Prospective trial to evaluate the prognostic value of different nutritional assessment scores for survival in pancreatic cancer surgery

Objective

Malnutrition is associated with poor survival in pancreatic cancer patients. Nutritional scores show great heterogeneity diagnosing malnutrition. The aim of this study was to find the score best suitable to identify patients with malnutrition related to worse survival after surgery for PDAC.

Methods

Risk of malnutrition was evaluated preoperatively using twelve nutritional assessment scores. Patients were followed-up prospectively for at least 3 years. Patients at risk for malnutrition were compared to those not at risk according to each score using Kaplan Meier survival statistics.

Results

A total of 116 Patients receiving a PDAC resection in curative intent were included. Malnutrition according to the Subjective Global Assessment score (SGA), the Short Nutritional Assessment Questionnaire (SNAQ) and the INSYST2 score was associated with worse overall survival (SGA: at-risk: 392 days; not at-risk: 942 days; p = 0.001; SNAQ: at-risk: 508 days; not at-risk: 971 days; p = 0.027; INSYST2: at-risk: 538 days; not at risk: 1068; p = 0.049). In the multivariate analysis SGA (HR of death 2.22, 95% CI 1.37-3.6, p = 0.002) was associated with worse overall survival.

Conclusion

Malnutrition as defined by the Subjective Global Assessment is independently associated with worse survival in resected PDAC patients. The SGA should be used to stratify PDAC patients in clinical studies. If severely malnourished patients according to the SGA profit from intensified nutritional therapy should be evaluated in a randomized controlled trial.

Randomized clinical trial of stapler hepatectomy versus LigaSure™ transection in elective hepatic resection

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have demonstrated stapler hepatectomy and use of various energy devices to be safe alternatives to the clamp-crushing technique in elective hepatic resection. In this randomized trial, the effectiveness and safety of stapler hepatectomy were compared with those of parenchymal transection with the LigaSure™ vessel sealing system.

METHOD

Patients scheduled for elective liver resection at two tertiary-care centres were randomized during surgery to stapler hepatectomy or transection with the LigaSure™ device. Total intraoperative blood loss was the primary efficacy endpoint. Transection time, duration of operation, perioperative complications and length of hospital stay were recorded as secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

A total of 138 patients were analysed, 69 in the LigaSure™ and 69 in the stapler hepatectomy group. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the groups. Mean intraoperative blood loss was significantly higher in the LigaSure™ group than the stapler hepatectomy group: 1101 (95 per cent c.i. 915 to 1287) versus 961 (752 to 1170) ml (P = 0·028). The parenchymal transection time was significantly shorter in the stapler group (P = 0·005), as was the total duration of operation (P = 0·027). Surgical morbidity did not differ between the groups, nor did the grade of complications.

CONCLUSION

Stapler hepatectomy was associated with reduced blood loss and a shorter duration of operation than the LigaSure™ device for parenchymal transection in elective partial hepatectomy. Registration number: NCT01858987 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Network meta-analysis of topical haemostatic agents in thyroid surgery

Background

The objective of this study was to investigate the potential benefit of local haemostatic agents for the prevention of postoperative bleeding after thyroidectomy.

Methods

A systematic literature search was performed, and RCTs involving adult patients who underwent thyroid surgery using either active (AHA) or passive (PHA) haemostatic agents were included in the review. The main outcome was the rate of cervical haematoma that required reoperation. A Bayesian random-effects model was used for network meta-analysis with minimally informative prior distributions.

Results

Thirteen RCTs were included. The rate of cervical haematoma requiring reoperation ranged from 0 to 9·1 per cent, and was not reduced by haemostatic agents: AHA versus control (odds ratio (OR) 1·53, 95 per cent credibility interval 0·21 to 10·77); PHA versus control (OR 2·74, 0·41 to 16·62) and AHA versus PHA (OR 1·77, 0·12 to 25·06). No difference was observed in the time required for drain removal, duration of hospital stay, and the rate of postoperative hypocalcaemia or recurrent nerve palsy. AHA led to a significantly lower total postoperative blood loss and reduced operating time in comparison with both the control and PHA groups.

