Literature DB >> 27280502

Multicenter, Prospective Trial of Selective Drain Management for Pancreatoduodenectomy Using Risk Stratification.

Matthew T McMillan1, Giuseppe Malleo, Claudio Bassi, Valentina Allegrini, Luca Casetti, Jeffrey A Drebin, Alessandro Esposito, Luca Landoni, Major K Lee, Alessandra Pulvirenti, Robert E Roses, Roberto Salvia, Charles M Vollmer.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This multicenter study sought to prospectively evaluate a drain management protocol for pancreatoduodenectomy (PD).
BACKGROUND: Recent evidence suggests value for both selective drain placement and early drain removal for PD. Both strategies have been associated with reduced rates of clinically relevant pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF)-the most common and morbid complication after PD.
METHODS: The protocol was applied to 260 consecutive PDs performed at two institutions over 17 months. Risk for ISGPF CR-POPF was determined intraoperatively using the Fistula Risk Score (FRS); drains were omitted in negligible/low risk patients and drain fluid amylase (DFA) was measured on postoperative day 1 (POD 1) for moderate/high risk patients. Drains were removed early (POD 3) in patients with POD 1 DFA ≤5,000 U/L, whereas patients with POD 1 DFA >5,000 U/L were managed by clinical discretion. Outcomes were compared with a historical cohort (N = 557; 2011-2014).
RESULTS: Fistula risk did not differ between cohorts (median FRS: 4 vs 4; P = 0.933). No CR-POPFs developed in the 70 (26.9%) negligible/low risk patients. Overall CR-POPF rates were significantly lower after protocol implementation (11.2 vs 20.6%, P = 0.001). The protocol cohort also demonstrated lower rates of severe complication, any complication, reoperation, and percutaneous drainage (all P < 0.05). These patients also experienced reduced hospital stay (median: 8 days vs 9 days, P = 0.001). There were no differences between cohorts in the frequency of bile or chyle leaks.
CONCLUSIONS: Drains can be safely omitted for one-quarter of PDs. Drain amylase analysis identifies which moderate/high risk patients benefit from early drain removal. This data-driven, risk-stratified approach significantly decreases the occurrence of clinically relevant pancreatic fistula.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 27280502     DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001832

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


  26 in total

1.  Evolving the Paradigm of Early Drain Removal Following Pancreatoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Thomas F Seykora; Laura Maggino; Giuseppe Malleo; Major K Lee; Robert Roses; Roberto Salvia; Claudio Bassi; Charles M Vollmer
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2018-11-07       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  The influence of fellowship training on the practice of pancreatoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Gregory T Kennedy; Matthew T McMillan; Michael H Sprys; Claudio Bassi; Paul D Greig; Paul D Hansen; Dhiresh R Jeyarajah; Tara S Kent; Giuseppe Malleo; Giovanni Marchegiani; Rebecca M Minter; Charles M Vollmer
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2016-10-28       Impact factor: 3.647

3.  The North American Neuroendocrine Tumor Society Consensus Paper on the Surgical Management of Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.

Authors:  James R Howe; Nipun B Merchant; Claudius Conrad; Xavier M Keutgen; Julie Hallet; Jeffrey A Drebin; Rebecca M Minter; Terry C Lairmore; Jennifer F Tseng; Herbert J Zeh; Steven K Libutti; Gagandeep Singh; Jeffrey E Lee; Thomas A Hope; Michelle K Kim; Yusuf Menda; Thorvardur R Halfdanarson; Jennifer A Chan; Rodney F Pommier
Journal:  Pancreas       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 3.327

4.  Number of acinar cells at the pancreatic stump predicts pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Naoki Umezaki; Daisuke Hashimoto; Shigeki Nakagawa; Yuki Kitano; Kensuke Yamamura; Akira Chikamoto; Fujio Matsumura; Hideo Baba
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2018-03-24       Impact factor: 2.549

5.  C-Reactive Protein on Postoperative Day 1 Is a Reliable Predictor of Pancreas-Specific Complications After Pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Théophile Guilbaud; David Jérémie Birnbaum; Coralie Lemoine; Mircea Chirica; Olivier Risse; Stéphane Berdah; Edouard Girard; Vincent Moutardier
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2018-01-04       Impact factor: 3.452

6.  Evidence Versus Practice in Early Drain Removal After Pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Nicole Villafane-Ferriol; Katherine A Baugh; Amy L McElhany; George Van Buren; Andrew Fang; Erisha K Tashakori; Jose E Mendez Reyes; Hop S Tran Cao; Eric J Silberfein; Nader Massarweh; Cary Hsu; Omar Barakat; Carl Schmidt; Nicholas J Zyromski; Mary Dillhoff; Joshua A Villarreal; William E Fisher
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2019-01-04       Impact factor: 2.192

Review 7.  Pancreatoduodenectomy associated with colonic resections: indications, pitfalls, and outcomes.

Authors:  Tommaso Giuliani; Anthony Di Gioia; Stefano Andrianello; Giovanni Marchegiani; Claudio Bassi
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2021-02-13

Review 8.  [Evidence-based supportive measures to secure pancreatic anastomoses].

Authors:  O Belyaev; W Uhl
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 0.955

9.  What are the predictors that can help identify safe removal of drains following pancreatectomy?

Authors:  Emanuel Eguia; Ann E Hwalek; Brendan Martin; Gerard Abood; Gerard V Aranha
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2018-03-10       Impact factor: 2.565

10.  Perioperative Net Fluid Balance Predicts Pancreatic Fistula After Pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Leah K Winer; Vikrom K Dhar; Koffi Wima; Tiffany C Lee; Mackenzie C Morris; Shimul A Shah; Syed A Ahmad; Sameer H Patel
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2018-06-04       Impact factor: 3.452

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.