-
Hepatobiliary Surgery and Nutrition Feb 2022Aberrant right hepatic arteries (aRHA) are frequently encountered during pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Their effects on surgical morbidity and resection margin are still...
Preservation of aberrant right hepatic arteries does not affect safety and oncological radicality of pancreaticoduodenectomy-own results and a systematic review of the literature.
BACKGROUND
Aberrant right hepatic arteries (aRHA) are frequently encountered during pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Their effects on surgical morbidity and resection margin are still debated. This study aimed to compare the short term and long term outcomes in patients with and without aRHA.
METHODS
A single-center retrospective analysis of 353 consecutive PD during a 5-year period was done. The type of arterial supply was determined preoperatively by CT and confirmed at surgery. Hiatt types III-VI included some type of aRHA and comprised the study group. Hiatt types I and II were considered irrelevant for PD and used as controls. Primary endpoints were the rates of major postoperative complications and the rate of R0-resection in cases of malignant disease. Secondary endpoints included duration of surgery, postoperative stay, number of harvested lymph nodes and survival in patients with pancreatic cancer. Own results were compared to existent data using a systematic review of the literature.
RESULTS
No aRHA had to be sacrificed or reconstructed. Surgical morbidity and specific complications such as post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), pancreatic fistula and bile leak were the same in patients with and without aRHA. There was no significant difference in operative time, blood loss, length of ICU- and hospital stay. Patients with malignancy had similar high rates of R0-resection and identical number of harvested lymph nodes. Survival of patients with pancreatic cancer was not affected by aRHA.
CONCLUSIONS
aRHA may be preserved in virtually all cases of PD for resectable pancreatic head lesions without increasing surgical morbidity and without compromising oncological radicality in patients with cancer, provided the variant anatomy is being recognised on preoperative CT and a meticulous surgical technique is used.
PubMed: 35284530
DOI: 10.21037/hbsn-20-352 -
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Sep 2022The learning curve of new surgical procedures has implications for the education, evaluation and subsequent adoption. There is currently no standardised surgical...
BACKGROUND
The learning curve of new surgical procedures has implications for the education, evaluation and subsequent adoption. There is currently no standardised surgical training for those willing to make their first attempts at minimally invasive pancreatic surgery. This study aims to ascertain the learning curve in minimally invasive pancreatic surgery.
METHODS
A systematic search of PubMed, Embase and Web of Science was performed up to March 2021. Studies investigating the number of cases needed to achieve author-declared competency in minimally invasive pancreatic surgery were included.
RESULTS
In total, 31 original studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria with 2682 patient outcomes being analysed. From these studies, the median learning curve for distal pancreatectomy was reported to have been achieved in 17 cases (10-30) and 23.5 cases (7-40) for laparoscopic and robotic approach respectively. The median learning curve for pancreaticoduodenectomy was reported to have been achieved at 30 cases (4-60) and 36.5 cases (20-80) for a laparoscopic and robotic approach respectively. Mean operative times and estimated blood loss improved in all four surgical procedural groups. Heterogeneity was demonstrated when factoring in the level of surgeon's experience and patient's demographic.
CONCLUSIONS
There is currently no gold standard in the evaluation of a learning curve. As a result, derivations are difficult to utilise clinically. Existing literature can serve as a guide for current trainees. More work needs to be done to standardise learning curve assessment in a patient-centred manner.
Topics: Humans; Laparoscopy; Learning Curve; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Pancreas; Pancreatectomy; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Robotic Surgical Procedures
PubMed: 35278112
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-022-02470-3 -
Surgical Endoscopy Jun 2022The outcomes of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided drainage (EUSD) in treatment of pancreas fluid collection (PFC) after pancreas surgeries have not been evaluated... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The outcomes of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided drainage (EUSD) in treatment of pancreas fluid collection (PFC) after pancreas surgeries have not been evaluated systematically. The current systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the outcomes of EUSD in patients with PFC after pancreas surgery and compare it with percutaneous drainage (PCD).