Conclusion

The general use of local haemostatic agents has not been shown to reduce the rate of clinically relevant bleeding.

Prospective trial to evaluate the prognostic value of different nutritional assessment scores in pancreatic surgery (NURIMAS Pancreas)

BACKGROUND

Preoperative nutritional status has an impact on patients' clinical outcome. For pancreatic surgery, however, it is unclear which nutritional assessment scores adequately assess malnutrition associated with postoperative outcome.

METHODS

Patients scheduled for elective pancreatic surgery at the University of Heidelberg were screened for eligibility. Twelve nutritional assessment scores were calculated before operation, and patients were categorized as either at risk or not at risk for malnutrition by each score. The postoperative course was monitored prospectively by assessors blinded to the nutritional status. The primary endpoint was major complications evaluated for each score in a multivariable analysis corrected for known risk factors in pancreatic surgery.

RESULTS

Overall, 279 patients were analysed. A major complication occurred in 61 patients (21·9 per cent). The proportion of malnourished patients differed greatly among the scores, from 1·1 per cent (Nutritional Risk Index) to 79·6 per cent (Nutritional Risk Classification). In the multivariable analysis, only raised amylase level in drainage fluid on postoperative day 1 (odds ratio (OR) 4·91, 95 per cent c.i. 1·10 to 21·84; P = 0·037) and age (OR 1·05, 1·02 to 1·09; P = 0·005) were significantly associated with major complications; none of the scores was associated with, or predicted, postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

None of the nutritional assessment scores defined malnutrition relevant to complications after pancreatic surgery and these scores may thus be abandoned.

Meta-analysis of prophylactic abdominal drainage in pancreatic surgery

BACKGROUND

Intra-abdominal drains are frequently used after pancreatic surgery whereas their benefit in other gastrointestinal operations has been questioned. The objective of this meta-analysis was to compare abdominal drainage with no drainage after pancreatic surgery.

METHODS

PubMed, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science electronic databases were searched systematically to identify RCTs comparing abdominal drainage with no drainage after pancreatic surgery. Two independent reviewers critically appraised the studies and extracted data. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated to aggregate dichotomous outcomes, and weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes. Summary effect measures were presented together with their 95 per cent confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Some 711 patients from three RCTs were included. The 30-day mortality rate was 2·0 per cent in the drain group versus 3·4 per cent after no drainage (OR 0·68, 95 per cent c.i. 0·26 to 1·79; P = 0·43). The morbidity rate was 65·6 per cent in the drain group and 62·0 per cent in the no-drain group (OR 1·17, 0·86 to 1·60; P = 0·31). Clinically relevant pancreatic fistulas were seen in 11·5 per cent of patients in the drain group and 9·5 per cent in the no-drain group. Reinterventions, intra-abdominal abscesses and duration of hospital stay also showed no significant difference between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Pancreatic resection with, or without abdominal drainage results in similar rates of mortality, morbidity and reintervention.

Meta-analysis of complication rates for single-loop versus dual-loop (Roux-en-Y) with isolated pancreaticojejunostomy reconstruction after pancreaticoduodenectomy

Background

Postoperative pancreatic fistula is one of the most important and potentially severe complications after partial pancreaticoduodenectomy. In this context, the reduction of postoperative pancreatic fistula by means of a dual-loop (Roux-en-Y) reconstruction with isolation of the pancreaticojejunostomy from biliary drainage has been evaluated in several studies. This systematic review and meta-analysis summarizes evidence of effectiveness and safety of the isolation of the pancreaticojejunostomy compared with conventional single-loop reconstruction.

Methods

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing outcomes of dual-loop reconstruction with isolated pancreaticojejunostomy and single-loop reconstruction were searched according to PRISMA guidelines. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed and the results presented as weighted risk ratios or mean differences with their corresponding 95 per cent c.i.

Results

Of 83 trials screened for eligibility, three RCTs and four CCTs including a total of 802 patients were finally included. Quantitative synthesis showed no significant statistical difference between the two procedures regarding postoperative pancreatic fistula, delayed gastric emptying, haemorrhage, intra-abdominal fluid collection or abscess, bile leakage, wound infection, pneumonia, overall morbidity, mortality, reinterventions, reoperations, perioperative blood loss and length of hospital stay. Duration of surgery was significantly longer in patients undergoing dual-loop reconstruction.

