| Literature DB >> 25127883 |
Marius Distler1, Stephan Kersting, Felix Rückert, Peggy Kross, Hans-Detlev Saeger, Jürgen Weitz, Robert Grützmann.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is an ongoing debate about the best closure technique after distal pancreatectomy (DP). The aim of the closure is to prevent the formation of a clinically relevant post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF). Stapler technique seems to be equal compared with hand-sewn closure of the remnant. For both techniques, a fistula rate of approximately 30% has been reported.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25127883 PMCID: PMC4184167 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2482-14-54
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Surg ISSN: 1471-2482 Impact factor: 2.102
Demographic and clinical data from our patient cohort (n = 124)
| n = 74 (59.7%)/n = 50 (40.3%) | |
| 57.5 (±14.2) 95% CI 55.0-60.1 | |
| 25.8 (±5.1) 95% CI 24.9-26.8 | |
| | |
| n = 14 (11.3%) | |
| n = 75 (60.5%) | |
| n = 35 (28.2%) | |
| n = 27 (21.8%)/n = 97 (78.2%) | |
| n = 35 (28.2%)/n = 89 (71.8%) | |
| n = 56 (45.2%)/n = 68 (54.8%) | |
| n = 38 (30.6%)/n = 86 (69.4%) | |
| n = 32 (25.8%) | |
| n = 22 (17.7%) | |
| n = 10 (8.0%) | |
| | |
| n = 22 (17.7%) | |
| n = 53 (42.7%) | |
| n = 9 (7.3%) | |
| n = 6 (4.8%) | |
| n = 27 (21.9%) | |
| n = 7 (5.6%) | |
| | |
| | |
| n = 30 (24.2%) | |
| n = 24 (19.3%) | |
| n = 2 (1.7%) | |
| 282.2 (±106.8) 95% CI 263.2-301.2 | |
| 834 (±787.1) 95% CI 694.6-1217.4 |
Univariate analysis of independent risk factors for the development of a clinically relevant POPF after DP (Type 0/A versus B/C)
| | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 95% CI 0.952-1.009 | 0.179** (OR 0.98) | ||
| 95% CI 1.000-1.001 | 0.007** (OR 1.001) | ||
| 95% CI 1.000-1.007 | 0.082** (OR 1.003) | ||
| | | 0.072* | |
| PDAC | n = 16 | n = 6 | |
| IPMN | n = 42 | n = 11 | |
| Chronic pancreatitis | n = 8 | n = 1 | |
| Metastasis | n = 4 | n = 2 | |
| NET | n = 25 | n = 2 | |
| Others | n = 3 | n = 4 | |
| | | 0.335* | |
| 1 | n = 9 | n = 5 | |
| 2 | n = 60 | n = 15 | |
| 3 | n = 29 | n = 6 | |
| | | | |
| Yes/No | n = 20/n = 78 | n = 7/n = 19 | 0.474* |
| | | | |
| Yes/No | n = 26/n = 72 | n = 9/n = 17 | 0.416* |
| | | | |
| Yes/No | n = 48/n = 50 | n = 8/n = 18 | 0.097* |
| | | | |
| Yes/No | n = 28/n = 70 | n = 4/n = 22 | 0.172* |
| | | | |
| Yes/No | n = 29/n = 69 | n = 4/n = 22 | 0.145* |
| | | | |
| Yes/No | n = 10/n = 88 | n = 0/n = 26 | 0.089* |
| | | | |
| Yes/No | n = 12/n = 86 | n = 9/n = 17 | 0.007* |
| | | | |
| Yes/No | n = 31/n = 67 | n = 7/n = 19 | 0.643* |
| | | | |
| 0 | n = 69 | n = 16 | |
| Ia | n = 3 | n = 0 | |
| Ib | n = 6 | n = 1 | 0.512* |
| IIa | n = 4 | n = 2 | |
| IIb | n = 12 | n = 6 | |
| III | n = 1 | n = 1 | |
| IV | n = 3 | n = 0 | |
*χ2-test , **binary logistic regression analysis; p < 0.05 statistically significant.
Figure 1Pancreatic remnant after transection with a scalpel and stitch ligation (5*0 Vicryl) of small vessels. Arrow: pancreatic duct.
Figure 2Arrow: Figure-of-eight stitch ligation of the pancreatic duct (5*0 PDS).
Figure 3Simple, single-stich suture fish-mouth closure of the pancreatic remnant (4*0 PDS).
Multivariate analysis of risk factors for the development of a clinically relevant POPF
| | | | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | | | |
| Sex | 0.60 | 0.131 | 2.802 | 0.520 |
| PDAC | 0.50 | 0.084 | 2.984 | 0.447 |
| IPMN | 0.04 | 0.002 | 1.003 | 0.050 |
| Chronic pancreatitis | 1.38 | 0.113 | 16.939 | 0.798 |
| Metastasis | 0.28 | 0.031 | 2.540 | 0.259 |
| NET | 4.68 | 0.423 | 51.818 | 0.208 |
| ASA | 0.85 | 0.302 | 2.421 | 0.768 |
| Nicotine | 2.34 | 0.525 | 10.446 | 0.265 |
| Alcohol | 1.82 | 0.504 | 6.572 | 0.361 |
| Hypertension | 2.32 | 0.609 | 8.854 | 0.218 |
| Preoperative Diabetes | 0.93 | 0.160 | 5.490 | 0.943 |
| Postoperative Diabetes | 0.33 | 0.054 | 2.077 | 0.240 |
| Chronic pancreatitis in remnant | 6.51 | 1.390 | 30.545 | 0.017 |
| Preoperative Weight loss | 0.40 | 0.101 | 1.648 | 0.208 |
| | | | | |
| Hypertension | 2.80 | 0.980 | 8.033 | 0.050 |
| Chronic pancreatitis in remnant | 7.09 | 1.867 | 26.994 | 0.004 |