDP and LDP for perioperative outcomes. By June 2022, all studies comparing RDP to LDP in the PubMed, the Embase, and the Cochrane Library database were systematically reviewed. According to the heterogeneity, fix or random-effects models were used for the meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes. Odds ratio (OR), weighted mean differences (WMD), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. A sensitivity analysis was performed to explore potential sources of high heterogeneity and a trim and fill analysis was used to evaluate the impact of publication bias on the pooled results. Thirty-four studies met the inclusion criteria. RDP provides greater benefit than LDP for higher spleen preservation (OR 3.52 95% CI 2.62-4.73, p < 0.0001) and Kimura method (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.42-2.62, p < 0.0001) in benign and low-grade malignant tumors. RDP is associated with lower conversion to laparotomy (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.33-0.52, p < 0.00001), and shorter postoperative hospital stay (WMD - 0.57, 95% CI - 0.92 to - 0.21, p = 0.002), but it is more costly. In terms of postoperative complications, there was no difference between RDP and LDP except for 30-day mortality (RDP versus LDP, 0.1% versus 1.0%, p = 0.03). With the exception of its high cost, RDP appears to outperform LDP on perioperative outcomes and is technologically feasible and safe. High-quality prospective randomized controlled trials are advised for further confirmation as the quality of the evidence now is not high.
Topics: Humans; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Pancreatectomy; Prospective Studies; Treatment Outcome; Length of Stay; Operative Time; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Laparoscopy
PubMed: 36378464
DOI: 10.1007/s13304-022-01413-3 -
Surgical Endoscopy Apr 2023The present paper aims at evaluating the potential benefits of high-energy devices (HEDs) in the Italian surgical practice, defining the comparative efficacy and safety...
High-energy devices in different surgical settings: lessons learnt from a full health technology assessment report developed by SICE (Società Italiana di Chirurgia Endoscopica).
BACKGROUND
The present paper aims at evaluating the potential benefits of high-energy devices (HEDs) in the Italian surgical practice, defining the comparative efficacy and safety profiles, as well as the potential economic and organizational advantages for hospitals and patients, with respect to standard monopolar or bipolar devices.
METHODS
A Health Technology Assessment was conducted in 2021 assuming the hospital perspective, comparing HEDs and standard monopolar/bipolar devices, within eleven surgical settings: appendectomy, hepatic resections, colorectal resections, cholecystectomy, splenectomy, hemorrhoidectomy, thyroidectomy, esophago-gastrectomy, breast surgery, adrenalectomy, and pancreatectomy. The nine EUnetHTA Core Model dimensions were deployed considering a multi-methods approach. Both qualitative and quantitative methods were used: (1) a systematic literature review for the definition of the comparative efficacy and safety data; (2) administration of qualitative questionnaires, completed by 23 healthcare professionals (according to 7-item Likert scale, ranging from - 3 to + 3); and (3) health-economics tools, useful for the economic evaluation of the clinical pathway and budget impact analysis, and for the definition of the organizational and accessibility advantages, in terms of time or procedures' savings.
RESULTS
The literature declared a decrease in operating time and length of stay in using HEDs in most surgical settings. While HEDs would lead to a marginal investment for the conduction of 178,619 surgeries on annual basis, their routinely implementation would generate significant organizational savings. A decrease equal to - 5.25/-9.02% of operating room time and to - 5.03/-30.73% of length of stay emerged. An advantage in accessibility to surgery could be hypothesized in a 9% of increase, due to the gaining in operatory slots. Professionals' perceptions crystallized and confirmed literature evidence, declaring a better safety and effectiveness profile. An improvement in both patients and caregivers' quality-of-life emerged.
CONCLUSIONS
The results have demonstrated the strategic relevance related to HEDs introduction, their economic sustainability, and feasibility, as well as the potentialities in process improvement.
