BACKGROUND: Stapled pancreatic transection is widely used although pancreatic fistula remains a common post-surgical complication. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of existing data regarding pancreatic fistula following stapled pancreatic transection, comparing bare metal staples to reinforced staple loads. RESULTS: We identified ten manuscripts between 2007 and 2009 reporting outcomes following stapled division of the pancreas (five retrospective reviews, five prospective case series). A total of 483 stapled pancreatic resections are included in this meta-analysis. Of these, 234(48 %) were reinforced (REINF) and 249 (52 %) were bare staples (STPL). Out of 483 cases, there were a total of 100 documented pancreatic leaks (21 %). Sixty-one leaks were reported out of 249 STPL divisions (24 %), while 39 leaks were reported following REINF division (17 %). The overall relative risk of developing a pancreatic fistula following distal pancreatectomy was not significantly different comparing STPL to REINF when all studies were combined (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.65-1.53). We further evaluated the data stratifying by study design (prospective or retrospective) and found that prospective studies reported a significantly higher risk of pancreatic fistula with STPL compared to REINF technique (RR 14.45, 95 % CI 3.15-66.21). CONCLUSION: Reinforced staples may be a preferred method of pancreatic stump closure following distal pancreatectomy.
BACKGROUND: Stapled pancreatic transection is widely used although pancreatic fistula remains a common post-surgical complication. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of existing data regarding pancreatic fistula following stapled pancreatic transection, comparing bare metal staples to reinforced staple loads. RESULTS: We identified ten manuscripts between 2007 and 2009 reporting outcomes following stapled division of the pancreas (five retrospective reviews, five prospective case series). A total of 483 stapled pancreatic resections are included in this meta-analysis. Of these, 234(48 %) were reinforced (REINF) and 249 (52 %) were bare staples (STPL). Out of 483 cases, there were a total of 100 documented pancreatic leaks (21 %). Sixty-one leaks were reported out of 249 STPL divisions (24 %), while 39 leaks were reported following REINF division (17 %). The overall relative risk of developing a pancreatic fistula following distal pancreatectomy was not significantly different comparing STPL to REINF when all studies were combined (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.65-1.53). We further evaluated the data stratifying by study design (prospective or retrospective) and found that prospective studies reported a significantly higher risk of pancreatic fistula with STPL compared to REINF technique (RR 14.45, 95 % CI 3.15-66.21). CONCLUSION: Reinforced staples may be a preferred method of pancreatic stump closure following distal pancreatectomy.
Authors: Daniel Borja-Cacho; Waddah B Al-Refaie; Selwyn M Vickers; Todd M Tuttle; Eric H Jensen Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2009-10-08 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Fabian Mc Johnston; Antonino Cavataio; Steven M Strasberg; Nicholas A Hamilton; Peter O Simon; Kathryn Trinkaus; M B Majella Doyle; Brent D Mathews; Matthew R Porembka; David C Linehan; William G Hawkins Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 3.647
Authors: Markus K Diener; Christoph M Seiler; Inga Rossion; Jörg Kleeff; Matthias Glanemann; Giovanni Butturini; Ales Tomazic; Christiane J Bruns; Olivier R C Busch; Stefan Farkas; Orlin Belyaev; John P Neoptolemos; Christopher Halloran; Tobias Keck; Marco Niedergethmann; Klaus Gellert; Helmut Witzigmann; Otto Kollmar; Peter Langer; Ulrich Steger; Jens Neudecker; Frederik Berrevoet; Silke Ganzera; Markus M Heiss; Steffen P Luntz; Thomas Bruckner; Meinhard Kieser; Markus W Büchler Journal: Lancet Date: 2011-04-30 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Eduardo A Guzman; Rebecca A Nelson; Joseph Kim; Alessio Pigazzi; Vijay Trisal; Benjamin Paz; Joshua Di Ellenhorn Journal: Am Surg Date: 2009-10 Impact factor: 0.688
Authors: Cristina R Ferrone; Andrew L Warshaw; David W Rattner; David Berger; Hui Zheng; Bhupendra Rawal; Ruben Rodriguez; Sarah P Thayer; Carlos Fernandez-del Castillo Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2008-08-13 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Fernando Rotellar; Fernando Pardo; Custodia Montiel; Alberto Benito; Fernando M Regueira; Ignacio Poveda; Pablo Martí-Cruchaga; Javier A Cienfuegos Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Matthew Eschbach; Gregory M Sindberg; Marisha L Godek; Matthew Nagelschmidt; Nicholas Paquette; Michael Wegener; James Alberino; Jane Mayotte; Amit Vasanji; Andrew M Miesse Journal: Med Devices (Auckl) Date: 2018-08-15