Preoperative biliary drainage for distal obstruction: the case against revisited

Preoperative endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage for primary drainage in obstructive jaundice

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic transpapillary approach by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the established technique for preoperative biliary drainage (PBD). Recently, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has been reported to be a useful alternative technique after ERCP fail. However, the optimal strategy remain controversial.

AREA COVERED

This review summarizes the literature on EUS-BD techniques for PBD with a literature search using PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials database between 2000 and 2023 using keywords for 'preoperative biliary drainage' and all types of EUS-BD techniques.

EXPERT OPINION

As there is no consensus on the optimal EUS-BD technique for PBD, selection of the EUS-BD approach depends on the patient's condition, the biliary obstruction site, the anastomosis after surgical intervention, and the preference of the endoscopist. However, we consider that EUS-HGS using a dedicated plastic stent may have some advantages in the adverse impact of surgical procedure because the location where the fistula is created by EUS-HGS is away from the site of the surgical procedure. Although there remain many issues that require further investigation, EUS-BD can be a feasible and safe alternative method of PBD for malignant biliary obstruction after ERCP fail.

Postoperative outcomes of resectable periampullary cancer accompanied by obstructive jaundice with and without preoperative endoscopic biliary drainage

BACKGROUND

Preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) is useful in resectable periampullary cancer with obstructive jaundice. Whether it is better than direct surgery (DS) in terms of postoperative complications and mortality is controversial.

METHODS

All cases of successful pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) in patients with periampullary cancer with obstructive jaundice performed between January 2016 and January 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Endoscopic PBD was performed; data pertaining to serum bilirubin level, procedural technique, and duration before surgery were obtained. The incidence of postoperative complications and survival rate were compared between the PBD and DS group.

RESULTS

A total of 104 patients (PBD, n = 58; DS, n = 46) underwent curative PD. The mean age was 63.8 ± 10 years and 53 (51%) were male. Age, body mass index (BMI), sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status, presence of comorbid disease, initial laboratory results, and pathological diagnoses were not significantly different between the two groups. The incidence of postoperative complications was 58.6% in the PBD group while 73.9% in the DS group (relative risk [RR] 1.26, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92, 1.73, p=0.155) and the difference was not significant except in bile leakage (RR 8.83, 95% CI 1.26, 61.79, p = 0.021) and intraoperative bleeding (RR 3.97, 95% CI 0.88, 17.85, p = 0.049) which were higher in the DS group. The one-year survival rate was slightly less in the DS group but the difference was not statistically significant. The independent predictors for death within 1-year were intraoperative bleeding and preoperative total bilirubin > 14.6 mg/dL.

CONCLUSIONS

PBD in resectable malignant distal biliary obstruction showed no benefit in terms of 1-year survival over DS approach. But it demonstrated the benefit of lower risks of intraoperative bleeding, and bile leakage. Additionally, the level of pre-operative bilirubin level of over 14.6 mg/dL and having intraoperative bleeding were associated with a lower 1-year survival in such patients. Overall, PBD may be not necessary for all resectable periampullary cancer patients, but there might be a role in those with severely jaundice (>14.6 mg/dL), as it helps lower risk of intraoperative bleeding, and might lead to a better survival outcome.

Preoperative biliary drainage for pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is currently one of the leading causes of cancer-related morbidity and mortality with dismal long term survival after diagnosis. Nearly 85% of pancreatic cancer patients present with advanced disease precluding curative surgical resection. In those who are candidates for surgery, preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) has been developed since the 1960s in order to improve surgical outcomes. While obstructive jaundice in resectable pancreatic cancer has been traditionally treated before surgical resection in all patients, data over the past decade demonstrated increased perioperative complications and morbidity with systematic PBD compared to direct surgery. With new evidence of potential adverse events, the role of routine PBD is being reassessed. Current indications for PBD include cholangitis, delayed surgery, and relief of jaundice in patients planned to receive neoadjuvant therapy (NAT). NAT is being increasingly utilized in borderline resectable as well as resectable pancreatic cancer and a higher proportion of patients with likely require PBD in the future. The evidence for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography as first line for PBD is robust with supporting data from endoscopic ultrasound assisted biliary drainage. Self-expanding metal stent was shown to be cost-effective in recent studies without increase in morbidity compared to plastic stents in this setting. In this review, we will summarize the current evidence for PBD in patients with pancreatic cancer.

Effect of Preoperative Biliary Stenting on Outcomes of Pancreaticoduodenectomy

Biliary drainage before pancreaticoduodenectomy was introduced to decrease morbidity from obstructive jaundice. Recent retrospective and randomised data show that preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) increases perioperative infectious complications. Most patients presenting to our tertiary care centre have undergone drainage procedures prior to surgical consultation. We analysed the impact of PBD, specifically endoscopic stent placement, on the postoperative outcome of pancreaticoduodenectomy at our centre. A cohort of 87 patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy from 2012 to 2016 was identified. Data was collected retrospectively and a comparative analysis of stented and nonstented patients was done. Comparison of the 23 stented patients was done with 23 nonstented patients after matching them for age, sex and bilirubin levels. Median total bilirubin level in stented patients was 10.2 mg/dl versus 7.7 mg/dl in nonstented patients. The infectious complication rate in the stented group was 39.1% versus 12.7% in the nonstented group (P value < 0.05). There was no difference in the anastomotic leak rate between the two groups. Time to curative surgery in the stented group was significantly more than in the nonstented group. Stented patients are at a higher risk for postoperative infectious complications. Patients with obstructive jaundice awaiting surgery should undergo selective biliary drainage after careful planning and discussion between the operating surgeon and the endoscopist.

