Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Ann Surg. 2018 Apr;267(4):608-616. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002327.

Characterization and Optimal Management of High-risk Pancreatic Anastomoses During Pancreatoduodenectomy.

Author information

1
Departments of Surgery from University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA.
2
Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL.
3
University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
4
University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
5
Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN.
6
University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN.
7
Jefferson Medical College, Philadelphia, PA.
8
West of Scotland Pancreatic Unit, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, UK.
9
The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH.
10
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
11
University of Alabama School of Medicine, Birmingham, AL.
12
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
13
Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX.
14
University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL.
15
Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
16
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA.
17
Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

The aim of this study was to identify the optimal fistula mitigation strategy following pancreaticoduodenectomy.

BACKGROUND:

The utility of technical strategies to prevent clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) may vary by the circumstances of the anastomosis. The Fistula Risk Score (FRS) identifies a distinct high-risk cohort (FRS 7 to 10) that demonstrates substantially worse clinical outcomes. The value of various fistula mitigation strategies in these particular high-stakes cases has not been previously explored.

METHODS:

This multinational study included 5323 PDs performed by 62 surgeons at 17 institutions. Mitigation strategies, including both technique related (ie, pancreatogastrostomy reconstruction; dunking; tissue patches) and the use of adjuvant strategies (ie, intraperitoneal drains; anastomotic stents; prophylactic octreotide; tissue sealants), were evaluated using multivariable regression analysis and propensity score matching.

RESULTS:

A total of 522 (9.8%) PDs met high-risk FRS criteria, with an observed CR-POPF rate of 29.1%. Pancreatogastrostomy, prophylactic octreotide, and omission of externalized stents were each associated with an increased rate of CR-POPF (all P < 0.001). In a multivariable model accounting for patient, surgeon, and institutional characteristics, the use of external stents [odds ratio (OR) 0.45, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.25-0.81] and the omission of prophylactic octreotide (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30-0.78) were independently associated with decreased CR-POPF occurrence. In the propensity score matched cohort, an "optimal" mitigation strategy (ie, externalized stent and no prophylactic octreotide) was associated with a reduced rate of CR-POPF (13.2% vs 33.5%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS:

The scenarios identified by the high-risk FRS zone represent challenging anastomoses associated with markedly elevated rates of fistula. Externalized stents and omission of prophylactic octreotide, in the setting of intraperitoneal drainage and pancreaticojejunostomy reconstruction, provides optimal outcomes.

PMID:
28594741
DOI:
10.1097/SLA.0000000000002327
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wolters Kluwer
Loading ...
Support Center