METHODS
PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched for studies reporting outcomes EUSD in treatment of PFC after pancreas surgeries, from their inception until January 2022. Two meta-analyses were performed: (A) a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis of EUSD (meta-analysis A) and (B) two-arm meta-analysis comparing the outcomes of EUSD and PCD (meta-analysis B). Pooled proportion of the outcomes in meta-analysis A as well as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) in meta-analysis B was calculated to determine the technical and clinical success rates, complications rate, hospital stay, and recurrence rate. ROBINS-I tool was used to assess the risk of bias.
RESULTS
The literature search retrieved 610 articles, 25 of which were eligible for inclusion. Included clinical studies comprised reports on 695 patients. Twenty-five studies (477 patients) were included in meta-analysis A and eight studies (356 patients) were included in meta-analysis B. In meta-analysis A, the technical and clinical success rates of EUSD were 94% and 87%, respectively, with post-procedural complications of 14% and recurrence rates of 9%. Meta-analysis B showed comparable technical and clinical success rates as well as complications rates between EUSD and PCD. EUSD showed significantly shorter duration of hospital stay compared to that of patients treated with PCD.
CONCLUSION
EUSD seems to be associated with high technical and clinical success rates, with low rates of procedure-related complications. Although EUSD leads to shorter hospital stay compared to PCD, the certainty of evidence was low in this regard.
Topics: Drainage; Endosonography; Humans; Length of Stay; Pancreas; Pancreatic Diseases
PubMed: 35246738
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09137-6 -
Frontiers in Surgery 2021Surgery is an effective choice for the treatment of chronic pancreatitis (CP). However, there is no clear consensus regarding the best choice among the surgical...
BACKGROUND
Surgery is an effective choice for the treatment of chronic pancreatitis (CP). However, there is no clear consensus regarding the best choice among the surgical procedures. The aim of this study is to conduct a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing treatment outcomes to provide high-quality evidences regarding which is the best surgery for CP.
METHODS
A systematic search of the PubMed (MEDLINE), SCIE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and CDSR databases were performed to identify studies comparing surgeries for CP from the beginning of the databases to May 2020. Pain relief and mortality were the primary outcomes of interest.
RESULTS
Ten studies including a total of 680 patients were identified for inclusion. PPPD had a better postoperative short-term pain relief and quality of life (QOL), but a worse pancreatic exocrine function deficiency and high morbidity. Berne had a significant postoperative long-term pain relief and mortality with a lower risk of pancreatic exocrine function deficiency.
CONCLUSION
The main surgical procedures including the PPPD, Beger procedure, Frey modification and Berne modification can efficaciously treat CP. The Berne modification may be first choice with better efficacy and less complications in pancreatic function, but the impact of postoperative QOL cannot be ignored. Furthermore, when the CP patients have a mass in the pancreatic head which cannot be distinguished from pancreatic cancer, the only legitimate choice should be PPPD or classical pancreaticoduodenectomy.
PubMed: 35187048
DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2021.798867 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Feb 2022Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT), intended as induction chemotherapy (IC) followed by radio-chemotherapy (RCT), has been taking hold in the treatment of pancreatic ductal... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT), intended as induction chemotherapy (IC) followed by radio-chemotherapy (RCT), has been taking hold in the treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The aim of this review is to summarize the available evidence on the role of TNT followed by curative surgery.
METHODS
Eligible studies were those reporting on patients with PDAC undergoing curative surgery after TNT. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS).
RESULTS
A total of 1080 patients with PDAC who had undergone TNT were analyzed. The most common IC regimen was Gemcitabine (N 620, 57%). Toxicity during IC varied from 14% to 51%. Disease progression during IC varied from 3% to 25%. 607 (62%) patients underwent curative surgery after IC + CRT. In meta-analysis, the available data on lymph node metastases radicality and 2 years OS had better results in favor of TNT groups (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.20-2.60, = 0.004 and OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.19-3.47, = 0.01 and OR 1.64, CI 1.09-2.47, = 0.02, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
Despite the heterogeneity of the studies, different selection criteria, and non-negligible drop-out rate, TNT demonstrated a potential superiority to NAT without CRT in oncological and pathological outcomes, even if the main differences seem to depend on the IC regimen.
