Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Development of a Nomogram to Predict Clinically Relevant Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula After Pancreaticoduodenectomy on the Basis of Visceral Fat Area and Magnetic Resonance Imaging

  • Pancreatic Tumors
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The aim of this study was to develop a nomogram to predict the risk of developing clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) using preoperative clinical and imaging data.

Methods

The data of 205 patients were retrospectively analyzed, randomly divided into training (n = 125) and testing groups (n = 80). The patients’ preoperative laboratory indicators, preoperative clinical baseline data, and preoperative imaging data [enhanced computed tomography (CT), enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)] were collected. Univariate analyses combined with multivariate logistic regression were used to identify the independent risk factors for CR-POPF. These factors were used to train and validate the model and to develop the risk nomogram. The area under the curve (AUC) was used to measure the predictive ability of the models. The integrated discrimination improvement index (IDI) and decision curve analysis (DCA) were used to assess the clinical feasibility of the nomogram in relation to five other models established in literature.

Results

CT visceral fat area (P = 0.014), the pancreatic spleen signal ratio on T1 fat-suppressed MRI sequences (P < 0.001), and CT main pancreatic duct diameter (P = 0.001) were identified as independent prognostic factors and used to develop the model. The final nomogram achieved an AUC of 0.903. The IDI and DCA showed that the nomogram outperformed the other five CR-POPF models in the training and testing cohorts.