Impact of Percutaneous Transhepatic Biliary Drainage on Clinical Outcomes of Patients with Malignant Obstructive Jaundice Undergoing Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy

Preoperative biliary drainage may increase the morbidity and mortality of pancreaticoduodenectomy. Studies on percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) before laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD), however, are scarce. The aim of this study was to examine the impact of PTBD on clinical outcomes of patients with malignant obstructive jaundice undergoing LPD. Clinical data of 172 patients who had malignant obstructive jaundice and underwent LPD from 2014 to 2017 in our hospital were retrospectively analyzed. Demographics, catheter-related complications, postoperative complications, and oncological outcomes were collected and analyzed. Propensity score matching was performed to minimize selection bias associated with the comparison of data between patients who underwent PTBD and then LPD (PTBD group), and those given LPD alone (LPD group). The results showed that, in the PTBD group relative to the LPD group, the operating time was significantly shortened (250.28±69.95 vs. 278.58±86.51 min, P=0.0196), the intraoperative blood loss was markedly reduced (271.96±403.47 vs. 429.72±482.47 mL, P=0.022), and overall rates of complications (16.33% vs. 36.49%, P=0.0025) including postoperative haemorrhage (2.04% vs. 12.16%, P=0.0072) and delayed gastric emptying (4.08% vs. 13.51%, P=0.0251) were greatly decreased. The propensity score-matched analysis, with 48 patients enrolled in each group, revealed no statistically significant differences in operating duration (262.71±68.64 vs. 280.25±83.52 min, P=0.264), intraoperative blood loss (290.21±407.71 vs. 373.75±422.33 mL, P=0.327) and delayed gastric emptying (4.17% vs. 12.50%, P=0.1396). PTBD group had lower incidences in overall complications (22.92% vs. 39.58%, P=0.0481) and postoperative haemorrhage (2.08% vs. 12.50%, P=0.0497) than LPD group. In conclusion, patients with malignant obstructive jaundice may benefit from PTBD procedure before LPD in terms of perioperative outcomes.

Clinical practice guidelines for the management of biliary tract cancers 2019: The 3rd English edition

BACKGROUND

The Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery launched the clinical practice guidelines for the management of biliary tract cancers (cholangiocarcinoma, gallbladder cancer, and ampullary cancer) in 2007, then published the 2nd version in 2014.

METHODS

In this 3rd version, clinical questions (CQs) were proposed on six topics. The recommendation, grade for recommendation, and statement for each CQ were discussed and finalized by an evidence-based approach. Recommendations were graded as Grade 1 (strong) or Grade 2 (weak) according to the concepts of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system.

RESULTS

The 31 CQs covered the six topics: (a) prophylactic treatment, (b) diagnosis, (c) biliary drainage, (d) surgical treatment, (e) chemotherapy, and (f) radiation therapy. In the 31 CQs, 14 recommendations were rated strong and 14 recommendations weak. The remaining three CQs had no recommendation. Each CQ includes a statement of how the recommendations were graded.

CONCLUSIONS

This latest guideline provides recommendations for important clinical aspects based on evidence. Future collaboration with the cancer registry will be key for assessing the guidelines and establishing new evidence.

Covered and uncovered biliary metal stents provide similar relief of biliary obstruction during neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic cancer: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Preoperative biliary drainage with self-expanding metal stents (SEMSs) brings liver function within an acceptable range in preparation for neoadjuvant therapy (NATx) and provides relief of obstructive symptoms in patients with pancreatic cancer. We compared fully-covered SEMSs (FCSEMSs) and uncovered SEMSs (UCSEMSs) for sustained biliary drainage before and during NATx.

METHODS

Patients with pancreatic cancer and planned NATx who need treatment of jaundice and/or cholestasis before pancreaticoduodenectomy were randomized to FCSEMSs versus UCSEMSs. The primary endpoint was sustained biliary drainage, defined as the absence of reinterventions for biliary obstructive symptoms, and was assessed from SEMS placement until curative intent surgery or at 1 year.

RESULTS

The intention-to-treat population included 119 patients (59 FCSEMSs, 60 UCSEMSs). Sustained biliary drainage was equally successful with FCSEMSs and UCSEMSs (72.2% vs 72.9%, noninferiority P = .01). Reasons for FCSEMS and UCSEMS failure differed significantly between the groups and included tumor ingrowth in 0% versus 16.7% (P < .01), and stent migration in 6.8% versus 0% (P = .03), respectively. Serious adverse event rates related to stent placement were not significantly different in both groups (23.7% [14/59] vs 20.0% [12/60], P = .66), as were acute cholecystitis rates when the gallbladder was in situ (9.3% [4/43] vs 4.8% [2/42], P = .68) for FCSEMSs and UCSEMSs, respectively. In our study, independent of stent type, predictors of reinterventions were 4-cm stent length and presence of the gallbladder.

CONCLUSION

FCSEMSs and UCSEMSs provide similar preoperative management of biliary obstruction in patients with pancreatic cancer receiving NATx, but mechanisms of stent dysfunction depend on stent type, stent length, and presence of the gallbladder. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02238847.).

Evaluation of the clinical and economic impact of delays to surgery in patients with periampullary cancer

Background

Early treatment is the only potential cure for periampullary cancer. The pathway to surgery is complex and involves multiple procedures across local and specialist hospitals. The aim of this study was to analyse variability within this pathway, and its impact on cost and outcomes.

Methods

Patients undergoing surgery for periampullary cancer (2011–2016) were identified retrospectively and their pathway to surgery was analysed. Patients who had early surgery (shortest quartile, Q1) were compared with those having late surgery (longest quartile, Q4).

