Literature DB >> 29998288

Use of Video Review to Investigate Technical Factors That May Be Associated With Delayed Gastric Emptying After Pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Jae Pil Jung1, Mazen S Zenati1, Mashaal Dhir2, Amer H Zureikat1, Herbert J Zeh1, Richard L Simmons3, Melissa E Hogg1.   

Abstract

Importance: Technical proficiency at robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and video assessment are promising tools for understanding postoperative outcomes. Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) remains a major driver of cost and morbidity after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Objective: To determine if technical variables during RPD are associated with postoperative DGE. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective study was conducted of technical assessment performed in all available videos (n = 192) of consecutive RPDs performed at a single academic institution from October 3, 2008, through September 27, 2016. Exposures: Video review of gastrojejunal anastomosis during RPD. Main Outcomes and Measures: Delayed gastric emptying was classified according to International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery criteria. Video analysis reviewed technical variables specific in the construction of the gastrojejunal anastomosis. Using multivariate analysis, DGE was correlated with known patient variables and technical variables, individually and combined.
Results: Of 410 RPDs performed, video was available for 192 RPDs (80 women and 112 men; mean [SD] age, 65.7 [11.1] years). Delayed gastric emptying occurred in 41 patients (21.4%; grade A, 15; grade B, 14; and grade C, 12). Patient variables contributing to DGE on multivariate analysis were advanced age (odds ratio [OR] 1.11; 95% CI, 1.05-1.16; P < .001), small pancreatic duct size (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.72-0.98; P = .03), and postoperative pseudoaneurysm (OR, 17.29; 95% CI, 2.34-127.78; P = .005). However, technical variables contributing to decreased DGE on multivariate analysis included the flow angle (within 30° of vertical) between the stomach and efferent jejunal limb (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.08-0.79; P = .02), greater length of the gastrojejunal anastomosis (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.20-0.77; P = .006), and a robotic-sewn anastomosis (robotic suture vs stapler: OR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.09-0.95; P = .04). Conclusions and Relevance: This study examines modifiable technical factors through the use of review of video obtained at the time of operation and suggests ways by which the surgical construction of the gastrojejunal anastomosis during RPD may reduce the incidence of DGE as a framework for prospective quality improvement.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29998288      PMCID: PMC6584315          DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2018.2089

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Surg        ISSN: 2168-6254            Impact factor:   14.766


  62 in total

1.  Robotic-assisted major pancreatic resection and reconstruction.

Authors:  Amer H Zureikat; Kevin T Nguyen; David L Bartlett; Herbert J Zeh; A James Moser
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2010-11-15

2.  Abnormal initiation and conduction of slow-wave activity in gastroparesis, defined by high-resolution electrical mapping.

Authors:  Gregory O'Grady; Timothy R Angeli; Peng Du; Chris Lahr; Wim J E P Lammers; John A Windsor; Thomas L Abell; Gianrico Farrugia; Andrew J Pullan; Leo K Cheng
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2012-05-27       Impact factor: 22.682

3.  Clinical validation and risk factors for delayed gastric emptying based on the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) Classification.

Authors:  Joon Seong Park; Ho Kyoung Hwang; Jae Keun Kim; Sin Il Cho; Dong-Sup Yoon; Woo Jung Lee; Hoon Sang Chi
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2009-07-18       Impact factor: 3.982

4.  Gastric emptying and quality of life after pancreatoduodenectomy with retrocolic or antecolic gastroenteric anastomosis.

Authors:  W J Eshuis; K de Bree; M A G Sprangers; R J Bennink; T M van Gulik; O R C Busch; D J Gouma
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2015-06-18       Impact factor: 6.939

5.  Effect of Billroth II or Roux-en-Y Reconstruction for the Gastrojejunostomy After Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Authors:  Ji Yang; Chao Wang; Qiang Huang
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2015-03-19       Impact factor: 3.452

6.  Preservation of the pyloric ring has little value in surgery for pancreatic head cancer: a comparative study comparing three surgical procedures.

Authors:  Tsutomu Fujii; Mitsuro Kanda; Yasuhiro Kodera; Shunji Nagai; Tevfik T Sahin; Masamichi Hayashi; Akiyuki Kanzaki; Suguru Yamada; Hiroyuki Sugimoto; Shuji Nomoto; Shin Takeda; Satoshi Morita; Akimasa Nakao
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2011-07-07       Impact factor: 5.344

Review 7.  The International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery definition of delayed gastric emptying and the effects of various surgical modifications on the occurrence of delayed gastric emptying after pancreatoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Rajesh Panwar; Sujoy Pal
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int       Date:  2017-08-15

8.  Robotic Pancreatoduodenectomy Biotissue Curriculum has Validity and Improves Technical Performance for Surgical Oncology Fellows.

Authors:  Vernissia Tam; Mazen Zenati; Stephanie Novak; Yong Chen; Amer H Zureikat; Herbert J Zeh; Melissa E Hogg
Journal:  J Surg Educ       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 2.891

9.  General surgical operative duration is associated with increased risk-adjusted infectious complication rates and length of hospital stay.

Authors:  Levi D Procter; Daniel L Davenport; Andrew C Bernard; Joseph B Zwischenberger
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2009-11-18       Impact factor: 6.113

10.  A new reconstruction method for preventing delayed gastric emptying after pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Masanori Sugiyama; Nobutsugu Abe; Hisayo Ueki; Tadahiko Masaki; Toshiyuki Mori; Yutaka Atomi
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 2.565

View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  International consensus statement on robotic pancreatic surgery.

Authors:  Rong Liu; Go Wakabayashi; Chinnusamy Palanivelu; Allan Tsung; Kehu Yang; Brian K P Goh; Charing Ching-Ning Chong; Chang Moo Kang; Chenghong Peng; Eli Kakiashvili; Ho-Seong Han; Hong-Jin Kim; Jin He; Jae Hoon Lee; Kyoichi Takaori; Marco Vito Marino; Shen-Nien Wang; Tiankang Guo; Thilo Hackert; Ting-Shuo Huang; Yiengpruksawan Anusak; Yuman Fong; Yuichi Nagakawa; Yi-Ming Shyr; Yao-Ming Wu; Yupei Zhao
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 7.293

2.  Prognostic Significance of PNI in Patients With Pancreatic Head Cancer Undergoing Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Peng Jiang; Xiaocheng Li; Shupeng Wang; Yahui Liu
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-06-01

3.  Early Nasojejunal Nutrition Versus Early Oral Feeding in Patients After Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Xinchun Liu; Qiuyang Chen; Yue Fu; Zipeng Lu; Jianmin Chen; Feng Guo; Qiang Li; Junli Wu; Wentao Gao; Kuirong Jiang; Cuncai Dai; Yi Miao; Jishu Wei
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-04-29       Impact factor: 6.244

4.  Laparoscopic versus open pancreatic resection for ductal adenocarcinoma: separate propensity score matching analyses of distal pancreatectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Ke Chen; Yu Pan; Chao-Jie Huang; Qi-Long Chen; Ren-Chao Zhang; Miao-Zun Zhang; Guan-Yu Wang; Xian-Fa Wang; Yi-Ping Mou; Jia-Fei Yan
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2021-04-09       Impact factor: 4.430

5.  Surgical training model and safe implementation of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy in Japan: a technical note.

Authors:  Kosei Takagi; Yuzo Umeda; Ryuichi Yoshida; Takahito Yagi; Toshiyoshi Fujiwara; Amer H Zureikat; Melissa E Hogg; Bas Groot Koerkamp
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-02-19       Impact factor: 2.754

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.