Pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy with external pancreatic remnant drainage

Pancreatic duct stents

Pancreatic duct stenting using endoscopy or surgery is widely used for the management of benign and malignant pancreatic diseases. Endoscopic pancreatic stents are mainly used to relieve pain caused by chronic pancreatitis and pancreas divisum, and to treat pancreatic duct disruption and stenotic pancreaticointestinal anastomosis after surgery. They are also used to prevent postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis and postoperative pancreatic fistula, treat pancreatic cancer, and locate radiolucent stones. Recent advances in endoscopic techniques, such as endoscopic ultrasonography and balloon enteroscopy, and newly designed stents have broadened the indications for pancreatic duct stenting. In this review we outlined the types, insertion procedures, efficacy, and complications of endoscopic pancreatic duct stent placement, and summarized the applications of pancreatic duct stents in surgery.

The Prognostic Value of External vs Internal Pancreatic Duct Stents in CR-POPF after Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is no specific evidence regarding the benefits of external and internal pancreatic duct stents after pancreaticoduodenectomy since pancreatic fistula (grade A) have been redefined with no clinical treatment effect. We aimed to reevaluate the prognostic value of external and internal stents in clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula over pancreaticoduodenectomy.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database were specifically searched for pertinent and original articles published before May 2019. The project has been registered in PROSPERO (Registration number: CRD42019137579).

RESULTS

Four randomized controlled trials and six nonrandomized controlled trials with a total of 2101 patients were enrolled in this meta-analysis. The use of an external stent resulted in better performance than the use of an internal stent in terms of pancreatic fistula (grade C) (OR 0.58, P = 0.03) but did not reduce the rate of pancreatic fistula (grade B) (OR 0.99, P = 0.94) in all studies. The meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials found that the use of an external stent approached a level of significance for an increased rate of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula compared to the use of an internal stent (OR 1.40, P = 0.10) but had no significant effect on pancreatic fistula (grade B) (OR 1.34, P = 0.26) or pancreatic fistula (grade C) (OR 1.68, P = 0.62).

CONCLUSION

Compared with internal stents, the use of external stent might be associated with a lower rate of pancreatic fistula (grade C). More randomized clinical trials are warranted to further explore safety and efficacy of pancreatic duct external stents.

New-onset diabetes after pancreatoduodenectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pancreatoduodenectomy may lead to new-onset diabetes mellitus, also known as type 3c diabetes, but the exact risk of this complication is unknown. The aim of this review was to assess the risk of new-onset diabetes mellitus after pancreatoduodenectomy.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase (Ovid), and the Cochrane Library for English articles published from March 1993 until March 2017 (PROSPERO registry number: CRD42016039784). Studies reporting on the risk of new-onset diabetes mellitus after pancreatoduodenectomy were included. For meta-analysis, studies were pooled using the random-effects model. All studies were appraised according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

After screening 1,523 studies, 22 studies involving 1,121 patients were eligible. The mean weighted overall proportion of new-onset diabetes mellitus after pancreatoduodenectomy was 16% (95% confidence interval, 12%-20%). We found no significant difference in risk of new-onset diabetes mellitus when pancreatoduodenectomy was performed for nonmalignant disease after excluding patients with chronic pancreatitis (19% risk; 95% confidence interval, 7%-43%; 6 studies) or for malignant disease (22% risk; 95% confidence interval, 14%-32%; 11 studies), P = .71. Among all patients, 6% (95% confidence interval, 4%-10%) developed insulin-dependent new-onset diabetes mellitus.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review identified a clinically relevant risk of new-onset diabetes mellitus after pancreatoduodenectomy of which patients should be informed preoperatively.

Pancreatic stump closure after pancreatoduodenectomy in elderly patients: a retrospective clinical study

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic fistula (PF) after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) represents the major source of morbidity. Derivative procedures are preferred by pancreatic surgeons, but the optimal management of remnant pancreatic stump remains controversial.

AIMS

The purpose of this retrospective study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pancreatic stump closure in selected elderly patients (>65 years).

METHODS

Clinical data of 44 PD undergone mechanical closure of the pancreatic stump performed between 2001 and 2014 in two department of general and oncologic surgery were retrospectively collected. Considering the age, patients were divided into two groups: 21 patients of less than 65 years (Group A) and 23 patients of more than 65 years (Group B).