Conclusion

Dual-loop (Roux-en-Y) reconstruction with isolated pancreaticojejunostomy after partial pancreaticoduodenectomy is not superior to single-loop reconstruction regarding pancreatic fistula rate or other relevant outcomes. Additional superiority trials are therefore not warranted, although a high-quality trial may be justified to prove equivalence or non-inferiority.

Incisional hernia rate 3 years after midline laparotomy

BACKGROUND

Incisional hernia is the most frequent long-term complication after visceral surgery, with an incidence of between 9 and 20 per cent 1 year after operation. Most controlled studies provide only short-term follow-up, and the actual incidence remains unclear. This study evaluated the incidence of incisional hernia up to 3 years after midline laparotomy in two prospective trials.

METHODS

Three-year follow-up data from the ISSAAC (prospective, multicentre, historically controlled) and INSECT (randomized, controlled, multicentre) trials focused on the rate of incisional hernia 1 and 3 years after surgery. Differences between the two groups were compared using t tests for continuous data and the χ2 test for categorical data.

RESULTS

Analysis of 775 patients included in the two trials suggested that the incisional hernia rate increased significantly from 12.6 per cent at 1 year to 22.4 per cent 3 years after surgery (P < 0.001), a relative increase of more than 60 per cent.

CONCLUSION

This follow-up of two trials demonstrated that 1 year of clinical follow-up for detection of incisional hernia is not sufficient; follow-up for at least 3 years should be mandatory in any study evaluating the rate of postoperative incisional hernia after midline laparotomy.

[Contribution of the Study Center of the German Surgical Society to evidence based surgery]

Since the Study Center of the German Surgical Society (SDGC) was established in 2003 it has been supporting surgeons to implement their ideas for multicenter randomized studies. Assistance is provided for development (sample size calculation, protocol, funding application) implementation (submission to ethics committee, data management, monitoring) and analysis (statistical analysis, publication) in close collaboration with biometricians and data managers. Currently more than 2,500 patients have been included in 11 trials. The most complex SDGC study (SYNCHRONOUS) so far with up to 80 participating centers has been activated in September 2011. Furthermore, there is an increasing relevance for systematic reviews and meta analyses with regard to the development of studies and aggregation of results. For this reason a systematic review working group was established within the SDGC. To date 13 publications have been completed and 8 more are underway.

[Evidence-based antibiotic prophylaxis in general and visceral surgery]

The use of prophylactic perioperative antibiotic therapy if indicated could successfully and safely prevent surgical wound infections. The current guidelines (S1) for prophylactic perioperative antibiotic therapy of the Study Group of the Scientific Medical Associations (AWMF) of 2004 was replaced by a recommendation of the study group of the Paul-Ehrlich-Gesellschaft for Chemotherapy (PEG) in 2010. This recommendation includes recent research data from 2000 to 2008. Indications and choice of antibiotic agent depend on specific risk factors of the patient and the operation performed. The aim of this article is to describe the current recommendations of the PEG for general and visceral surgery.

Double-blinded, randomized controlled trial comparing real versus placebo acupuncture to improve tolerance of diagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopy without sedation: a study protocol

Background

Sedation prior to performance of diagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGDE) is widespread and increases patient comfort. But 98% of all serious adverse events during EGDEs are ascribed to sedation. The S3 guideline for sedation procedures in gastrointestinal endoscopy published in 2008 in Germany increases patient safety by standardization. These new regulations increase costs because of the need for more personnel and a prolonged discharge procedure after examinations with sedation. Many patients have difficulties to meet the discharge criteria regulated by the S3 guideline, e.g. the call for a second person to escort them home, to resign from driving and working for the rest of the day, resulting in a refusal of sedation. Therefore, we would like to examine if an acupuncture during elective, diagnostic EGDEs could increase the comfort of patients refusing systemic sedation.

