Literature DB >> 31765347

Blame it on the injury: Trauma is a risk factor for pancreatic fistula following distal pancreatectomy compared with elective resection.

Noah S Rozich1, Katherine T Morris, Tabitha Garwe, Zoona Sarwar, Alessandra Landmann, Chesney B Siems, Alexandra Jones, Casey S Butler, Paul K McGaha, Benjamin C Axtman, Barish H Edil, Jason S Lees.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains a significant source of morbidity following distal pancreatectomy (DP). There is a lack of information regarding the impact of trauma on POPF rates when compared with elective resection. We hypothesize that trauma will be a significant risk factor for the development of POPF following DP.
METHODS: A retrospective, single-institution review of all patients undergoing DP from 1999 to 2017 was performed. Outcomes were compared between patients undergoing DP for traumatic injury to those undergoing elective resection. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed using SAS (version 9.4).
RESULTS: Of the 372 patients who underwent DP during the study period, 298 met inclusion criteria: 38 DPs for trauma (TDP), 260 elective DPs (EDP). Clinically significant grade B or C POPFs occurred in 17 (44.7%) of 38 TDPs compared with 41 (15.8%) of 260 EDPs (p < 0.0001). On multivariable analysis, traumatic injury was found to be independently predictive of developing a grade B or C POPF (odds ratio, 4.3; 95% confidence interval, 2.10-8.89). Age, sex, and wound infection were highly correlated with traumatic etiology and therefore were not retained in the multivariable model. When analyzing risk factors for each group (trauma vs. elective) separately, we found that TDP patients who developed POPFs had less sutured closure of their duct, higher infectious complications, and longer hospital stays, while EDP patients that suffered POPFs were more likely to be male, younger in age, and at a greater risk for infectious complications. Lastly, in a subgroup analysis involving only patients with drains left postoperatively, trauma was an independent predictor of any grade of fistula (A, B, or C) compared with elective DP (odds ratio, 8.6; 95% confidence interval, 3.09-24.15), suggesting that traumatic injury is risk factor for pancreatic stump closure disruption following DP.
CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this study represents the largest cohort of patients comparing pancreatic leak rates in traumatic versus elective DP, and demonstrates that traumatic injury is an independent risk factor for developing an ISGPF grade B or C pancreatic fistula following DP. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, Therapeutic, level III.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31765347      PMCID: PMC7799849          DOI: 10.1097/TA.0000000000002495

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg        ISSN: 2163-0755            Impact factor:   3.697


  43 in total

1.  Risk factor analysis and prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy with stapler use.

Authors:  Motokazu Sugimoto; Naoto Gotohda; Yuichiro Kato; Shinichiro Takahashi; Takahiro Kinoshita; Hidehito Shibasaki; Shogo Nomura; Masaru Konishi; Hironori Kaneko
Journal:  J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 7.027

2.  Outcomes after Distal Pancreatectomy for Trauma in the Modern Era.

Authors:  Gregory L Peck; David N Blitzer; Constantine S Bulauitan; Lauren A Huntress; Paul Truche; David V Feliciano; Christopher J Dente
Journal:  Am Surg       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 0.688

Review 3.  Modifications in the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definition of postoperative pancreatic fistula.

Authors:  Alessandra Pulvirenti; Marco Ramera; Claudio Bassi
Journal:  Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2017-12-12

4.  Management of adult pancreatic injuries: A practice management guideline from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

Authors:  Vanessa Phillis Ho; Nimitt J Patel; Faran Bokhari; Firas G Madbak; Jana E Hambley; James R Yon; Bryce R H Robinson; Kimberly Nagy; Scott B Armen; Samuel Kingsley; Sameer Gupta; Frederic L Starr; Henry R Moore; Uretz J Oliphant; Elliott R Haut; John J Como
Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 3.313

5.  Morbidity, mortality, and technical factors of distal pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Bridget N Fahy; Charles F Frey; Hung S Ho; Laurel Beckett; Richard J Bold
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 2.565

Review 6.  Surgical versus nonsurgical management of traumatic major pancreatic duct transection: institutional experience and review of the literature.

Authors:  Alireza Hamidian Jahromi; Horacio R D'Agostino; Gazi B Zibari; Quyen D Chu; Cheryl Clark; Hosein Shokouh-Amiri
Journal:  Pancreas       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 3.327

7.  Risk factors associated with pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy, which technique of pancreatic stump closure is more beneficial?

Authors:  Marco Pericoli Ridolfini; Sergio Alfieri; Stavros Gourgiotis; Dario Di Miceli; Fabio Rotondi; Giuseppe Quero; Roberta Manghi; Giovanni Battista Doglietto
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2007-10-14       Impact factor: 5.742

8.  Pancreatic injury in damage control laparotomies: Is pancreatic resection safe during the initial laparotomy?

Authors:  Mark J Seamon; Patrick K Kim; S Peter Stawicki; G Paul Dabrowski; Amy J Goldberg; Patrick M Reilly; C William Schwab
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2008-12-02       Impact factor: 2.586

Review 9.  Predictive factors for pancreatic fistula following pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Matthew T McMillan; Charles M Vollmer
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2014-06-25       Impact factor: 3.445

10.  Operative drainage following pancreatic resection: analysis of 1122 patients resected over 5 years at a single institution.

Authors:  Camilo Correa-Gallego; Murray F Brennan; Michael Dʼangelica; Yuman Fong; Ronald P Dematteo; T Peter Kingham; William R Jarnagin; Peter J Allen
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 12.969

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.