One-layer versus two-layer duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Stent placement for the prevention of clinically-relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula following pancreaticojejunostomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

There remains a lack of consensus regarding the benefits of stent placement following pancreaticojejunostomy in terms of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistulas (CR-POPFs). This study was aimed at analyzing the effects of stent placement, stent technique (internal and external), stent size, and dilation of the main pancreatic duct on CR-POPFs.

METHODS

Our study comprised a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials involving patients undergoing pancreaticojejunostomy. The primary outcome was defined as the incidence of CR-POPFs. Additionally, subgroup analyses were conducted, and pooled analyses were performed to provide comparative references.

RESULTS

Twelve randomized controlled trials, including a total of 1117 patients, were included. Compared with no stent placement, stenting did not exhibit a significant association with reduced CR-POPF incidence (odds ratio [OR] ​= ​0.60, 95% CI: 0.34-1.04, P ​= ​0.07). Subgroup analysis revealed that only external stents, and not internal stents, were significantly associated with a reduced CR-POPF incidence compared with no stent placement (OR ​= ​0.53, 95% CI: 0.28-0.99, P ​= ​0.05 vs. OR ​= ​0.92, 95% CI: 0.28-3.05, P ​= ​0.89). Furthermore, stent placement in patients with a main pancreatic duct diameter of ≤3 ​mm, and not in those with a main pancreatic duct diameter of >3 ​mm, was associated with a significantly reduced CR-POPF incidence compared with no stent placement (OR ​= ​0.24, 95% CI: 0.07-0.78, P ​= ​0.02 vs. OR ​= ​1.58, 95% CI: 0.41-6.06, P ​= ​0.50).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest a potential role for external stent placement in the prevention of CR-POPFs after pancreaticojejunostomy, particularly in patients with undilated pancreatic ducts. The reliability of our findings is constrained by the limited number of studies included.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022380103.

A modified single-needle continuous suture of duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy in pancreaticoduodenectomy

Background

The pancreatic reconstruction technique decides the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistulas (POPF) in pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). This study aims to evaluate the safety of modified single-needle continuous suture (SNCS) of duct-to-mucosa and compare the efficacy with double-layer continuous suture (DLCS) of duct-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) in open PD (OPD).

Methods

A total of 266 patients that received PD between January 2019 and May 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 130 patients underwent DLCS, and 136 patients underwent SNCS [73 OPD and 63 laparoscopic PD (LPD)]. The primary outcome was clinically relevant POPF (CR-POPF) according to the definition of the revised 2016 International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula (ISGPF). Propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted to reduce confounding bias.

Results

A total of 66 pairs were successfully matched using PSM in OPD. No significant difference was observed in the occurrence of CR-POPF between the two groups (9.1% vs. 21.2%, P=0.052). However, the median duration of operation and PJ was shorter in the SNCS group. The incidence of CR-POPF in LPD was 9.5%. Furthermore, regarding the alternative fistula risk score (a-FRS), the CR-POPF rate were 2.1%, 10.5%, and 15.6% in low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups (P=0.067).

Conclusions

The SNCS is a facile, safe, and effective PJ technique and does not increase the incidence of POPF, regardless of a-FRS stratification, pancreatic texture, and main pancreatic duct (MPD) size.

Severity of Pancreatic Leak in Relation to Gut Restoration After Pancreaticoduodenectomy: The Role of the Roux-en-Y Configuration

Background

Pancreatic leak after pancreaticoduodenectomy and gut restoration via a single jejunal loop remains the crucial predictor of patients' outcome. Our reasoning that active pancreatic enzymes may be more disruptive to the pancreatojejunostomy prompted us to explore a Roux-en-Y configuration for the gut restoration, anticipating diversion of bile salts away from the pancreatic stump. Our study aims at comparing two techniques regarding the severity of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) and patients' outcome.

Methods

The files of 415 pancreaticoduodenectomy patients were retrospectively reviewed. Based on gut restoration, the patients were divided into: cohort A (n = 105), with gut restoration via a single jejunal loop, cohort B (n = 140) via a Roux-en-Y technique assigning the draining of pancreatic stump to the short limb and gastrojejunostomy and bile (hepaticojejunostomy) flow to long limb, and cohort C (n = 170) granting the short limb to the gastric and pancreatic anastomosis, whereas hepaticojejunostomy was performed to the long limp. The POPF-related morbidity and mortality were analyzed.

Results

Overall POPF in cohort A versus cohorts B and C was 19% versus 12.1% and 9.4%, respectively (P = 0.01 A vs B + C). POPF-related morbidity in cohort A versus cohorts B and C was 10.5% versus 7.3% and 6.3%, respectively (P = 0.03 A vs B+C). POPF-related total hospital mortality in cohorts A versus B and C was 1.9% versus 0.8% and 0.59%, respectively (P = 0.02 A vs B+C).

Conclusion

Roux-en-Y configuration showed lower incidence and severity of POPF. Irrespective of technical skill, creating a gastrojejunostomy close to pancreatojejunostomy renders the pancreatic enzymes less active by leaping the bile salts away from the pancreatic duct and providing a lower pH.