Methods/Design

A single-center, double blinded, placebo controlled superiority trial to compare the success rates of elective, diagnostic EGDEs with real and placebo acupuncture. All patients aged 18 years or older scheduled for elective, diagnostic EGDE who refuse a systemic sedation are eligible. 354 patients will be randomized. The primary endpoint is the rate of successful EGDEs with the randomized technique. Intervention: Real or placebo acupuncture before and during EGDE. Duration of study: Approximately 24 months.

Discussion

Organisation/Responsibility The ACUPEND - Trial will be conducted in accordance with the protocol and in compliance with the moral, ethical, and scientific principles governing clinical research as set out in the Declaration of Helsinki (1989) and Good Clinical Practice (GCP). The Interdisciplinary Endoscopy Center (IEZ) of the University Hospital Heidelberg is responsible for design and conduct of the trial, including randomization and documentation of patients' data. Data management and statistical analysis will be performed by the independent Institute for Medical Biometry and Informatics (IMBI) and the Center of Clinical Trials (KSC) at the Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg.

Trial registration

The trial is registered at Germanctr.de (DRKS00000164) on December 10^th 2009. The first patient was randomized on February 2^nd 2010.

Randomized clinical trial of a modified Seldinger technique for open central venous cannulation for implantable access devices

INTRODUCTION

Totally implantable access ports (TIAPs) are often used for patients who need permanent venous access. The primary success rate using direct open insertion is about 80 per cent, so rescue strategies are needed. This study compared the primary success rates of standard open insertion and a modified Seldinger technique.

METHODS

This randomized trial recruited 164 patients scheduled for primary implantation of a TIAP and compared two interventions. The primary endpoint was the success rate of the implantation technique.

RESULTS

The primary success rates were similar: 66 (80 per cent) of 82 patients who had standard open insertion versus 69 (84 per cent) of 82 patients undergoing the modified Seldinger method (P = 0.686). A logistic mixed regression analysis including treatment group, age, Karnofsky index, body mass index and surgeon's experience showed no advantage for the Seldinger method: odds ratio 1.30 (95 per cent confidence interval 0.62 to 2.70). TIAPs were eventually implanted successfully in 163 (99.4 per cent) of 164 patients. In 11 patients randomized to standard surgery, the Seldinger method was a successful rescue strategy.

CONCLUSION

The primary success rate was similar for both open insertion methods. The modified Seldinger method is useful if standard open insertion fails.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN 52368201 (http://www.controlled-trials.com).

Comparison of Venae Sectio vs. modified Seldinger Technique for totally implantable access ports; Portas-trial [ISRCTN:52368201]

Background

The insertion of a Totally Implantable Access Port (TIAP) is a routinely employed technique in patients who need a safe and permanent venous access. The number of TIAP implantations is increasing constantly mainly due to advanced treatment options for malignant diseases. Therefore it is important to identify the implantation technique which has the optimal benefit/risk ratio for the patient.

Study design

A single-centre, randomized, controlled superiority trial to compare two different TIAP implantation techniques. Sample size: 160 patients will be included and randomized intra-operatively. Eligibility criteria: Age equal or older than 18 years, patients scheduled for primary elective implantation of a TIAP in local anaesthesia and a signed informed consent. Primary endpoint: Primary success rate of the randomized technique. Intervention: Venae Sectio in combination with the Seldinger Technique (guide wire and a peel away sheath) will be used to place a TIAP. Reference treatment: Conventional Venae Sectio will be used with a direct insertion of the TIAP without guide wire or peel away sheath. Duration of study: Approximately 20 months.

Organisation/Responsibility

The trial will be conducted in compliance with the protocol and in accordance with the moral, ethical, and scientific principles governing clinical research as set out in the Declaration of Helsinki (1989) and Good Clinical Practice (GCP). The trial will also be carried out in keeping with local and regulatory requirements. The Klinisches Studienzentrum Chirurgie (KSC) – Centre of Clinical Trials in Surgery at the Department of Surgery, University Hospital Heidelberg is responsible for planning and conduction of the trial. Documentation of patient's data will be accomplished via electronical Case Report Files (eCRF) with MACRO^®-Software by the KSC. Randomization, data management, monitoring and biometry are provided by the independent Koordinierungszentrum für Klinische Studien (KKS) – Coordination Centre for Clinical Trails at the University of Heidelberg.