RESULTS

A soft pancreatic parenchyma with a not-dilated duct (diameter <3 mm) was reported in all the 44 patients. A grade-A PF, which did not required further treatments, developed in 20 cases (45.4%; 13 in group A and 7 in group B; p < 0.05), grade-B in 5 patients (11.4%; 3 in group A and 2 in group B; statistically not significant) and a grade-C PF was observed only in one patient (2.2%; 1 in group A and 0 in group B).

DISCUSSION

In selected "high risk" elderly patients (>65 years) with soft pancreatic texture, the closure of the pancreatic stump can be a useful tool in the surgical armamentarium with the aim to reduce the incidence of age-related complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Prospective randomized controlled trial to better evaluate PF risk factors is needed.

Stents for the prevention of pancreatic fistula following pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Several studies have demonstrated that the use of pancreatic duct stents following pancreaticoduodenectomy is associated with a lower risk of pancreatic fistula. However, to date there is a lack of accord in the literature on whether the use of stents is beneficial and, if so, whether internal or external stenting, with or without replacement, is preferable. This is an update of a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of pancreatic stents in preventing pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and four major Chinese biomedical databases up to November 2015. We also searched several major trials registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the use of stents (either internal or external) versus no stents, and comparing internal stents versus external stents, replacement versus no replacement following pancreaticoduodenectomy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted the data. The outcomes studied were incidence of pancreatic fistula, need for reoperation, length of hospital stay, overall complications, and in-hospital mortality. We showed the results as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD), with 95% confidence interval (CI). We assessed the quality of evidence using GRADE (http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/).

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight studies (1018 participants). The average age of the participants ranged from 56 to 68 years. Most of the studies were conducted in single centers in Japan (four studies), China (two studies), France (one study), and the USA (one study). The risk of bias was low or unclear for most domains across the studies. Stents versus no stentsThe effect of stents on reducing pancreatic fistula in people undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy was uncertain due to the low quality of the evidence (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.14; 605 participants; 4 studies). The risk of in-hospital mortality was 3% in people who did receive stents compared with 2% (95% CI 1% to 6%) in people who had stents (RR 0.73, 0.28 to 1.94; 605 participants; 4 studies; moderate-quality evidence). The effect of stents on reoperation was uncertain due to wide confidence intervals (RR 0.67, 0.36 to 1.22; 512 participants; 3 studies; moderate-quality evidence). We found moderate-quality evidence that using stents reduces total hospital stay by just under four days (mean difference (MD) -3.68, 95% CI -6.52 to -0.84; 605 participants; 4 studies). The risk of delayed gastric emptying, wound infection, and intra-abdominal abscess was uncertain (gastric emptying: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.24 to 2.35; moderate-quality evidence) (wound infection: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.32; moderate-quality evidence) (abscess: RR 1.38, 0.49 to 3.85; low-quality evidence). Subgroup analysis by type of stent provided limited evidence that external stents lead to lower risk of fistula compared with internal stents. External versus internal stentsThe effect of external stents on the risk of pancreatic fistula, reoperation, delayed gastric emptying, and intra-abdominal abscess compared with internal stents was uncertain due to low-quality evidence (fistula: RR 1.44, 0.94 to 2.21; 362 participants; 3 studies) (reoperation: RR 2.02, 95% CI 0.38 to 10.79; 319 participants; 3 studies) (gastric emptying: RR 1.65, 0.66 to 4.09; 362 participants; 3 studies) (abscess: RR 1.91, 95% CI 0.80 to 4.58; 362 participants; 3 studies). The rate of in-hospital mortality was lower in studies comparing internal and external stents than in those comparing stents with no stents. One death occurred in the external-stent group (RR 0.33, 0.01 to 7.99; low-quality evidence). There were no cases of pancreatitis in participants who had internal stents compared with three in those who had external stents (RR 0.15, 0.01 to 2.73; low-quality evidence). The difference between internal and external stents on total hospital stay was uncertain due to the wide confidence intervals around the average effect of 1.7 days fewer with internal stents (9.18 days fewer to 5.84 days longer; 262 participants; 2 studies; low-quality evidence). The analysis of wound infection could not exclude a protective effect with either approach (RR 1.41, 0.44 to 4.48; 319 participants; 2 studies; moderate-quality evidence). Operative replacement of pancreatic juice versus not replacing pancreatic juice There was insufficient evidence available from a small trial to ascertain the effect of replacing pancreatic juice.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review has identified limited evidence on the effects of stents. We have not been able to identify convincing direct evidence of superiority of external over internal stents. We found a limited number of RCTs with small sample sizes. Further RCTs on the use of stents after pancreaticoduodenectomy are warranted.