Results

A total of 483 patients were included in the study, with 121 and 124 patients in Q1 and Q4 respectively. The median time from initial CT to surgery was 21 days for Q1 versus 112 days for Q4 (P < 0·001). Diagnostic delays were common in Q4; these patients required significantly more investigations than those in Q1 (endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS): 74·2 versus 18·2 per cent respectively, P < 0·001; MRI: 33·6 versus 20·6 per cent, P = 0·036). The median time to diagnostic EUS was 13 days in Q1 versus 59 days in Q4 (P < 0·001). Some 42·1 per cent of jaundiced patients in Q1 underwent preoperative biliary drainage, compared with all patients in Q4. There were significantly more unplanned admissions and associated longer duration of hospital stay per patient and costs in Q4 than in Q1 (median: 8 versus 3 days respectively; €5652 versus €2088; both P < 0·001). There was a higher likelihood of potentially curative surgery in Q1 (82·6 per cent versus 66·9 per cent in Q4; P = 0·005).

Conclusion

There is wide variation across the entire pathway, suggesting that multiple strategies are required to enable early surgery. Defining an effective pathway by anticipating the need for investigations and avoiding biliary drainage reduces unplanned admissions and costs and increases resection rates.

Preoperative Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Is Not Associated With Increased Pancreatic Cancer Mortality

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) before surgery for pancreatic cancer has been associated with infectious complications after surgery. Little is known about the effects of preoperative ERCP on the survival of patients with pancreatic cancer. We investigated whether ERCP before surgery affects overall survival, after controlling for confounding factors.

METHODS

We used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) and linked Medicare claims data to identify patients older than 65 years with cancer localized to the head of the pancreas, from 2000 through 2011. We used inverse propensity-weighted Cox proportional hazard models to assess the effects of ERCP on the survival of patients who underwent surgery for pancreatic cancer.

RESULTS

Among 16,670 patients with cancer of the head of the pancreas, 2890 (17.3%) underwent surgical resection; 1864 (64.5%) of these patients received preoperative ERCP. After we adjusted for confounders, we found that patients who received preoperative ERCP did not have an increased risk of death compared with patients who underwent resection alone (hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.96-1.08).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with pancreatic cancer who underwent ERCP before surgery did not have an increased risk of death compared with patients who proceeded directly to surgery. Studies are needed to identify subsets of patients who may benefit from this procedure.

Preclinical assessment of the ADME, efficacy and drug-drug interaction potential of a novel NAMPT inhibitor

GNE-617 (N-(4-((3,5-difluorophenyl)sulfonyl)benzyl)imidazo[1,2-a]pyridine-6-carboxamide) is a potent, selective nicotinamide phosphoribosyltransferase (NAMPT) inhibitor being explored as a potential treatment for human cancers. Plasma clearance was low in monkeys and dogs (9.14 mL min^-1kg^-1 and 4.62 mL min^-1kg^-1, respectively) and moderate in mice and rats (36.4 mL min^-1kg^-1 and 19.3 mL min^-1kg^-1, respectively). Oral bioavailability in mice, rats, monkeys and dogs was 29.7, 33.9, 29.4 and 65.2%, respectively. Allometric scaling predicted a low clearance of 3.3 mL min^-1kg^-1 and a volume of distribution of 1.3 L kg^-1 in human. Efficacy (57% tumor growth inhibition) in Colo-205 CRC tumor xenograft mice was observed at an oral dose of 15 mg/kg BID (AUC = 10.4 µM h). Plasma protein binding was moderately high. GNE-617 was stable to moderately stable in vitro. Main human metabolites identified in human hepatocytes were formed primarily by CYP3A4/5. Transporter studies suggested that GNE-617 is likely a substrate for MDR1 but not for BCRP. Simcyp^® simulations suggested a low (CYP2C9 and CYP2C8) or moderate (CYP3A4/5) potential for drug-drug interactions. The potential for autoinhibition was low. Overall, GNE-617 exhibited acceptable preclinical properties and projected human PK and dose estimates.

PRE-OPERATIVE BILIARY DRAINAGE IN THE PERIAMPULLARY NEOPLASIA - A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Introduction:

Periampular neoplasms represent 5% of all cancers of the gastrointestinal tract with peak incidence in the 7^th decade of life. The most common clinical picture is jaundice, weight loss and abdominal pain. Considering that cholestasis is related to postoperative complications, preoperative biliary drainage was developed to improve the postoperative morbidity and mortality of icteric patients with periampular neoplasias, whether resectable or not.

Objective:

To describe the outcome of patients with periampullary tumors undergoing preoperative biliary drainage with pancreatoduodenectomy.

Method:

The search was performed in the Medline/PubMed and Virtual Health Library databases by means of the combination of descriptors of the Medical Subject Headings. Inclusion criteria were clinical trials, cohorts, studies that analyze the morbidity and mortality of preoperative biliary drainage in Portuguese, English and Spanish. Exclusion criteria were studies published more than 10 years ago, experimental studies, systematic reviews and articles with WebQualis C or smaller journal in the area of ​​Medicine I or Medicine III. Of the 196 references found, 46 were obtained for reading with quality assessed through the Checklist Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology. Eight studies were selected for review.

Results:

A total of 1116 patients with a sample ranging from 48 to 280 patients and a mean age of 48 to 69 years were obtained. Of the eight studies, four observed a higher rate of bleeding in drained patients; three a higher rate of positive bile culture in the intervention group; site and cavitary infection, and biliopancreatic leaks were more common in the drainage group in two studies each. The death outcome and rate of reoperation were observed in larger numbers in the control group in one study each.

Conclusion:

Preoperative intervention leads to a higher rate of infectious complications and bleeding.

