Literature DB >> 34782930

Double purse-string telescoped pancreaticogastrostomy is not superior in preventing pancreatic fistula development in high-risk anastomosis: a 6-year single-center case-control study.

Jonathan Garnier1, Jacques Ewald2, Ugo Marchese2, Anais Palen2, Djamel Mokart3, Gilles Piana4, Jean-Robert Delpero5, Olivier Turrini5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The double purse-string telescoped pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) technique has been suggested as an alternative approach to reduce the risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). Its efficacity in high-risk situations has not yet been explored. This study compared the incidence of clinically relevant POPF (CR-POPF) between patients with high-risk anastomosis undergoing PG and those undergoing pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ).
METHODS: From 2013 to 2019, 198 consecutive patients with high-risk anastomosis, an updated alternative fistula risk score > 20%, and who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy with the PJ (165) or PG (33) technique were included. Optimal mitigation strategy (external stenting/octreotide omission) was applied for all patients. The primary endpoint was the incidence of CR-POPF.
RESULTS: The mean ua-FRS was 33%. CR-POPF (grade B/C) was found in 42 patients (21%) and postoperative hemorrhage in 30 (15%); the mortality rate was 4%. CR-POPF rates were comparable between the PJ (19%) and PG (33%) groups (P = 0.062). The PG group had a higher rate of POPF grade C (24% vs. 10%; P = 0.036), longer operative time (P = 0.019), and a higher transfusion rate (P < 0.001), even after a matching process on ua-FRS. In the multivariate analysis, the type of anastomosis (P = 0.88), body mass index (P = 0.47), or main pancreatic duct diameter (P = 0.7) did not influence CR-POPF occurrence.
CONCLUSIONS: For patients with high-risk anastomosis, the double purse-string telescoped PG technique was not superior to the PJ technique for preventing CR-POPF.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clinically relevant pancreatic fistula; High-risk pancreatic anastomosis; Pancreaticogastrostomy; Soft pancreas

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34782930     DOI: 10.1007/s00423-021-02376-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg        ISSN: 1435-2443            Impact factor:   3.445


  36 in total

1.  Use of the round ligament of the liver to decrease pancreatic fistulas: a novel technique.

Authors:  David A Iannitti; Natalie G Coburn; Joy Somberg; Beth A Ryder; Jack Monchik; William G Cioffi
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2006-10-25       Impact factor: 6.113

2.  Omental flaps reduces complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Omar J Shah; Sadaf A Bangri; Manmohan Singh; Reyaz A Lattoo; Mohammad Y Bhat
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int       Date:  2015-06

3.  Scoring System to Predict Pancreatic Fistula After Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A UK Multicenter Study.

Authors:  Keith J Roberts; Robert P Sutcliffe; Ravi Marudanayagam; James Hodson; John Isaac; Paolo Muiesan; Alex Navarro; Krashna Patel; Asif Jah; Sara Napetti; Anya Adair; Stefanos Lazaridis; Andreas Prachalias; Guy Shingler; Bilal Al-Sarireh; Roland Storey; Andrew M Smith; Nehal Shah; Guiseppe Fusai; Jamil Ahmed; Mohammad Abu Hilal; Darius F Mirza
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 12.969

4.  Randomized clinical trial of external stent drainage of the pancreatic duct to reduce postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreaticojejunostomy.

Authors:  F Motoi; S Egawa; T Rikiyama; Y Katayose; M Unno
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 6.939

5.  Fatty pancreas and increased body mass index are risk factors of pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Sébastien Gaujoux; Alexandre Cortes; Anne Couvelard; Séverine Noullet; Laurent Clavel; Vinciane Rebours; Philippe Lévy; Alain Sauvanet; Philippe Ruszniewski; Jacques Belghiti
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 3.982

6.  Body Mass Index and Stump Morphology Predict an Increased Incidence of Pancreatic Fistula After Pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Chi-Hua Fang; Qing-Shan Chen; Jian Yang; Fei Xiang; Zhao-Shan Fang; Wen Zhu
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Fatty pancreas: a factor in postoperative pancreatic fistula.

Authors:  Abhishek Mathur; Henry A Pitt; Megan Marine; Romil Saxena; C Max Schmidt; Thomas J Howard; Attila Nakeeb; Nicholas J Zyromski; Keith D Lillemoe
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  A randomized prospective multicenter trial of pancreaticoduodenectomy with and without routine intraperitoneal drainage.

Authors:  George Van Buren; Mark Bloomston; Steven J Hughes; Jordan Winter; Stephen W Behrman; Nicholas J Zyromski; Charles Vollmer; Vic Velanovich; Taylor Riall; Peter Muscarella; Jose Trevino; Attila Nakeeb; C Max Schmidt; Kevin Behrns; E Christopher Ellison; Omar Barakat; Kyle A Perry; Jeffrey Drebin; Michael House; Sherif Abdel-Misih; Eric J Silberfein; Steven Goldin; Kimberly Brown; Somala Mohammed; Sally E Hodges; Amy McElhany; Mehdi Issazadeh; Eunji Jo; Qianxing Mo; William E Fisher
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 12.969

9.  Updated Alternative Fistula Risk Score (ua-FRS) to Include Minimally Invasive Pancreatoduodenectomy: Pan-European Validation.

Authors:  Timothy H Mungroop; Sjors Klompmaker; Ulrich F Wellner; Ewout W Steyerberg; Andrea Coratti; Mathieu D'Hondt; Matteo de Pastena; Safi Dokmak; Igor Khatkov; Olivier Saint-Marc; Uwe Wittel; Mohammed Abu Hilal; David Fuks; Ignasi Poves; Tobias Keck; Ugo Boggi; Marc G Besselink
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2021-02-01       Impact factor: 13.787

Review 10.  Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF): A systematic review and analysis of the POPF-related mortality rate in 60,739 patients retrieved from the English literature published between 1990 and 2015.

Authors:  Sergio Pedrazzoli
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 1.889

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.