PubMed: 35160263
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11030812 -
HPB : the Official Journal of the... Jul 2022Morbidity and mortality from post-pancreatectomy haemorrhage (PPH) remains high. The International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) published guidelines to...
BACKGROUND
Morbidity and mortality from post-pancreatectomy haemorrhage (PPH) remains high. The International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) published guidelines to standardise definitions of PPH severity, management and reporting. This study aimed to i) identify the number of studies reporting PPH using ISGPS guidelines (Grade A, B or C) and ii) describe treatment modality success by grade.
METHODS
A systematic literature review was performed, identifying studies reporting PPH by ISGPS Grade and their subsequent management.
RESULTS
Of 62 studies reporting on PPH management, 17 (27.4%) stratified by ISGPS guidelines and included 608 incidences of PPH: 48 Grade A, 274 Grade B (62 early, 166 late, 46 unspecified) and 286 Grade C. 96% of Grade A PPH were treated conservatively. Of 62 early Grade B, 54.8% were managed conservatively and 37.1% surgically. Late Grade B were managed non-operatively in 25.3% (42/166), with successful endoscopy in 90.9% (10/11) and angiography in 90.3% (28/31). In Grade C, endoscopic treatment was successful in 64.4% (29/45) and angiography in 90.8% (108/119). Surgical intervention was required in 43.5% early Grade B, 7.8% late Grade B and 33.2% Grade C.
CONCLUSION
PPH grading is underreported and despite guidelines, inconsistencies remain when using definitions and reporting of outcomes.
Topics: Angiography; Humans; Pancreatectomy; Postoperative Hemorrhage; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35101359
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2021.12.002 -
Journal of Hepato-biliary-pancreatic... Nov 2022Previous systematic reviews have shown that radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) had favorable outcomes including prognosis. However, recent large... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE
Previous systematic reviews have shown that radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) had favorable outcomes including prognosis. However, recent large studies have shown opposite results, thus necessitating clarification of RAMPS efficacy. We aimed to update existing evidence on the clinical outcomes of RAMPS for left-sided pancreatic cancer by comparing them to those of the conventional approach.
METHODS
Electronic databases and registries were searched until August 2021 to perform random-effect meta-analysis. Methodological quality was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. The protocol was registered at protocols.io (https://doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.bxhfpj3n).
RESULTS
Thirteen cohort studies (1641 patients) and four ongoing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified. RAMPS increased disease-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.42-0.91), but it had little effect on overall survival (HR 0.92, 95% CI = 0.79-1.09) and recurrence-free survival (HR 0.72, 95% CI = 0.37-1.38) with low certainty of evidence.
CONCLUSION
The meta-analysis of recent studies suggests that RAMPS may have little effect on clinical outcomes. These findings highlight the necessity of further studies, including RCTs to determine the efficacy and subsequent indication of RAMPS in clinical cases.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy; Splenectomy; Lymph Node Excision; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Prognosis
PubMed: 35092177
DOI: 10.1002/jhbp.1120 -
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 -
HPB : the Official Journal of the... May 2022Major abdominal surgery and malignancy lead to a hypercoagulable state, with a risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) of approximately 3% after pancreatic surgery. No... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Major abdominal surgery and malignancy lead to a hypercoagulable state, with a risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) of approximately 3% after pancreatic surgery. No guidelines exist to assist surgeons in managing VTE prophylaxis or anticoagulation in patients undergoing elective pancreatic surgery for malignancy or premalignant lesions. A systematic review specific to VTE prophylaxis and anticoagulation after resectional pancreatic surgery is herein provided.
METHODS
Six topic areas are reviewed: pre- and perioperative VTE prophylaxis, early postoperative VTE prophylaxis, extended outpatient VTE prophylaxis, management of chronic anticoagulation, anti-coagulation after vascular reconstruction, and treatment of VTE. A Medline and PubMED search was completed with systematic medical literature review for each topic. Level of evidence was graded and strength of recommendation ranked according to the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system for practice guidelines.
RESULTS
Levels of evidence and strength of recommendations are presented.