Effectiveness and risk of biliary drainage prior to pancreatoduodenectomy: review of current status

Preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) prior to pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) has gained popularity as bridge management to resolve jaundice, but its role is being challenged as it is thought to increase morbidity. To clarify the current recommendations for PBD prior to PD, we reviewed the literature, including all relevant articles published in English up until December, 2015. There is increasing evidence that PBD causes bile infection, which is related to the morbidity of infectious complications. Results of transhepatic drainage are poorer than those of endoscopic stenting, especially in an oncologic setting, although it is still unclear whether metallic stents are superior to nasobiliary drainage. PBD should be avoided whenever possible and performed only in selected cases, such as the emergency setting, an inevitable long delay (>4 weeks) before PD, and jaundice-related anorexia. Seemingly, transhepatic drainage should be reserved for refractory cases if endoscopic drainage is not possible. Further studies comparing endoscopic drainage techniques, such as metallic stents and nasobiliary drainage, are required to assess the most effective technique of PBD. Bile infection should be prevented by adequate antibiotic prophylaxis and treated even in the absence of symptoms, and bile status should be assessed systematically.

Preoperative Cholangitis Affects Survival Outcome in Patients with Extrahepatic Bile Duct Cancer

BACKGROUND

It remains controversial whether preoperative cholangitis affects long-term outcomes after resection in patients with extrahepatic bile duct cancer.

METHODS

A total of 107 patients with extrahepatic bile duct cancer who underwent resection with curative intent from 2008 to 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were categorized into two groups according to the presence or absence of preoperative cholangitis. Clinicopathological variables and long-term outcomes were compared in the two groups.

RESULTS

In the preoperative cholangitis group, the rate of preoperative biliary drainage, the number of tube changes and/or additions, and the rate of lymph node metastasis were higher compared to the no-cholangitis group. Overall survival and disease-free survival were significantly worse in the cholangitis group compared to the no-cholangitis group (p = 0.022, p = 0.007). A poorer prognosis was not observed with an increasing grade of cholangitis in Tokyo Guidelines 2013 (p = 0.09). A multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the preoperative cholangitis was an independent prognostic factor for extrahepatic bile duct cancer.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative cholangitis is an independent prognostic factor in patients with extrahepatic bile duct cancer regardless of the severity of the cholangitis.

Poor Results of Pancreatoduodenectomy in High-Risk Patients with Endoscopic Stent and Bile Colonization are Associated with E. coli, Diabetes and Advanced Age

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic stenting has spread as bridge management before pancreatoduedenectomy (PD) to resolve jaundice, but its role is nowadays challenged as it is reported to increase morbidity. Although bile sampling is increasingly performed, its clinical role is unclear. The objective of the study is to assess bile colonization's impact on outcome.

METHODS

Results of pancreatoduodenectomy after endoscopic stenting are analyzed in 61 high-risk patients presenting bacterial bile colonization. The impact of 11 demographic, clinical, infectious, and laboratory parameters and outcome, including pancreatic leakage, morbidity, and mortality, is analyzed.

RESULTS

All stented patients present bacterial bile colonization and PD mortality approaches 10 %. The presence of E. coli in the bile is significantly related to poor outcome, including 23.5 % mortality (p = 0.034), whereas age (≥70 years) and diabetes present borderline results (p < 0.070 and p < 0.066, respectively). E. coli (p = 0.002) and age (p = 0.017) are also related to grade C pancreatic fistula.

CONCLUSIONS

In high-risk patients undergoing PD, bile colonization inevitably occurs after endoscopic stenting and is a major risk factor of poor outcome, reaching its maximum in the case of E. coli colonization and elderly patients, where the indication to stent and/or to perform PD should be accurately evaluated. E. coli-targeted antibiotic prophylaxis should be administered.

Current status of preoperative biliary drainage

Preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) has been thought to be preferable regardless of the site of biliary strictures, e.g., distal or proximal strictures because PBD by endoscopy or interventional radiology decreases postoperative mortality and morbidity rates. However, recently, several studies have revealed that PBD strategy showed an increased mortality rate or a high frequency of surgical site infection. Herein, we reviewed reports in the literature regarding the current status of PBD and investigated the effects of PBD on patients with distal and proximal biliary obstructions due to potentially resectable pancreatobiliary cancers. Our summary demonstrated that there is as yet no optimal PBD method regardless of the distal and proximal biliary strictures because of the small sample size and the lack of better control groups in previous studies. Thus, prospective randomized studies with a large sample size are needed to establish the optimal mode of PBD and to evaluate the potential benefits of PBD in patients with both distal and proximal biliary obstructions.

Current status of preoperative drainage for distal biliary obstruction

Preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) was developed to improve obstructive jaundice, which affects a number of organs and physiological mechanisms in patients waiting for surgery. However, its role in patients who will undergo pancreaticoduodenectomy for biliary obstruction remains controversial. This article aims to review the current status of the use of preoperative drainage for distal biliary obstruction. Relevant articles published from 1980 to 2015 were identified by searching MEDLINE and PubMed using the keywords “PBD”, “pancreaticoduodenectomy”, and “obstructive jaundice”. Additional papers were identified by a manual search of the references from key articles. Current studies have demonstrated that PBD should not be routinely performed because of the postoperative complications. PBD should only be considered in carefully selected patients, particularly in cases where surgery had to be delayed. PBD may be needed in patients with severe jaundice, concomitant cholangitis, or severe malnutrition. The optimal method of biliary drainage has yet to be confirmed. PBD should be performed by endoscopic routes rather than by percutaneous routes to avoid metastatic tumor seeding. Endoscopic stenting or nasobiliary drainage can be selected. Although more expensive, the use of metallic stents remains a viable option to achieve effective drainage without cholangitis and reintervention.

