Michele Mazzola1, Pietro Calcagno2, Alessandro Giani2, Marianna Maspero2, Camillo Leonardo Bertoglio2, Paolo De Martini2, Carmelo Magistro2, Cristiano Sgrazzutti3, Angelo Vanzulli3,4, Giovanni Ferrari2. 1. Division of Minimally-invasive Surgical Oncology, Niguarda Cancer Center, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Piazza Ospedale Maggiore 3, 20162, Milan, Italy. micmazzola@gmail.com. 2. Division of Minimally-invasive Surgical Oncology, Niguarda Cancer Center, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Piazza Ospedale Maggiore 3, 20162, Milan, Italy. 3. Advanced Technologies Department, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Piazza Ospedale Maggiore 3, 20162, Milan, Italy. 4. Department of Oncology and Hemato-oncology, University of Milan, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Piazza Ospedale Maggiore 3, 20162, Milan, Italy.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The clinical impact of routine CT imaging after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) has not been properly investigated. The aim of this study was to investigate the role of routine CT scan after PD for the detection of postoperative complications. METHODS: Prospectively collected data of consecutive patients undergoing PD and receiving routine postoperative CT imaging were retrospectively analyzed. The primary endpoint was accuracy of CT imaging in identifying major complications. The secondary endpoint was identification of preoperative and intraoperative factors associated with severe complications. A subgroup analysis of CT scan accuracy in identifying severe complications in patients stratified by fistula risk score (FRS) and presence of early clinical alterations was also performed. RESULTS: A total of 145 patients were included. Routine CT scan had low specificity (Sp = 0.36) and high sensitivity (Sn = 0.98) for predicting major complications, with an accuracy of 0.57. At multivariate logistic regression analysis, only fistula moderate-high FRS (p = 0.029) was independently associated with severe complications. In patients with negligible-low FRS, CT scan showed a Sp of 0.63 and a Sn of 1.0 with an accuracy of 0.69. In patients with moderate-high FRS, CT scan had a Sp of 0.19, a Sn of 0.97 and an accuracy of 0.5. In the 20 (14%) patients with negligible-low FRS and no clinical alterations, no deaths or readmissions occurred regardless of CT findings, while one severe complication occurred in the positive CT scan group. In all other groups, no deaths or readmissions occurred in case of negative CT, with only one severe complication in the moderate-high FRS group with clinical alterations. In case of positive CT, the rate of severe complications was 47% in case of negligible-low FRS and clinical alterations, 40% in case of moderate-high FRS with no clinical alterations, and 45% in case of moderate-high FRS and clinical alterations. CONCLUSIONS: Routine postoperative CT scan after PD should not be performed in patients with negligible-low FRS and no clinical alterations. In all other patients, a negative CT scan appears to be highly accurate in identifying patients who will have an uneventful course and who could benefit from early discharge.
PURPOSE: The clinical impact of routine CT imaging after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) has not been properly investigated. The aim of this study was to investigate the role of routine CT scan after PD for the detection of postoperative complications. METHODS: Prospectively collected data of consecutive patients undergoing PD and receiving routine postoperative CT imaging were retrospectively analyzed. The primary endpoint was accuracy of CT imaging in identifying major complications. The secondary endpoint was identification of preoperative and intraoperative factors associated with severe complications. A subgroup analysis of CT scan accuracy in identifying severe complications in patients stratified by fistula risk score (FRS) and presence of early clinical alterations was also performed. RESULTS: A total of 145 patients were included. Routine CT scan had low specificity (Sp = 0.36) and high sensitivity (Sn = 0.98) for predicting major complications, with an accuracy of 0.57. At multivariate logistic regression analysis, only fistula moderate-high FRS (p = 0.029) was independently associated with severe complications. In patients with negligible-low FRS, CT scan showed a Sp of 0.63 and a Sn of 1.0 with an accuracy of 0.69. In patients with moderate-high FRS, CT scan had a Sp of 0.19, a Sn of 0.97 and an accuracy of 0.5. In the 20 (14%) patients with negligible-low FRS and no clinical alterations, no deaths or readmissions occurred regardless of CT findings, while one severe complication occurred in the positive CT scan group. In all other groups, no deaths or readmissions occurred in case of negative CT, with only one severe complication in the moderate-high FRS group with clinical alterations. In case of positive CT, the rate of severe complications was 47% in case of negligible-low FRS and clinical alterations, 40% in case of moderate-high FRS with no clinical alterations, and 45% in case of moderate-high FRS and clinical alterations. CONCLUSIONS: Routine postoperative CT scan after PD should not be performed in patients with negligible-low FRS and no clinical alterations. In all other patients, a negative CT scan appears to be highly accurate in identifying patients who will have an uneventful course and who could benefit from early discharge.
Authors: Claudio Bassi; Giovanni Marchegiani; Christos Dervenis; Micheal Sarr; Mohammad Abu Hilal; Mustapha Adham; Peter Allen; Roland Andersson; Horacio J Asbun; Marc G Besselink; Kevin Conlon; Marco Del Chiaro; Massimo Falconi; Laureano Fernandez-Cruz; Carlos Fernandez-Del Castillo; Abe Fingerhut; Helmut Friess; Dirk J Gouma; Thilo Hackert; Jakob Izbicki; Keith D Lillemoe; John P Neoptolemos; Attila Olah; Richard Schulick; Shailesh V Shrikhande; Tadahiro Takada; Kyoichi Takaori; William Traverso; Charles R Vollmer; Christopher L Wolfgang; Charles J Yeo; Roberto Salvia; Marcus Buchler Journal: Surgery Date: 2016-12-28 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: S H McEvoy; L P Lavelle; S M Hoare; A C O'Neill; F N Awan; D E Malone; E R Ryan; J W McCann; E J Heffernan Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2014-07-16 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Shailesh V Shrikhande; Masillamany Sivasanker; Charles M Vollmer; Helmut Friess; Marc G Besselink; Abe Fingerhut; Charles J Yeo; Carlos Fernandez-delCastillo; Christos Dervenis; Christoper Halloran; Dirk J Gouma; Dejan Radenkovic; Horacio J Asbun; John P Neoptolemos; Jakob R Izbicki; Keith D Lillemoe; Kevin C Conlon; Laureano Fernandez-Cruz; Marco Montorsi; Max Bockhorn; Mustapha Adham; Richard Charnley; Ross Carter; Thilo Hackert; Werner Hartwig; Yi Miao; Michael Sarr; Claudio Bassi; Markus W Büchler Journal: Surgery Date: 2016-12-24 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Louise Barbier; Diane Mège; Anthony Reyre; Vincent M Moutardier; Jacques A Ewald; Jean-Robert Delpero Journal: ANZ J Surg Date: 2017-05-16 Impact factor: 1.872
Authors: Baki Topal; Steffen Fieuws; Raymond Aerts; Joseph Weerts; Tom Feryn; Geert Roeyen; Claude Bertrand; Catherine Hubert; Marc Janssens; Jean Closset Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2013-05-02 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Helmut Witzigmann; Markus K Diener; Stefan Kienkötter; Inga Rossion; Thomas Bruckner; Olaf Pridöhl; Olga Radulova-Mauersberger; Heike Lauer; Phillip Knebel; Alexis Ulrich; Oliver Strobel; Thilo Hackert; Markus W Büchler Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2016-09 Impact factor: 12.969
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