DISCUSSION
While strong data exist to guide management of chronic anticoagulation and treatment of VTE, data for anticoagulation after reconstruction is inconclusive and support for perioperative chemoprophylaxis with pancreatic surgery is similarly limited. The risk of post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage often exceeds that of thrombosis. The role of universal chemoprophylaxis must therefore be examined critically, particularly in the preoperative setting.
Topics: Anticoagulants; Blood Coagulation; Hemorrhage; Humans; Neoplasms; Risk Factors; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 35063354
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2021.12.010 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2022Pancreatic cancer remains one of the five leading causes of cancer deaths in industrialised nations. For adenocarcinomas in the head of the gland and premalignant... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Pancreatic cancer remains one of the five leading causes of cancer deaths in industrialised nations. For adenocarcinomas in the head of the gland and premalignant lesions, partial pancreaticoduodenectomy represents the standard treatment for resectable tumours. The gastro- or duodenojejunostomy after partial pancreaticoduodenectomy can be reestablished via either an antecolic or retrocolic route. The debate about the more favourable technique for bowel reconstruction is ongoing.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the effectiveness and safety of antecolic and retrocolic gastro- or duodenojejunostomy after partial pancreaticoduodenectomy.
SEARCH METHODS
In this updated version, we conducted a systematic literature search up to 6 July 2021 to identify all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Library 2021, Issue 6, MEDLINE (1946 to 6 July 2021), and Embase (1974 to 6 July 2021). We applied no language restrictions. We handsearched reference lists of identified trials to identify further relevant trials, and searched the trial registries clinicaltrials.govand World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We considered all RCTs comparing antecolic with retrocolic reconstruction of bowel continuity after partial pancreaticoduodenectomy for any given indication to be eligible.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened the identified references and extracted data from the included trials. The same two review authors independently assessed risk of bias of included trials, according to standard Cochrane methodology. We used a random-effects model to pool the results of the individual trials in a meta-analysis. We used odds ratios (OR) to compare binary outcomes and mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes.
MAIN RESULTS
Of a total of 287 citations identified by the systematic literature search, we included eight randomised controlled trials (reported in 11 publications), with a total of 818 participants. There was high risk of bias in all of the trials in regard to blinding of participants and/or outcome assessors and unclear risk for selective reporting in six of the trials. There was little or no difference in the frequency of delayed gastric emptying (OR 0.67; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41 to 1.09; eight trials, 818 participants, low-certainty evidence) with relevant heterogeneity between trials (I=40%). There was little or no difference in postoperative mortality (risk difference (RD) -0.00; 95% CI -0.02 to 0.01; eight trials, 818 participants, high-certainty evidence); postoperative pancreatic fistula (OR 1.01; 95% CI 0.73 to 1.40; eight trials, 818 participants, low-certainty evidence); postoperative haemorrhage (OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.47 to 1.59; six trials, 742 participants, low-certainty evidence); intra-abdominal abscess (OR 1.11; 95% CI 0.71 to 1.74; seven trials, 788 participants, low-certainty evidence); bile leakage (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.35 to 1.91; seven trials, 606 participants, low-certainty evidence); reoperation rate (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.34 to 1.36; five trials, 682 participants, low-certainty evidence); and length of hospital stay (MD -0.21; 95% CI -1.41 to 0.99; eight trials, 818 participants, low-certainty evidence). Only one trial reported quality of life, on a subgroup of 73 participants, also without a relevant difference between the two groups at any time point. The overall certainty of the evidence was low to moderate, due to some degree of heterogeneity, inconsistency and risk of bias in the included trials.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There was low- to moderate-certainty evidence suggesting that antecolic reconstruction after partial pancreaticoduodenectomy results in little to no difference in morbidity, mortality, length of hospital stay, or quality of life. Due to heterogeneity in definitions of the endpoints between trials, and differences in postoperative management, future research should be based on clearly defined endpoints and standardised perioperative management, to potentially elucidate differences between these two procedures. Novel strategies should be evaluated for prophylaxis and treatment of common complications, such as delayed gastric emptying.
Topics: Humans; Length of Stay; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 35014692
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011862.pub3