Endoscopic treatment of malignant biliary strictures

Endoscopic stenting is a widely accepted strategy for providing effective drainage in both extrahepatic and intrahepatic malignant strictures. In patients with extrahepatic malignancies, uncovered self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) provide excellent palliation. Hilar malignancies are probably best palliated by placement of uncovered SEMS although some disagreement exists among experts regarding the type and number of stents for optimal palliation. Preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) is commonly performed although a higher risk of complications and the lack of clear benefit raise questions about this practice. Certain groups of patients such as those with markedly elevated bilirubin levels, and in those in whom neoadjuvant therapy is planned, are good candidates for PBD. Considerable controversy exists regarding the optimal method as well as type of stent for PBD in patients with hilar malignancies. Novel endoscopic therapies, including photodynamic therapy and radiofrequency ablation, have emerged as potential adjuvant therapies in the management of malignant bile duct strictures but need further long-term evaluation to establish survival benefit. This review focuses on the current status of endoscopic therapies for malignant biliary obstructions.

Effect of Preoperative Biliary Drainage on Complications Following Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Meta-Analysis

Preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) prior to pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is still controversial; therefore, the aim of this study was to examine the impact of PBD on complications following PD. A meta-analysis was carried out for all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective studies published from inception to March 2015 that compared PBD and non-PBD (immediate surgery) for the development of postoperative complications in PD patients. Pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated using fixed-effect analyses, or random-effects analyses if there was statistically significant heterogeneity (P < 0.05). Eight RCTs, 13 prospective studies, 20 retrospective studies, and 3 Chinese local retrospective studies with 6286 patients were included in this study. In a pooled analysis, there were no significant differences between PBD and non-PBD group in the risks of mortality, morbidity, intra-abdominal abscess, sepsis, hemorrhage, pancreatic leakage, and biliary leakage. However, subgroup analysis of RCTs yielded a trend toward reduced risk of morbidity in PBD group (OR 0.48, CI 0.24 to 0.97; P = 0.04). Compared with non-PBD, PBD was associated with significant increase in the risk of infectious complication (OR 1.52, CI 1.07 to 2.17; P = 0.02), wound infection (OR 2.09, CI 1.39 to 3.13; P = 0.0004), and delayed gastric emptying (DGE) (OR 1.37, CI 1.08 to 1.73; P = 0.009). This meta-analysis suggests that biliary drainage before PD increased postoperative infectious complication, wound infection, and DGE. In light of the results of the study, PBD probably should not be routinely carried out in PD patients.

[Surgery for pancreatic cancer: Evidence-based surgical strategies]

Pancreatic cancer surgery represents a challenge for surgeons due to its technical complexity, the potential complications that may appear, and ultimately because of its poor survival. The aim of this article is to summarize the scientific evidence regarding the surgical treatment of pancreatic cancer in order to help surgeons in the decision making process in the management of these patients .Here we will review such fundamental issues as the need for a biopsy before surgery, the type of pancreatic anastomosis leading to better results, and the need for placement of drains after pancreatic surgery will be discussed.

The diagnostic pathway for solid pancreatic neoplasms: are we applying too many tests?

BACKGROUND

The single best diagnostic and staging test for pancreatic cancer remains a contrast-enhanced computed tomography scan. It is frequently the only imaging test required before surgical resection for solid pancreatic lesions. Unfortunately, many patients undergo additional testing that often delays definitive care.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients with solid pancreatic lesions concerning for adenocarcinoma referred to a high volume Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary (HPB) service over 4 y (2008-2012) was completed. The time intervals between the initial imaging test and both consultation with HPB surgery and operative intervention, as well as the number of additional tests, were evaluated. Standard statistical methodology was used (P < 0.05).

RESULTS

Among 130 patients with solid pancreatic lesions, the index imaging modality was ultrasonography and computed tomography for 75 (58%) and 52 (40%), respectively. Patients underwent a mean of 1.3 diagnostic tests after the index study and before consultation with HPB surgery (range: 0-5). There was a significant increase in time to HPB consultation and operative intervention with an increasing number of interval imaging tests. The mean time to surgical consultation and operation if 0 interval diagnostic tests were performed was 15.9 and 45.4 d, respectively. If four interval tests were conducted, the mean was 69.4 and 122.6 d, respectively. Sixty-two patients (48%) were initially referred to a nonsurgical service. The mean time to surgical consultation and operation if an intervening referral occurred was 36.6 and 66.8 d, respectively. This compares to 19.8 and 48.1 d, respectively, in cases of direct referral to an HPB surgeon. The mean number of diagnostic tests performed before HPB consultation if a nonsurgical referral occurred was 2.1 (versus 0.7 if direct HPB surgeon referral).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a relatively simple algorithm for the investigation of solid pancreatic lesions, considerable heterogeneity remains in how these patients are evaluated before referral to HPB surgery. As the number of investigations increases after the index imaging test, there is increasing delay to both surgical consultation and definitive intervention. Education is required to expedite care and mitigate excess diagnostic tests.

Factors Affecting Surgical Site Infection Rates in Hepatobiliary Surgery

BACKGROUND

There are several studies regarding risk factors affecting surgical site infections (SSIs); nevertheless, there are an insufficient number of studies focusing on risk factors for SSI in hepatobiliary (HPB) surgery. In this study, we aimed to determine risk factors related to HPB surgery.