Pure pancreaticocutaneous fistula shunted into the urinary bladder. Lesson learned by an incomplete, original attempt

Because pancreaticocystostomy is a method of exocrine secretion management in pancreas transplantation, a legitimate question is whether a pure pancreatic fistula could be shunted into the bladder. After duodenopancreatectomy for cancer, a pancreaticojejunostomy leakage was treated by pancreas-saving anastomosis disconnection. The resulting pure pancreaticocutaneous fistula was later diverted into the bladder using a Denver valved-pump device. Technical problems necessitated redoing the shunt using a modified technique and device. Although the system did work, catheter displacement outside the bladder finally caused device takedown and external fistula restoration. Our attempt did not succeed mostly because of our inexperience in dealing with an altogether novel issue without appropriate technology. Supposing its feasibility, a pancreatic-bladder shunt might have a role in treating pure pancreatic fistulas or creating an external fistula whenever the pancreatic remnant is unreliable for an anastomosis, or when a leaked anastomosis' disconnection is preferable to completion pancreatectomy.

Stents for the prevention of pancreatic fistula following pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Several studies have demonstrated that the use of pancreatic duct stents following pancreaticoduodenectomy is associated with a lower risk of pancreatic fistula. However, to date, there is a lack of accord in the literature on whether the use of stents is beneficial and, if so, whether internal or external stenting is preferable.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of pancreatic stents in preventing pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science and four major Chinese biomedical databases were searched up to February 2011. We also searched four major trials registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the use of stents (either internal or external) versus no stents, and comparing internal stents versus external stents following pancreaticoduodenectomy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors extracted the data independently. The outcomes studied were incidence of pancreatic fistula, need for reoperation, length of hospital stay, overall complications, and in-hospital mortality. The results were shown as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 656 patients were included in the systematic review. Overall, the use of stents (both external and internal) was not associated with a statistically significant change in any of the studied outcomes. In a subgroup analysis, it was found that the use of external, but not internal, stents is associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of pancreatic fistulae (RR 0.33; 95% CI 0.11 to 0.98, P = 0.04), the incidence of complications (RR 0.48; 95% CI 0.25 to 0.92, P = 0.03) and length of hospital stay (RR -0.57; 95% CI -0.94 to -0.21, P = 0.002). In RCTs on the use of internal versus external stents, no statistically significant difference was found in terms of any of the studied outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review suggests that the use of external stents following pancreaticoduodenectomy may be beneficial. However, only a limited number of RCTs with rather small sample sizes were available. Further RCTs on the use of stents after pancreaticoduodenectomy are warranted.

The pancreatic stump after pancreatoduodenectomy: the "Achille's heel" revisited

Pancreatic fistula, the most dreaded complication of pancreatoduodenectomy occurs with an incidence ranging from 4-30% in literature reports; the incidence varies considerably according to the definition of fistula used. This literature review describes various methods proposed over the last decade to decrease the incidence and severity of pancreatic fistula including techniques of pancreatico-jejunal and pancreatico-gastric anastomoses, deliberate avoidance of pancreatico-enteric anastomosis, and the prophylactic role of somatostatin analogues.

Choice of the optimal pancreaticojejunal anastomosis technique: how can we improve patient safety in pancreatic surgery?

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

The cause of the morbidity and mortality following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) in the surgical treatment of benign and malignant diseases of the periampullary region is leakage from the pancreaticojejunal anastomosis. The size of the main pancreatic duct and the texture of the remnant pancreas are very important factors for a secure pancreaticojejunal anastomosis.

METHODS

A new technique was developed for patients having pancreatic ducts smaller than 3 mm and a hard remnant pancreas.

RESULTS

Pylorus-preserving PD was performed for 28 patients who underwent PD at our hospital between January 2004 and January 2007, without mortality. The new technique was used in the 8 patients who had pancreatic ducts smaller than 3 mm and a hard remnant pancreas. With our new technique, different from other previously described techniques, the anastomosis was performed with the sutures passing from the cut-surface of the parenchyma of the pancreas. All patients were operated on by the same surgeon and surgical team. None of the patients developed a fistula.

CONCLUSIONS

We believe that this anastomosis technique can be performed securely in patients having a hard remnant pancreas and a main pancreatic duct smaller than 3 mm.