Conclusion

The nomogram achieved a superior predictive ability for CR-POPF following PD than other models described in literature. Clinicians can use this simple model to optimize perioperative planning according to the patient’s risk of developing CR-POPF.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Menahem B, Guittet L, Mulliri A, et al. Pancreaticogastrostomy is superior to pancreaticojejunostomy for prevention of pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ann Surg. 2015;261:882–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C, et al. The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 years after. Surgery. 2017;161:584–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Wente MN, Bassi C, Dervenis C, et al. Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after pancreatic surgery: a suggested definition by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS). Surgery. 2007;142:761–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Callery MP, Pratt WB, Kent TS, et al. A prospectively validated clinical risk score accurately predicts pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;216:1–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gaujoux S, Cortes A, Couvelard A, et al. Fatty pancreas and increased body mass index are risk factors of pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surgery. 2010;148:15–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wellner UF, Kayser G, Lapshyn H, et al. A simple scoring system based on clinical factors related to pancreatic texture predicts postoperative pancreatic fistula preoperatively. HPB (Oxford). 2010;12:696–702.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Graham JA, Kayser R, Smirniotopoulos J, et al. Probability prediction of a postoperative pancreatic fistula after a pancreaticoduodenectomy allows for more transparency with patients and can facilitate management of expectations. J Surg Oncol. 2013;108:137–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Roberts KJ, Hodson J, Mehrzad H, et al. A preoperative predictive score of pancreatic fistula following pancreatoduodenectomy. HPB (Oxford). 2014;16:620–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lin Z, Tang B, Cai J, et al. Preoperative prediction of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Eur J Radiol. 2021;139:109693.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Satoi S, Takai S, Matsui Y, et al. Less morbidity after pancreaticoduodenectomy of patients with pancreatic cancer. Pancreas. 2006;33:45–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. El Nakeeb A, ElGawalby A, Ali MA, et al. Efficacy of octreotide in the prevention of complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with soft pancreas and non-dilated pancreatic duct: a prospective randomized trial. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2018;17:59–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Vickers AJ, Elkin EB. Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models. Med Decis Mak. 2006;26:565–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Rousson V, Zumbrunn T. Decision curve analysis revisited: overall net benefit, relationships to ROC curve analysis, and application to case-control studies. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2011;11:45.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Kerr KF, Brown MD, Zhu K, Janes H. Assessing the clinical impact of risk prediction models with decision curves: guidance for correct interpretation and appropriate use. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:2534–40.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Mungroop TH, van Rijssen LB, van Klaveren D, et al. Alternative fistula risk score for pancreatoduodenectomy (a-FRS): design and international external validation. Ann Surg. 2019;269:937–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Zhang JY, Huang J, Zhao SY, et al. Risk factors and a new prediction model for pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2021;14:1897–906.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Lapshyn H, Petruch N, Thomaschewski M, et al. A simple preoperative stratification tool predicting the risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. Pancreatology. 2021;21:957–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Li Y, Zhou F, Zhu DM, et al. Novel risk scoring system for prediction of pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. World J Gastroenterol. 2019;25:2650–64.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Gateva AT, Velikova TV, Kamenov ZA. Peroxiredoxin 4 levels in patients with PCOS and/or obesity. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2019;48:739–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Di J, Cheng Y, Chang D, Liu Y. A Meta-Analysis of the impact of obesity, metabolic syndrome, insulin resistance, and microbiome on the diagnosis of Barrett’s esophagus. Dig Dis. 2020;38:165–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kountouras J, Doulberis M, Polyzos SA, Katsinelos P. Metabolic syndrome components including high abdominal obesity and sarcopenia in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Ann Gastroenterol. 2019;32:214.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Spencer M, Yao-Borengasser A, Unal R, et al. Adipose tissue macrophages in insulin-resistant subjects are associated with collagen VI and fibrosis and demonstrate alternative activation. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2010;299:E1016-1027.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Tranchart H, Gaujoux S, Rebours V, et al. Preoperative CT scan helps to predict the occurrence of severe pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 2012;256:139–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Park CM, Park JS, Cho ES, et al. The effect of visceral fat mass on pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Investig Surg. 2012;25:169–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Mitchell DG, Vinitski S, Saponaro S, et al. Liver and pancreas: improved spin-echo T1 contrast by shorter echo time and fat suppression at 1.5 T. Radiology. 1991;178:67–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Winston CB, Mitchell DG, Outwater EK, Ehrlich SM. Pancreatic signal intensity on T1-weighted fat saturation MR images: clinical correlation. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1995;5:267–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Liang X, Shi LG, Hao J, et al. Risk factors and managements of hemorrhage associated with pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2017;16:537–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Eshmuminov D, Karpovich I, Kapp J, et al. Pancreatic fistulas following distal pancreatectomy are unrelated to the texture quality of the pancreas. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2021;406:729–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Chong E, Ratnayake B, Lee S, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of risk factors of postoperative pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy in the era of 2016 International Study Group pancreatic fistula definition. HPB (Oxford). 2021;23:1139–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Nathan H, Cameron JL, Goodwin CR, et al. Risk factors for pancreatic leak after distal pancreatectomy. Ann Surg. 2009;250:277–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Hashimoto Y, Sclabas GM, Takahashi N, et al. Dual-phase computed tomography for assessment of pancreatic fibrosis and anastomotic failure risk following pancreatoduodenectomy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2011;15:2193–204.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Mathur A, Pitt HA, Marine M, et al. Fatty pancreas: a factor in postoperative pancreatic fistula. Ann Surg. 2007;246:1058–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Chu CK, Mazo AE, Sarmiento JM, et al. Impact of diabetes mellitus on perioperative outcomes after resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. J Am Coll Surg. 2010;210:463–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, Jiangsu Province, China

    Jiayue Zou MD, Xiaofeng Xue MD, PhD & Lei Qin MD, PhD

Authors
  1. Jiayue Zou MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xiaofeng Xue MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lei Qin MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Jiayue Zou MD, Xiaofeng Xue MD, PhD or Lei Qin MD, PhD.

Ethics declarations

Disclosure

The authors certify that there are no conflict of interest related to the manuscript.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 5696 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zou, J., Xue, X. & Qin, L. Development of a Nomogram to Predict Clinically Relevant Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula After Pancreaticoduodenectomy on the Basis of Visceral Fat Area and Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Ann Surg Oncol 30, 7712–7719 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-023-13943-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-023-13943-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation