Is there comparable morbidity in pylorus-preserving and pylorus-resecting pancreaticoduodenectomy? A meta-analysis

Surgical Outcome and Microbial Colonization of Standardized Smear Locations after Pancreatic Head Resection (Pylorus-Preserving Pancreatoduodenectomy, PPPD) for Chronic Pancreatitis and Pancreatic Head Carcinoma

Introduction: Patients with chronic pancreatitis (CP) as well as with pancreatic head carcinoma (CA) undergo the surgical intervention named "pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy according to Traverso-Longmire (PPPD)", which allowed a comparative analysis of the postoperative courses. The hypothesis was that patients with CA would have worse general as well as immune status than patients with CP due to the severity of the tumor disease and that this would be reflected in the more disadvantageous early postoperative outcome after PPPD. Methods: With the aim of eliciting the influence of the different diagnoses, the surgical outcome of all consecutive patients who underwent surgery at the Dept. of General, Abdominal, Vascular and Transplant Surgery at the University Hospital at Magdeburg between 2002 and 2015 (inclusion criterion) was recorded and comparatively evaluated. Early postoperative outcome was characterized by general and specific complication rate indicating morbidity, mortality, and microbial colonization rate, in particular surgical site infection (SSI, according to CDC criteria). In addition, microbiological findings of swabs and cultures from all compartments as well as preoperative and perioperative parameters from patient records were retrospectively documented and used for statistical comparison in this systematic retrospective unicenter observational study (design). Results: In total, 192 cases with CA (68.1%) and 90 cases with CP (31.9%) met the inclusion criteria of this study. Surprisingly, there were similar specific complication rates of 45.3% (CA) vs. 45.6% (CP; p = 0.97) and in-hospital mortality, which differed only slightly at 3.65% (CA) vs. 3.3% (CP; p = 0.591); the overall complication rate tended to be higher for CA at 23.4% vs. 14.4% (CP; p = 0.082). Overall, potentially pathogenic germs were detected in 28.9% of all patients in CP compared to 32.8% in CA (p = 0.509), and the rate of SSI was 29.7% (CA) and 24.4% (CP; p = 0.361). In multivariate analysis, CA was found to be a significant risk factor for the development of SSI (OR: 2.025; p = 0.048); the underlying disease had otherwise no significant effect on early postoperative outcome. Significant risk factors in the multivariate analysis were also male sex for SSI and microbial colonization, and intraoperatively transfused red cell packs for mortality, general and specific complications, and surgical revisions. Conclusions: Based on these results, a partly significant, partly trending negative influence of the underlying disease CA, compared to CP, on the early postoperative outcome was found, especially with regard to SSI after PPPD. This influence is corroborated by the international literature.

Clinical outcomes of pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma depending on preservation or resection of pylorus

Backgrounds/Aims

The comparative effectiveness of pylorus-resecting pancreaticoduodenectomy (PRPD) and pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPPD) in pancreatic head cancer is still disputed. The aim of this study was to analyze the data obtained from a large, single center with PPPD compared with PRPD in terms of postoperative outcomes, including blood glucose levels and survival in patients with pancreatic head cancer.

Methods

Between January 2007 and December 2016, a total of 556 patients with pancreatic head cancer underwent either PPPD or PRPD. We analyzed the clinicopathologic data to assess short- and long-term outcomes retrospectively.

Results

For underlying disease, patients with DM in PPPD were fewer than in PRPD (33.0% vs. 46.2%, p=0.002). The median value of CA19-9 was significantly higher in PRPD than in PPPD (129.36 vs. 86.47, p=0.037). The incidence of Clavien-Dindo grade III to V major complications in PPPD was significantly higher than in PRPD (20.4% vs. 13.4%, p=0.032). Resection of pylorus was shown to reduce complications in univariate and multivariate analyses (p=0.032 and = 0.021, respectively). The 5-year survival rates were 27.6% in the PPPD group and 22.4% in the PRPD group (p=0.015).

Conclusions

The results of PPPD and PRPD showed no significant differences from those reported conventionally in previous studies. Although further well-designed studies are needed, it is more important to select the range of surgical resection for the patient’s disease regardless of resection of pylorus.

