Literature DB >> 17435552

Clinical and economic validation of the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula (ISGPF) classification scheme.

Wande B Pratt1, Shishir K Maithel, Tsafrir Vanounou, Zhen S Huang, Mark P Callery, Charles M Vollmer.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to validate the ISGPF classification scheme in a large cohort of patients following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) in a pancreaticobiliary surgical specialty unit. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Definitions of postoperative pancreatic fistula vary widely, precluding accurate comparisons of surgical techniques and experiences. The ISGPF has proposed a classification scheme for pancreatic fistula based on clinical parameters; yet it has not been rigorously tested or validated.
METHODS: : Between October 2001 and 2005, 176 consecutive patients underwent PD with a single drain placed. Pancreatic fistula was defined by ISGPF criteria. Cases were divided into four categories: no fistula; biochemical fistula without clinical sequelae (grade A), fistula requiring any therapeutic intervention (grade B), and fistula with severe clinical sequelae (grade C). Clinical and economic outcomes were analyzed across all grades.
RESULTS: More than two thirds of all patients had no evidence of fistula. Grade A fistulas occurred 15% of the time, grade B 12%, and grade C 3%. All measurable outcomes were equivalent between the no fistula and grade A classes. Conversely, costs, duration of stay, ICU duration, and disposition acuity progressively increased from grade A to C. Resource utilization similarly escalated by grade.
CONCLUSIONS: Biochemical evidence of pancreatic fistula alone has no clinical consequence and does not result in increased resource utilization. Increasing fistula grades have negative clinical and economic impacts on patients and their healthcare resources. These findings validate the ISGPF classification scheme for pancreatic fistula.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17435552      PMCID: PMC1877022          DOI: 10.1097/01.sla.0000251708.70219.d2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  21 in total

1.  Management of complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy in a high volume centre: results on 150 consecutive patients.

Authors:  C Bassi; M Falconi; R Salvia; G Mascetta; E Molinari; P Pederzoli
Journal:  Dig Surg       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 2.588

2.  Prevention of pancreatic anastomotic leakage after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Ronnie Tung Ping Poon; Siu Hung Lo; Daniel Fong; Sheung Tat Fan; John Wong
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 2.565

3.  Pancreatic fistula rate after pancreatic resection. The importance of definitions.

Authors:  Claudio Bassi; Giovanni Butturini; Enrico Molinari; Giuseppe Mascetta; Roberto Salvia; Massimo Falconi; Andrew Gumbs; Paolo Pederzoli
Journal:  Dig Surg       Date:  2003-12-30       Impact factor: 2.588

4.  Incidence, risk factors, and treatment of pancreatic leakage after pancreaticoduodenectomy: drainage versus resection of the pancreatic remnant.

Authors:  M I van Berge Henegouwen; L T De Wit; T M Van Gulik; H Obertop; D J Gouma
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 6.113

5.  Ten-year experience with 733 pancreatic resections: changing indications, older patients, and decreasing length of hospitalization.

Authors:  J H Balcom; D W Rattner; A L Warshaw; Y Chang; C Fernandez-del Castillo
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2001-04

6.  Prospective randomized clinical trial of the value of intraperitoneal drainage after pancreatic resection.

Authors:  K C Conlon; D Labow; D Leung; A Smith; W Jarnagin; D G Coit; N Merchant; M F Brennan
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  Risk factors and outcomes in postpancreaticoduodenectomy pancreaticocutaneous fistula.

Authors:  John W Lin; John L Cameron; Charles J Yeo; Taylor S Riall; Keith D Lillemoe
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 3.452

8.  Rates of complications and death after pancreaticoduodenectomy: risk factors and the impact of hospital volume.

Authors:  D J Gouma; R C van Geenen; T M van Gulik; R J de Haan; L T de Wit; O R Busch; H Obertop
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 12.969

9.  Six hundred fifty consecutive pancreaticoduodenectomies in the 1990s: pathology, complications, and outcomes.

Authors:  C J Yeo; J L Cameron; T A Sohn; K D Lillemoe; H A Pitt; M A Talamini; R H Hruban; S E Ord; P K Sauter; J Coleman; M L Zahurak; L B Grochow; R A Abrams
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  A prospective randomized trial of pancreaticogastrostomy versus pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  C J Yeo; J L Cameron; M M Maher; P K Sauter; M L Zahurak; M A Talamini; K D Lillemoe; H A Pitt
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 12.969

View more
  123 in total

Review 1.  Pancreatic surgery: evolution and current tailored approach.

Authors:  Mario Zovak; Dubravka Mužina Mišić; Goran Glavčić
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 7.293

2.  Total laparoscopic partial pancreatoduodenectomy and reconstruction via laparoscopic pancreatogastrostomy.

Authors:  Tobias Keck; Simon Küsters; Ulrich Friedrich Wellner; Ulrich Theodor Hopt; Konrad Wojciech Karcz
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2012-05-31       Impact factor: 3.445

3.  Robotic distal pancreatectomy versus conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a comparative study for short-term outcomes.

Authors:  Eric C H Lai; Chung Ngai Tang
Journal:  Front Med       Date:  2015-08-13       Impact factor: 4.592

4.  A root-cause analysis of mortality following major pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Charles Mahlon Vollmer; Norberto Sanchez; Stephen Gondek; John McAuliffe; Tara S Kent; John D Christein; Mark P Callery
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2011-11-08       Impact factor: 3.452

5.  Pancreatic anastomotic leakage after pancreaticoduodenectomy in 1,507 patients: a report from the Pancreatic Anastomotic Leak Study Group.

Authors:  Kaye M Reid-Lombardo; Michael B Farnell; Stefano Crippa; Matthew Barnett; George Maupin; Claudio Bassi; L William Traverso
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2007-08-21       Impact factor: 3.452

6.  Pancreatic anastomotic leakage after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Risk factors, clinical predictors, and management (single center experience).

Authors:  Ayman El Nakeeb; Tarek Salah; Ahmad Sultan; Mohamed El Hemaly; Waleed Askr; Helmy Ezzat; Emad Hamdy; Ehab Atef; Ehab El Hanafy; Ahmed El-Geidie; Mohamed Abdel Wahab; Talaat Abdallah
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  How do we predict the clinically relevant pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy?--an analysis in 244 consecutive patients.

Authors:  Manabu Kawai; Masaji Tani; Seiko Hirono; Shinomi Ina; Motoki Miyazawa; Hiroki Yamaue
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  Computed tomography attenuation and patient characteristics as predictors of complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  John C McAuliffe; Karen Parks; Prakash Kumar; Sandre F McNeal; Desiree E Morgan; John D Christein
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2013-01-10       Impact factor: 3.647

9.  Cost benefit analysis of mesh reinforcement of stapled left pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Kamran Idrees; Joshua R Edler; David C Linehan; Steven M Strasberg; David Jacques; Nicholas A Hamilton; Ryan C Fields; Dennis Lambert; Steven Kymes; William G Hawkins
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2013-02-20       Impact factor: 3.647

Review 10.  Pancreatic fistula after pancreatectomy: evolving definitions, preventive strategies and modern management.

Authors:  Shailesh-V Shrikhande; Melroy-A D'Souza
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-10-14       Impact factor: 5.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.