METHODS

A total of 1,418 patients were included in this study, all of whom underwent hepatobiliary system surgery in a five-year period between January 2005 and December 2009. Demographic data, patient- and surgery-related risk factors, and laboratory parameters were analyzed retrospectively from a database maintained prospectively.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of SSI was 3.94% for HPB surgery. In multivariable analysis, blood transfusion (OR: 20.9), the presence of surgical drains (OR: 10.7), a pre-operative hospital stay of more than eight days (OR: 8.1), diabetes mellitus (OR: 6.2), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR: 6.127), inappropriate antimicrobial prophylaxis (OR: 6), obesity (OR: 3.2), the presence of an external-internal biliary drainage catheter (OR: 2), and a direct bilirubin concentrations more than 15 mg/dL (OR: 1.4) were determined as independent risk factors related to SSI. E.coli and Enterococcus spp. were the pathogens isolated most commonly in SSIs.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the independent risk factors for hepatobiliary system surgery are similar to those for other general abdominal surgical procedures. The presence of an external-internal biliary drainage catheter and direct bilirubin concentrations higher than 15 mg/dL were found to be specific risk factors for HPB surgery.

MRI of cholangiocarcinoma

Cholangiocarcinomas are the second most common primary hepatobiliary tumors after hepatocellular carcinomas. They can be categorized either based on their location (intrahepatic/perihilar/extrahepatic distal) or their growth characteristics (mass-forming/periductal-infiltrating/intraductal) because they exhibit varied presentations and outcomes based on their location and or pattern of growth. The increased risk of cholangiocarcinoma in PSC necessitates close surveillance of these patients by means of imaging and laboratory measures; and because currently surgical resection is the only effective treatment for cholangiocarcinoma, the need for accurate pre-operative staging and assessment of resectability has emphasized the role of high quality imaging in management. Today magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the modality of choice for detection, pre-operative staging and surveillance of cholangiocarcinoma.

Preoperative bile replacement improves immune function for jaundiced patients treated with external biliary drainage

BACKGROUND

Although preoperative biliary drainage in jaundiced patients is controversial, external biliary drainage (EBD) is beneficial for infection control in patients with biliary cancers. When EBD is performed, additional bile replacement (BR) has the benefit of improving impaired intestinal barrier function, but the detailed mechanism remains unknown. We examined the effect of bile replacement on immune functions over the duration of BR in jaundiced patients.

METHODS

Fifteen patients were enrolled into this prospective study. BR was started soon after the total serum bilirubin concentration reached 5.0 mg/dl and was continued for 14 days. Drained bile was given two times orally (2 × 100 ml/day). Concanavalin A (Con A)- and phytohemagglutinin (PHA)-stimulated lymphocyte proliferation and serum diamine oxidase (DAO) activity were measured before starting and during BR. Twenty patients with EBD and no BR were analyzed as a control group.

RESULTS

Serum liver enzymes, prothrombin time-international normalized ratio (PT-INR), and responses to Con A and PHA gradually improved over the 14 days of BR, but percentages of lymphocytes and DAO levels did not. PT-INR, and Con A and PHA responses did not improve during EBD in the control group. PT-INR significantly decreased in patients with a greater fraction of their drained bile replaced.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that preoperative BR using as large a quantity of bile as possible is useful for improving blood coagulability and cellular immunity in patients with EBD.

Improving outcomes in pancreatic cancer: Key points in perioperative management

This review focused in the perioperative management of patients with pancreatic cancer in order to improve the outcome of the disease. We consider that the most controversial points in pancreatic cancer management are jaundice management, vascular resection and neo-adjuvant therapy. Preoperative biliary drainage is recommended only in patients with severe jaundice, as it can lead to infectious cholangitis, pancreatitis and delay in resection, which can lead to tumor progression. The development of a phase III clinical trial is mandatory to clarify the role of neo-adjuvant radiochemotherapy in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Venous resection does not adversely affect postoperative mortality and morbidity, therefore, the need for venous resection should not be a contraindication to surgical resection in selected patients. The data on arterial resection alone, or combined with vascular resection at the time of pancreatectomy are more heterogeneous, thus, patient age and comorbidity should be evaluated before a decision on operability is made. In patients undergoing R0 resection, arterial resection can also be performed.

The current status of preoperative biliary drainage for patients who receive pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary carcinoma: a comprehensive review

BACKGROUND

Surgery on patients with malignant obstructive jaundice carries increased risks of postoperative morbidity and mortality. Preoperative biliary drainage has been developed to reduce this procedure-related risks, but its role in patients who are going to receive pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary carcinoma is still controversial.

METHODS

This article aimed at reviewing the current status of preoperative biliary drainage for patients with peri-ampullary tumors who were candidates for pancreaticoduodenectomy. A MEDLINE and PubMed database search from 1980 to 2013 was performed to identify relevant articles using the keywords "pancreaticoduodenectomy", "preoperative biliary drainage", "jaundice", "peri-ampullary neoplasm" and "carcinoma of pancreas". Additional papers were identified by a manual search of the references from the key articles.

RESULTS

There were six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 5 meta-analyses on preoperative biliary drainage for patients with malignant obstructive jaundice. Most of the results of these studies could not be used to define the role of preoperative biliary drainage for patients who received pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary carcinoma because: first, the majority of these studies were on bypass or palliative resections; second, various pathologies with both proximal and distal biliary obstruction were included; third, there were different forms of percutaneous or endoscopic drainage procedures; fourth, there were different durations of preoperative drainage; and finally, there were variations in the definition of events and outcomes. There was only one RCT which included a homogeneous group of patients with carcinoma of pancreas who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy. For patients with periampullary tumor, the RCTS and meta-analyses showed no benefit of preoperative biliary drainage. Instead, there were some concerns about the drainage-related complications and the increase in positive intraoperative bile culture rate and the associated infective complication rate postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

Routine preoperative biliary drainage showed no beneficial effect on the surgical outcome for patients with periampullary tumor. A selective approach of preoperative biliary drainage should be adopted for these patients. The optimal duration and modality of preoperative biliary drainage remain unclear.

