BACKGROUND: Pancreaticoduodenectomy for trauma (PDT) is a rare procedure, reserved for severe pancreaticoduodenal injuries. Using the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB), our aim was to compare outcomes of PDT patients to similarly injured patients who did not undergo a PDT. METHODS: Patients with pancreatic or duodenal injuries treated with PDT (ICD-9-CM 52.7) were identified in the NTDB 2008–2010 Research Data Sets. We excluded those who underwent delayed PDT (>4 days). The PDT group (n = 39) was compared to patients with severe combined pancreaticoduodenal injuries (grade 4 or 5) who did not undergo PDT (non-PDT group, n = 38). Patients who died in the emergency department or did not undergo a laparotomy were excluded. Our primary outcome was death. Secondary outcomes were intensive care unit length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, and total ventilator days. A multivariate model was used to determine predictors of in-hospital mortality within each group and in the overall cohort. RESULTS: The non-PDT group had a significantly lower systolic blood pressure and Glasgow Coma Scale values at baseline and more severe duodenal, pancreatic, and liver injuries. There were no significant differences in outcomes between the two groups. The Injury Severity Score was the only independent predictor of mortality among PDT patients [odds ratio (OR) 1.12, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.01–1.24] and in the entire cohort (OR 1.06, 95 % CI 1.01–1.12). The operative technique did not influence any of the outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to non-PDT, PDT did not result in improved outcomes despite a lower physiologic burden among PDT patients. More conservative procedures for high-grade injuries of the pancreaticoduodenal complex may be appropriate.
BACKGROUND: Pancreaticoduodenectomy for trauma (PDT) is a rare procedure, reserved for severe pancreaticoduodenal injuries. Using the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB), our aim was to compare outcomes of PDT patients to similarly injured patients who did not undergo a PDT. METHODS:Patients with pancreatic or duodenal injuries treated with PDT (ICD-9-CM 52.7) were identified in the NTDB 2008–2010 Research Data Sets. We excluded those who underwent delayed PDT (>4 days). The PDT group (n = 39) was compared to patients with severe combined pancreaticoduodenal injuries (grade 4 or 5) who did not undergo PDT (non-PDT group, n = 38). Patients who died in the emergency department or did not undergo a laparotomy were excluded. Our primary outcome was death. Secondary outcomes were intensive care unit length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, and total ventilator days. A multivariate model was used to determine predictors of in-hospital mortality within each group and in the overall cohort. RESULTS: The non-PDT group had a significantly lower systolic blood pressure and Glasgow Coma Scale values at baseline and more severe duodenal, pancreatic, and liver injuries. There were no significant differences in outcomes between the two groups. The Injury Severity Score was the only independent predictor of mortality among PDT patients [odds ratio (OR) 1.12, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.01–1.24] and in the entire cohort (OR 1.06, 95 % CI 1.01–1.12). The operative technique did not influence any of the outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to non-PDT, PDT did not result in improved outcomes despite a lower physiologic burden among PDT patients. More conservative procedures for high-grade injuries of the pancreaticoduodenal complex may be appropriate.
Authors: E E Moore; T H Cogbill; M A Malangoni; G J Jurkovich; H R Champion; T A Gennarelli; J W McAninch; H L Pachter; S R Shackford; P G Trafton Journal: J Trauma Date: 1990-11
Authors: Adil H Haider; Taimur Saleem; Jeffrey J Leow; Cassandra V Villegas; Mehreen Kisat; Eric B Schneider; Elliott R Haut; Kent A Stevens; Edward E Cornwell; Ellen J MacKenzie; David T Efron Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2012-02-07 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Robert W Eppsteiner; Nicholas G Csikesz; James T McPhee; Jennifer F Tseng; Shimul A Shah Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Micah G Katz; Stephen J Fenton; Kathryn W Russell; Eric R Scaife; Scott S Short Journal: Pediatr Surg Int Date: 2018-04-05 Impact factor: 1.827
Authors: Jake E Krige; Eduard Jonas; Sandie R Thomson; Urda K Kotze; Mashiko Setshedi; Pradeep H Navsaria; Andrew J Nicol Journal: World J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2017-03-27
Authors: Nadja Benmohamed; Ziad Abbassi; Surennaidoo P Naiken; Philippe Morel; Alexandra Platon; Pierre-Alexandre Poletti; Christian Toso Journal: J Surg Case Rep Date: 2016-12-31
Authors: Federico Coccolini; Leslie Kobayashi; Yoram Kluger; Ernest E Moore; Luca Ansaloni; Walt Biffl; Ari Leppaniemi; Goran Augustin; Viktor Reva; Imitiaz Wani; Andrew Kirkpatrick; Fikri Abu-Zidan; Enrico Cicuttin; Gustavo Pereira Fraga; Carlos Ordonez; Emmanuil Pikoulis; Maria Grazia Sibilla; Ron Maier; Yosuke Matsumura; Peter T Masiakos; Vladimir Khokha; Alain Chichom Mefire; Rao Ivatury; Francesco Favi; Vassil Manchev; Massimo Sartelli; Fernando Machado; Junichi Matsumoto; Massimo Chiarugi; Catherine Arvieux; Fausto Catena; Raul Coimbra Journal: World J Emerg Surg Date: 2019-12-11 Impact factor: 5.469