Randomized Trial of Pylorus-Preserving vs. Pylorus-Resecting Pancreatoduodenectomy: Long-Term Morbidity and Quality of Life

BACKGROUND

The randomized controlled PROPP trial (DKRS00004191) showed that pylorus-resecting pancreatoduodenectomy (PR) is not superior to the pylorus-preserving procedure (PP) in terms of perioperative outcome, specifically in reduction of delayed gastric emptying. Non-superiority of PR was also confirmed in a recent meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. However, long-term data on morbidity and quality of life after PP compared to PR are sparse. The aim of this study was to investigate long-term outcomes of patients included in the PROPP trial.

METHODS

Between February 2013 and June 2016, a total of 188 patients underwent PD and were intraoperatively randomized to either preservation or resection of the pylorus (95 vs. 93 patients). For long-term follow-up, morbidity and quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30/PAN26) were monitored until January 1, 2018. Statistical analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis.

RESULTS

The mean duration of follow-up was 34.3 (± 11.3) months. Sixty-three of the 188 patients had died (PP n = 33, PR n = 30), 29 patients were lost to follow-up (PP n = 17, PR n = 12), and the remaining 96 patients were included in long-term follow-up (PP n = 45, PR n = 51). There was no difference between PP and PR patients regarding endocrine and exocrine pancreatic function, receipt of adjuvant/palliative chemotherapy, cancer recurrence, and other relevant characteristics. Late cholangitis occurred significantly more often in patients following pylorus resection (P = 0.042). Reoperations, readmissions to hospital, and quality of life scores except pain were comparable between the two study groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Similar to short-term results, long-term follow-up showed no significant differences between pylorus resection compared to pylorus preservation.

Meta-analysis of delayed gastric emptying after pylorus-preserving versus pylorus-resecting pancreatoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is a frequent complication after pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy. Recent studies have suggested that resection of the pylorus is associated with decreased rates of DGE. However, superiority of pylorus-resecting pancreatoduodenectomy was not shown in a recent RCT. This meta-analysis summarized evidence of the effectiveness and safety of pylorus-preserving compared with pylorus-resecting pancreatoduodenectomy.

METHODS

RCTs and non-randomized studies comparing outcomes of pylorus-preserving and pylorus-resecting pancreatoduodenectomy were searched systematically in MEDLINE, Web of Science and CENTRAL. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed and the results presented as weighted odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences with their corresponding 95 per cent confidence intervals. Subgroup analyses were performed to account for interstudy heterogeneity between RCTs and non-randomized studies.

RESULTS

Three RCTs and eight non-randomized studies with a total of 992 patients were included. Quantitative synthesis across all studies showed superiority for pylorus-resecting pancreatoduodenectomy regarding DGE (OR 2·71, 95 per cent c.i. 1·48 to 4·96; P = 0·001) and length of hospital stay (mean difference 3·26 (95 per cent c.i. -1·04 to 5·48) days; P = 0·004). Subgroup analyses including only RCTs showed no significant statistical differences between the two procedures regarding DGE, and for all other effectiveness and safety measures.

CONCLUSION

Pylorus-resecting pancreatoduodenectomy is not superior to pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy for reducing DGE or other relevant complications.

Pylorus preservation pancreatectomy or not

Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is the treatment of choice for various benign and malignant tumors of the pancreatic head or the periampullary region, and the only hope for cure in patients with cancer at this side. While it has been associated with high morbidity and mortality rates in the last century, its centralization in specialized institutions together with refinements in the operative technique and better management of postoperative complications have made PD a standardized, safe procedure. Besides the classic Whipple procedure including distal gastrectomy, two variations of PD with or without pylorus resection, but preservation of the entire stomach in either procedure exist today. Pylorus-preserving PD has gained wide acceptance as standard procedure and is being performed by an increasing number of pancreatic surgeons. After its oncological adequacy was questioned initially, pylorus-preserving PD was shown to be equivalent to the classic Whipple procedure regarding tumor recurrence and long-term survival. Moreover, operation time and blood loss were shown to be reduced in the pylorus-preserving procedure and benefits in nutritional status and quality of life were observed. However, preservation of the pylorus has been suggested to result in an increased incidence of postoperative delayed gastric emptying (DGE). In this context, pylorus-resecting PD has become popular especially in Japan with the aim to prevent DGE by removal of the pylorus but preservation of the stomach. In contrast to positive results from early studies, latest high-quality randomized controlled trial (RCT) data show that pylorus resection does not reduce DGE compared to the pylorus-preserving operation. Non-superiority of pylorus resection was also confirmed in current meta-analysis on this topic. This article summarizes the existing evidence on PD with or without pylorus preservation and derives recommendations for daily practice.