Current trends in preoperative biliary stenting in patients with pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Sufficient evidence suggests that preoperative biliary stenting is associated with increased complication rates after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

METHODS

Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) and linked Medicare claims data (1992-2007) were used to identify patients with pancreatic cancer who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy. We evaluated trends in the use of preoperative biliary stenting, timing of physician visits relative to stenting, and time to surgical resection and symptoms in stented and unstented patients.

RESULTS

Pancreaticoduodenectomy was performed in 2,573 patients, and 52.6% of patients underwent preoperative biliary stenting (N = 1,354). Of these, 75.3% underwent endoscopic stenting only, 18.9% received a percutaneous stent, and 5.8% underwent both procedures. The overall stenting rate increased from 29.6% of patients between 1992 and 1995 to 59.1% between 2004 and 2007 (P < .0001). Preoperative stenting was more common in patients with jaundice, cholangitis, pruritus, or coagulopathy (P < .05 for all). Of stented patients, 77.7% had had a stent placed prior to seeing a surgeon. Stenting prior to surgical consultation was associated with longer indwelling stent time compared to stenting after surgical consultation (37.3 vs 27.0 days, P < .0001). In addition, stented patients had longer times from surgeon visit to pancreatectomy than those who had not received stents (24.2 days vs 17.2 days, P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Use of preoperative biliary stenting doubled between 1992 and 2007 despite evidence that stenting is associated with increased perioperative infectious complications. The majority of stenting occurred prior to surgical consultation and is associated with significant delay in time to operation. Surgeons should be involved early in order to prevent unnecessary stenting and improve outcomes.

The quandary of preresection biliary drainage for pancreatic cancer

Surgery in patients with obstructive jaundice caused by a tumor in the pancreatic head area is associated with a higher risk of postoperative complications. Preoperative biliary drainage was introduced in an attempt to improve the general condition and reduce morbidity and mortality. Extensive experimental studies have been performed to analyze the beneficial effect of biliary drainage and showed improvement in liver function, nutritional status, and cell-mediated immune function as well as reduction in mortality. However, despite the results seen in the experimental studies, clinical studies reported both beneficial and adverse effects, and most studies advised against routinely performing preoperative biliary drainage. To add clarity to the ongoing controversy, a recent randomized controlled trial was performed and reported more overall complications in patients with jaundice who underwent preoperative biliary drainage followed by surgery compared to those who underwent surgery alone. Many of these complications were stent related. Like most clinical studies, a plastic stent was used to initiate biliary drainage. Patients with jaundice because of a tumor in the pancreatic head area without locoregional irresectability or metastases should be candidates for early surgery. Preoperative biliary drainage should not be performed routinely. However, some selected patients might benefit from preoperative biliary drainage, in cases of severe jaundice, neoadjuvant therapy, or postponed surgery due to logistics. In these cases, the use of metal biliary stents is indicated.

Role of preoperative biliary drainage in jaundiced patients who are candidates for pancreatoduodenectomy or hepatic resection: highlights and drawbacks

INTRODUCTION

In this review of the literature, we analyze the indications for preoperative drainage in jaundiced patients who are candidates for pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) or major hepatectomy due to periampullary or proximal bile duct neoplasms.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to review the literature and to report on the current management of jaundiced patients with periampullary or proximal bile duct neoplasms who are candidates for PD or major liver resection.

BACKGROUND

Jaundiced patients represent a major challenge for surgeons. Alterations and functional impairment caused by jaundice increase the risk of surgery; therefore, preoperative biliary decompression has been suggested.

METHODS

A literature review was performed in the MEDLINE database to identify studies on the management of jaundice in patients undergoing PD or liver resection. Papers considering palliative drainage in jaundiced patients were excluded.

RESULTS

The first group of papers considered patients affected by middle-distal obstruction from periampullary neoplasms, in which preoperative drainage was applied selectively. The second group of papers evaluated patients with biliary obstructions from proximal biliary neoplasms. In these cases, Asian authors and a few European authors considered it mandatory to drain the future liver remnant (FLR) in all patients, while American and most European authors indicated preoperative drainage only in selected cases (in malnourished patients and in those with hypoalbuminemia, cholangitis or long-term jaundice; with an FLR < 30% or 40%) given the high risk of complications of drainage (choleperitoneum, cholangitis, bleeding, and seeding). The optimal type of biliary drainage is still a matter of debate; recent studies have indicated that endoscopy is preferable to percutaneous drainage. Although the type of endoscopic biliary drainage has not been clearly established, the choice is made between plastic stents and short, covered, metallic stents, while other authors suggest the use of nasobiliary drainage.

CONCLUSIONS

: A multidisciplinary evaluation (made by a surgeon, biliary endoscopist, gastroenterologist, and radiologist) of jaundiced neoplastic patients should be performed before deciding to perform biliary drainage. Middle-distal obstruction in patients who are candidates for PD does not usually require routine biliary drainage. Proximal obstruction in patients who are candidates for major hepatic resection in the majority of cases requires a drain; however, the type, site, number, and approach must be defined and tailored according to the planned hepatic resection. Recently, the use of preoperative biliary drainage limited to the FLR has been a suggested strategy. However, multicenter, randomized, controlled trials should be conducted to clarify this issue.

Patient optimization for gastrointestinal cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

Although surgical resection remains the central element in curative treatment of gastrointestinal cancer, increasing emphasis and resource has been focused on neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy. Developments in these modalities have improved outcomes, but far less attention has been paid to improving oncological outcomes through optimization of perioperative care.

METHODS

A narrative review is presented based on available and updated literature in English and the authors' experience with enhanced recovery research.