Duct-to-mucosa versus other types of pancreaticojejunostomy for the prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula following pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pancreatic fistula is a common and serious complication following pancreaticoduodenectomy. Duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy has been used in many centers to reconstruct pancreatic digestive continuity following pancreatoduodenectomy, however, its efficacy and safety are uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy versus other types of pancreaticojejunostomy for the reconstruction of pancreatic digestive continuity in participants undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy, and to compare the effects of different duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy techniques.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library (2021, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1966 to 9 January 2021), Embase (1988 to 9 January 2021), and Science Citation Index Expanded (1982 to 9 January 2021).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy with other types of pancreaticojejunostomy (e.g. invagination pancreaticojejunostomy, binding pancreaticojejunostomy) in participants undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. We also included RCTs that compared different types of duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy in participants undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently identified the studies for inclusion, collected the data, and assessed the risk of bias. We performed the meta-analyses using Review Manager 5. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and the mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For all analyses, we used the random-effects model. We used the Cochrane RoB 1 tool to assess the risk of bias. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for all outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 RCTs involving a total of 1696 participants in the review. One RCT was a dual-center study; the other 10 RCTs were single-center studies conducted in: China (4 studies); Japan (2 studies); USA (1 study); Egypt (1 study); Germany (1 study); India (1 study); and Italy (1 study). The mean age of participants ranged from 54 to 68 years. All RCTs were at high risk of bias. Duct-to-mucosa versus any other type of pancreaticojejunostomy We included 10 RCTs involving 1472 participants comparing duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy with invagination pancreaticojejunostomy: 732 participants were randomized to the duct-to-mucosa group, and 740 participants were randomized to the invagination group after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Comparing the two techniques, the evidence is very uncertain for the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula (grade B or C; RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.64 to 3.26; 7 studies, 1122 participants; very low-certainty evidence), postoperative mortality (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.49; 10 studies, 1472 participants; very low-certainty evidence), rate of surgical reintervention (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.95; 10 studies, 1472 participants; very low-certainty evidence), rate of postoperative bleeding (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.42; 9 studies, 1275 participants; very low-certainty evidence), overall rate of surgical complications (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.36; 5 studies, 750 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and length of hospital stay (MD -0.41 days, 95% CI -1.87 to 1.04; 4 studies, 658 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The studies did not report adverse events or quality of life outcomes. One type of duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy versus a different type of duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy We included one RCT involving 224 participants comparing duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy using the modified Blumgart technique with duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy using the traditional interrupted technique: 112 participants were randomized to the modified Blumgart group, and 112 participants were randomized to the traditional interrupted group after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Comparing the two techniques, the evidence is very uncertain for the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula (grade B or C; RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.61 to 3.75; 1 study, 210 participants; very low-certainty evidence), postoperative mortality (there were no deaths in either group; 1 study, 210 participants; very low-certainty evidence), rate of surgical reintervention (RR 1.93, 95% CI 0.18 to 20.91; 1 study, 210 participants; very low-certainty evidence), rate of postoperative bleeding (RR 2.89, 95% CI 0.12 to 70.11; 1 study, 210 participants; very low-certainty evidence), overall rate of surgical complications (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.51; 1 study, 210 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and length of hospital stay (15 days versus 15 days; 1 study, 210 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not report adverse events or quality of life outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy compared to invagination pancreaticojejunostomy on any of the outcomes, including rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula (grade B or C), postoperative mortality, rate of surgical reintervention, rate of postoperative bleeding, overall rate of surgical complications, and length of hospital stay. The evidence is also very uncertain whether duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy using the modified Blumgart technique is superior, equivalent or inferior to duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy using the traditional interrupted technique. None of the studies reported adverse events or quality of life outcomes.

Pancreaticojejunostomy-a review of modern techniques

Background

Pancreaticojejunal anastomosis is one of the most demanding procedures in surgery. Up to now, no technique has been proven to reduce the incidence of POPF when compared to the other methods.

Purpose

The aim of this review was to provide a concise and illustrated description of the most recent methods of pancreaticojejunostomy. Their development was directly related to the still ongoing search by surgeons for such a technique of anastomosis that would eliminate the problem of POPF.

Conclusions

Knowledge of various techniques of anastomosis may help the surgeon to find the most suitable and optimal method of pancreatic-intestinal anastomosis for the patient.

The effect of bilateral U-sutures in pancreaticojejunostomy in 75 consecutive cases

BACKGROUND

Various technical interventions have been suggested to decrease the frequency of postoperative pancreatic fistulas but the effect is not particularly satisfactory. We have analyzed our application of bilateral U-sutures in pancreaticojejunostomy.

METHODS

The pancreatic stump is freed over approximately 2 cm, an appropriate diameter silicone catheter with 2-4 lateral holes was inserted into the remnant pancreatic duct (>2 mm in diameter is required) over 2-3 cm as a stent in 69 patients. In six patients with soft pancreas and very small pancreatic duct (<2 mm in diameter), the silicone catheter was not used. An incision was made on the side of the distal section of the jejunum and end-to-side an invaginated pancreaticojejunostomy was performed using bilateral U-sutures.

RESULTS

Only two (2.67%) cases developed pancreatic 'biochemical leaks'. None of the 75 patients developed grade B and grade C pancreatic leakage. The overall morbidity was 29.33%. The anastomosis time was 14 minutes on average. There were no symptoms such as abdominal discomfort, dyspepsia and diarrhea, and no dilatation of pancreatic duct was found by CT in 75 patients after discharge from hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

Bilateral U-sutures are a safe, simple, and effective technique in pancreaticojejunostomy, preventing the primary complication of anastomotic leakage, and worthy of wide use.