Topics: Humans; Technology Assessment, Biomedical; Hospitals; Italy; Pancreatectomy; Cost-Benefit Analysis
PubMed: 36333498
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09734-5 -
Annals of Medicine and Surgery (2012) Oct 2022Post-pancreatectomy bleeding is a potentially fatal complication which results from the erosion of the regional visceral arteries, mainly the hepatic artery and stump of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Post-pancreatectomy bleeding is a potentially fatal complication which results from the erosion of the regional visceral arteries, mainly the hepatic artery and stump of the gastro-duodenal artery, caused by a leak or fistula from the pancreatic anastomosis. The objective of this article is to assess whether wrapping of regional vessels with omentum or falciform/teres ligament following pancreaticoduodenectomy reduces the risk of extra-luminal bleeding.
MATERIALS AND METHOD
Standard medical electronic databases were searched with the help of a local librarian and relevant published randomised controlled trials (RCT) and any type of comparative trial were shortlisted according to the inclusion criteria. The summated outcome of post-operative extra-luminal bleeding in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy was evaluated using the principles of meta-analysis on RevMan 5 statistical software.
RESULT
Two RCTs and 5 retrospective studies on 4100 patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy were found suitable for this meta-analysis. There were 1404 patients in the wrapping-group (WG) and 2696 patients in the no-wrapping group (NWG). In the random effects model analysis, the incidence of extra-luminal haemorrhage was statistically lower in WG [odds ratio 0.51, 95%, CI (0.31, 0.85), Z = 2.59, P = 0.01]. There was moderate heterogeneity between the studies; however it was not statistically significant.
CONCLUSION
The wrapping of regional vessels (using omentum, falciform ligament or ligamentum teres) following pancreaticoduodenectomy seems to reduce the risk of post-operative extra-luminal bleeding. However, more RCTs of robust quality recruiting a greater number of patients are required to validate these findings as this study presents the combined data of two RCTs and 5 retrospective studies.
PubMed: 36268446
DOI: 10.1016/j.amsu.2022.104618 -
HPB : the Official Journal of the... Dec 2022Surgical site infections (SSI) cause significant morbidity. Prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) may promote wound healing and decrease SSI. The objective... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Surgical site infections (SSI) cause significant morbidity. Prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) may promote wound healing and decrease SSI. The objective is to evaluate the effect of prophylactic NPWT on SSI in patients undergoing pancreatectomy.
METHODS
Electronic databases were searched from inception until April 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing prophylactic NPWT to standard dressings in patients undergoing pancreatectomy were included. The primary outcome was the risk of SSI. Secondary outcomes included the risk of superficial and deep SSI and organ space infection (OSI). Random effects models were used for meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Four single-centre RCTs including 309 patients were identified. Three studies were industry-sponsored, and two were at high risk of bias. There was no significant difference in the risk of SSI in patients receiving NPWT vs. control (14% vs. 21%, RR = 0.72, 95%CI = 0.32-1.60, p = 0.42, I = 53%). Likewise, there was no significant difference in the risk of superficial and deep SSI or OSI. No significant difference was found on subgroup analysis of patients at high risk of wound infection or on sensitivity analysis of studies at low risk of bias.
CONCLUSION
Prophylactic NPWT does not significantly decrease the risk of SSI among patients undergoing pancreatectomy. Insufficient evidence exists to justify the routine use of NPWT.