RESULTS

A range of perioperative factors (such as lifestyle, co-morbidity, anaemia, sarcopenia, medications, regional analgesia and minimal access surgery) are modifiable, and can be optimized to reduce short- and long-term morbidity and mortality, improve functional capacity and quality of life, and possibly improve oncological outcome. The effect on cancer-free and overall survival may be of equal magnitude to that achieved by many adjuvant oncological regimens. Modulation of core factors, such as nutritional status, systemic inflammation, and surgical and disease-mediated stress, probably influences the host's immune surveillance and defence status both directly and through reduced postoperative morbidity.

CONCLUSION

A wider view on long-term effects of expanded or targeted enhanced recovery protocols is warranted.

Preoperative biliary drainage for distal biliary obstruction and post-operative infectious complications

BACKGROUND

Preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) for distal bile duct obstruction may increase post-operative complications. This study examined the effect of PBD on positive bile culture (PBC) rates and complications after biliary bypass or pancreaticoduodenectomy. Bilirubin levels in the non-PBD cohort were also analysed to determine the impact on outcome.

METHODS

A retrospective case-note analysis from 2005 to the present day was undertaken. Statistical analysis was undertaken using Students's t-test, chi-squared test, receiver operator characteristics, correlation coefficient and relative risk ratios.

RESULTS

A total of 422 patients were identified undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy or biliary bypass for either benign or malignant distal biliary obstruction. One hundred ninety-six patients had complete data regarding PBD and bile cultures. PBD resulted in a significantly higher relative risk of both infectious complications and positive bile cultures. Overall complication rate was greater in patients undergoing PBD. The major complication rate was equivalent between the two groups. Bilirubin levels in the non-PBD cohort did not correlate or predict length of stay, high-dependency stay, and mortality or complication rate.

CONCLUSION

There seems to be little value in PBD for patients with distal biliary obstruction other than to defer definitive surgery to a non-emergency setting. For most hepato-pancreato-biliary units, avoidance of PBD will prove logistically difficult.

What is appropriate procedure for preoperative biliary drainage in patients with obstructive jaundice awaiting pancreaticoduodenectomy?

PURPOSE

The aims of this study were to compare the clinical outcomes of the preoperative drainage methods in patients with obstructive jaundice awaiting panreaticoduodenectomy and to determine, which procedure would be more effective for preoperative drainage.

METHODS

Among 239 patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary cancer, 77 with obstructive jaundice underwent percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD, n=34) or endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD, n=43).

RESULTS

Median rate of decrease in bilirubin was 0.65 mg/d in PTBD group and 0.34 mg/d in EBD group (P=0.003). Median interval from preoperative drainage to pancreaticoduodenectomy were 11 days in PTBD group and 18 days in EBD group (P=0.009). Overall indwelling catheter-related complication rates were higher in "EBD" group compared with "PTBD" group (23.3% vs. 2.9%, P=0.019). No catheter occlusion developed in "PTBD" group, but 6 stent occlusions (13.3%) developed in "EBD" group (P=0.031). The mortality rate was not significantly different between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous biliary drainage may be preferred for preoperative drainage in patients with obstructive jaundice awaiting pancreaticoduodenectomy due to rapid biliary decompression and lower frequency of catheter-related complications.

Pancreaticoduodenectomy versus duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection for the treatment of chronic pancreatitis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) and duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection (DPPHR) for the treatment of chronic pancreatitis (CP).

METHODS

The 123 patients with CP who underwent pancreatic head resection between January 2004 and June 2009 were retrospectively analyzed. The preoperative variables, operative data, postoperative complications, and follow-up information were examined.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in clinical and morphological characteristics, pain relief, and jaundice status between the PD and DPPHR groups. The duration of operation was shorter (251.8 [SD, 43.1] vs 324.5 [SD, 41.4] minutes, P < 0.001), blood loss was less (464.4 [SD, 203.6] vs 646.5 [SD, 242.9] mL, P < 0.001), and overall postoperative morbidity was lower (3% vs 19%, P = 0.006) in DPPHR group. The duration of hospital stay was also significantly different (9.9 [SD, 1.8] vs 13.7 [SD, 2.8] days, P < 0.001). Most functional and symptom scales revealed a better quality of life in DPPHR group. The proportion of patients with exocrine and endocrine insufficiency was higher in PD group as compared with DPPHR group.

CONCLUSIONS

Both procedures are equally effective in pain relief, but DPPHR is superior to PD in operative data, postoperative morbidity, improving quality of life, and preservation of exocrine and endocrine function.

Preoperative biliary stents in pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer is a common digestive cancer with high mortality, and surgical resection is the only potential curative treatment option. Pancreatic head cancer is usually accompanied by biliary obstruction, which potentially increases surgical complications following pancreaticoduodenectomy. Thus, preoperative biliary drainage has long been advocated.

METHODS

A review of the literature using Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases was undertaken.

RESULTS

Endoscopic or percutaneous biliary stent placement is technically successful in most patients. The use of routine preoperative biliary drainage in the setting of pancreatic cancer with biliary obstruction is controversial. Prospective studies have shown that complications related to preoperative biliary drainage using endoscopic placement of traditional plastic endoprostheses increase the overall morbidity compared to pancreaticoduodenectomy alone. Placement of self-expandable metal stents could reduce stent-related complication rates such as early occlusion because of prolonged patency, especially when surgery is delayed.

CONCLUSION

Pancreatic cancer patients with deep jaundice and expected delay prior to curative intent surgery are potential candidates for temporary biliary drainage. Cholangitis remains a formal indication for early, urgent preoperative biliary decompression for patients with pancreatic cancer.