Topics: Humans; Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy; Surgical Wound Infection; Bandages; Wound Healing; Pancreatectomy
PubMed: 36244906
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2022.08.010 -
Asian Journal of Surgery May 2023Whether early or late drain removal (EDR/LDR) is better for patients after pancreatic resection remains controversial. We aim to systematically evaluate the safety and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Whether early or late drain removal (EDR/LDR) is better for patients after pancreatic resection remains controversial. We aim to systematically evaluate the safety and efficacy of early or late drain removal in patients who undergo pancreatic resection. We searched seven databases from January 1, 2000, through September 2021, and included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or observational studies comparing EDR vs. LDR in patients after pancreatic resection. We separately pooled effect estimates across RCTs and observational studies. Finally, we included 4 RCTs with 711 patients and 8 nonRCTs with 7207 patients. Based on the pooled RCT data, compared to LDR, EDR reduced hospital length of stay (LOS) (RR: -2.59, 95% CI: -4.13 to -1.06) and hospital cost (RR: -1022.27, 95% CI: -1990.39 to -54.19). Based on the pooled nonRCT data, EDR may reduce the incidence of all complications (OR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.32 to 0.63), pancreatic fistula (OR: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.15 to 0.45), wound infection (RR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.06 to 5.45)), reoperation (OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.40 to 0.96) and hospital readmission (OR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.47 to 0.69). There was an uncertain effect on mortality (OR from pooled nonRCTs: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.41 to 2.53) and delayed gastric emptying (RR from pooled RCTs: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.41 to 1.41). The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that early drain removal is associated with lower hospital cost, is safe and may reduce the incidence of complications compared to late drain removal in patients after pancreaticoduodenectomy.
Topics: Humans; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Postoperative Complications; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Reoperation; Length of Stay
PubMed: 36207205
DOI: 10.1016/j.asjsur.2022.09.047 -
Annals of Surgical Treatment and... Sep 2022In patients who have previously undergone subtotal gastrectomy (STG), the remnant stomach is supplied with arterial blood through the splenic artery. It is currently...
PURPOSE
In patients who have previously undergone subtotal gastrectomy (STG), the remnant stomach is supplied with arterial blood through the splenic artery. It is currently unclear whether the remnant stomach can be safely preserved when performing distal pancreatosplenectomy (DPS) in these patients. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of performing DPS in patients who had undergone a previous STG.
METHODS
A multicenter cohort study was performed to identify patients who underwent DPS. Electronic medical data of Clinical Data Warehouse from 7 representative high-volume centers in 5 cities were retrospectively reviewed. A propensity score-matched analysis was performed to match patients who had no history of upper abdominal surgery with patients who had undergone a previous STG.
RESULTS
Fourteen DPS patients who had a history of STG (STG group) were studied and matched to 70 patients who underwent DPS without any history of upper abdominal surgery (non-STG group). All patients in the STG group had the remnant stomach preserved. In most patients, the blood vessel supplying blood to the remnant stomach was the left inferior phrenic artery. There was no significant difference in the incidence of stomach-related complications or length of hospital stay between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSION
Our study results suggest that the remnant stomach could be safely preserved when performing DPS in patients with a prior STG. However, it is necessary to carefully evaluate the vascular structure of the remnant stomach through preoperative imaging study and closely observe changes to the blue stomach during the operation.
PubMed: 36128033
DOI: 10.4174/astr.2022.103.3.145 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2022The aim of this study was to compare the safety and overall effect of robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) to laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) after the learning...
AIM
The aim of this study was to compare the safety and overall effect of robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) to laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) after the learning curve, especially in perioperative outcome and short-term oncological outcome.
METHODS
A literature search was performed by two authors independently using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science to identify any studies comparing the results of RDP versus LDP published until 5 January 2022. Only the studies where RDP was performed in more than 35 cases were included in this study. We performed a meta-analysis of operative time, blood loss, reoperation, readmission, hospital stay, overall complications, major complications, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), blood transfusion, conversion to open surgery, spleen preservation, tumor size, R0 resection, and lymph node dissection.
RESULTS
Our search identified 15 eligible studies, totaling 4,062 patients (1,413 RDP). It seems that the RDP group had a higher rate of smaller tumor size than the LDP group (MD: -0.15; 95% CI: -0.20 to -0.09; < 0.00001). Furthermore, compared with LPD, RDP was associated with a higher spleen preservation rate (OR: 2.19; 95% CI: 1.36-3.54; = 0.001) and lower rate of conversion to open surgery (OR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.33-0.55; < 0.00001). Our study revealed that there were no significant differences in operative time, overall complications, major complications, blood loss, blood transfusion, reoperation, readmission, POPF, and lymph node dissection between RDP and LDP.
CONCLUSIONS
RDP is safe and feasible for distal pancreatectomy compared with LDP, and it can reduce the rate of conversion to open surgery and increase the rate of spleen preservation, which needs to be further confirmed by quality comparative studies with large samples.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails.
PubMed: 36106111
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.954227 -
Surgery Nov 2022This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to give an overview on the postoperative outcome after a minimally invasive (ie, laparoscopic and robot-assisted) central... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to give an overview on the postoperative outcome after a minimally invasive (ie, laparoscopic and robot-assisted) central pancreatectomy and open central pancreatectomy with a specific emphasis on the postoperative pancreatic fistula. For benign and low-grade malignant lesions in the pancreatic neck and body, central pancreatectomy may be an alternative to distal pancreatectomy. Exocrine and endocrine insufficiency occur less often after central pancreatectomy, but the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula is higher.
METHODS
An electronic search was performed for studies on elective minimally invasive central pancreatectomy and open central pancreatectomy, which reported on major morbidity and postoperative pancreatic fistula in PubMed, Cochrane Register, Embase, and Google Scholar until June 1, 2021. A review protocol was developed a priori and registered in PROSPERO as CRD42021259738. A meta-regression was performed by using a random effects model.
RESULTS
Overall, 41 studies were included involving 1,004 patients, consisting of 158 laparoscopic minimally invasive central pancreatectomies, 80 robot-assisted minimally invasive central pancreatectomies, and 766 open central pancreatectomies. The overall rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula was 14%, major morbidity 14%, and 30-day mortality 1%. The rates of postoperative pancreatic fistula (17% vs 24%, P = .194), major morbidity (17% vs 14%, P = .672), and new-onset diabetes (3% vs 6%, P = .353) did not differ significantly between minimally invasive central pancreatectomy and open central pancreatectomy, respectively. Minimally invasive central pancreatectomy was associated with significantly fewer blood transfusions, less exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, and fewer readmissions compared with open central pancreatectomy. A meta-regression was performed with a random effects model between minimally invasive central pancreatectomy and open central pancreatectomy and showed no significant difference for postoperative pancreatic fistula (random effects model 0.16 [0.10; 0.24] with P = .789), major morbidity (random effects model 0.20 [0.15; 0.25] with P = .410), and new-onset diabetes mellitus (random effects model 0.04 [0.02; 0.07] with P = .651).
CONCLUSION
In selected patients and in experienced hands, minimally invasive central pancreatectomy is a safe alternative to open central pancreatectomy for benign and low-grade malignant lesions of the neck and body. Ideally, further research should confirm this with the main focus on postoperative pancreatic fistula and endocrine and exocrine insufficiency.
Topics: Humans; Laparoscopy; Pancreas; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Postoperative Complications; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35987787
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2022.06.024 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Jul 2022Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is one of the most critical complications after pancreatic surgery. The relationship between sarcopenia and outcomes following... (Review)
Review
Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is one of the most critical complications after pancreatic surgery. The relationship between sarcopenia and outcomes following this type of surgery is debated. The aim of this review was to assess the impact of sarcopenia on the risk of POPF. A literature search was performed using the PubMed database and the reference lists of relevant articles to identify papers about the impact of sarcopenia on POPF in pancreatic surgery. Twenty-one studies published between 2016 and 2021 with a total of 4068 patients were included. Some studies observed a significant difference in the incidence of POPF between the sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy. Interestingly, there was a trend of a lower POPF rate in sarcopenic patients than in non-sarcopenic patients. Only one study included patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy specifically. The role of sarcopenia in surgical outcomes is still unclear. A combination of objective CT measurements could be used to predict POPF. It could be assessed by routine preoperative staging CT and could improve preoperative risk stratification in patients undergoing pancreatic surgery.
PubMed: 35887908
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11144144