Advertisement

Pancreatic fistula following laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is probably unrelated to the stapler size but to the drainage modality and significantly decreased with a small suction drain

  • Safi DokmakEmail author
  • Fadhel Samir Ftériche
  • Roberto Luca Meniconi
  • Béatrice Aussilhou
  • Igor Duquesne
  • Genaro Perrone
  • Chihebeddine Romdhani
  • Jacques Belghiti
  • Philippe Lévy
  • Olivier Soubrane
  • Alain Sauvanet
Original Article

Abstract

Introduction

Risk factors of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) are not well known and were studied, including the stapler cartridge size and drainage modality.

Methods

Between January 2008 and December 2016, 181 LDP were performed and the pancreas was sectioned by stapler in 130 patients (72%). Patients received white (2.5 mm), blue (3.5 mm), or green (4.1 mm) staplers and the size was not based on any pre or peroperative randomization. As primary analysis of the first 84 patients (28 in each group) showed no effect of stapler size on POPF, we decided to use the white (total = 47) or blue and finally the blue (total = 55) of medium size for standardization. Drainage was obtained by multi-tubular drain (first, 79) and a small suction drain (last, 102). Risk factors of POPF were studied and grades B and C were compared to grade A or no POPF.

Results

POPF (n = 66; 36%) was of grade A (n = 25, 14%), grade B (n = 32, 18%), and grade C (n = 9, 5%). The comparison of the three groups of staplers showed that the blue stapler was used more with a small suction drain (85 vs 23%, p < 0.0001), had lower rate of grade B POPF (p = 0.028), and a shorter hospital stay (p = 0.004). On multivariate analysis, only the use of a small suction drain was associated with significant decrease in grades B and C POPF (6 vs 44%, odds ratio 7.385 (1.919–28.418); p = 0.004).

Conclusion

The occurrence of POPF following LDP is influenced by the type of drainage alone and is significantly decreased with a small suction drain.

Keywords

Laparoscopic approach Minimally invasive approach Pancreas Surgery Resection Pancreatic fistula Modality of drainage Stapler size cartridge 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Kooby DA, Hawkins WG, Schmidt CM et al (2010) A multicenter analysis of distal pancreatectomy for adenocarcinoma: is laparoscopic resection appropriate? J Am Coll Surg 210(5):779–785 786-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ricci C, Casadei R, Taffurelli G et al (2015) Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Gastrointest Surg 9(4):770–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kooby DA, Gillespie T, Bentrem D et al (2008) Left-sided pancreatectomy: a multicenter comparison of laparoscopic and open approaches. Ann Surg 248(3):438–446Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Venkat R, Edil BH, Schulick RD et al (2012) Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is associated with significantly less overall morbidity compared to the open technique: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 255(6):1048–1059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    de Rooij T, Jilesen AP, Boerma D et al (2014) A nationwide comparison of laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy for benign and malignant disease. J Am Coll Surg 220(3):263–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stauffer JA, Rosales-Velderrain A, Goldberg RF et al (2013) Comparison of open with laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a single institution's transition over a 7-year period. HPB (Oxford) 15(2):149–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jin T, Altaf K, Xiong JJ et al (2012) A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy. HPB (Oxford) 14(11):711–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cho CS, Kooby DA, Schmidt CM et al (2011) Laparoscopic versus open left pancreatectomy: can preoperative factors indicate the safer technique? Ann Surg 253:975–980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    de Rooij T, van Hilst J, van Santvoort H, et al.. (2018) Dutch pancreatic cancer group. Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy (LEOPARD): a multicenter patient-blinded randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 269(1):2–9.  https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002979
  10. 10.
    Raoof M, Ituarte PHG, Woo Y et al (2018) Propensity score-matched comparison of oncological outcomes between laparoscopic and open distal pancreatic resection. Br J Surg 105(5):578–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kleeff J, Diener MK, Z'graggen K et al (2007) Distal pancreatectomy: risk factors for surgical failure in 302 consecutive cases. Ann Surg 245:573–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lillemoe KD, Kaushal S, Cameron JL et al (1999) Distal pancreatectomy: indications and outcomes in 235 patients. Ann Surg 229:693–698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bilimoria MM, Cormier JN, Mun Y et al (2003) Pancreatic leak after left pancreatectomy is reduced following main pancreatic duct ligation. Br J Surg 90(2):190–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pannegeon V, Pessaux P, Sauvanet A et al (2006) Pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy: predictive risk factors and value of conservative treatment. Arch Surg 141(11):1071–1076 discussion 1076CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dokmak S, Aussilhou B, Ftériche FS et al (2017) Hanging maneuver for stomach traction in laparoscopic distal pancreatic resections: an original technique applied in 218 patients. Dig Surg 34(2):89–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Warshaw AL (1988) Conservation of the spleen with distal pancreatectomy. Arch Surg 123(5):550–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bassi C, Dervenis C, Butturini G et al (2005) Postoperative pancreatic fistula: an international study group (ISGPF) definition. Surgery 138:8–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Diener MK, Seiler CM, Rossion I et al (2011) Efficacy of stapler versus hand-sewn closure after distal pancreatectomy (DISPACT): a randomised, controlled multicentre trial. Lancet 377:1514–1522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Montorsi M, Zerbi A, Bassi C, Italian Tachosil Study Group et al (2012) Efficacy of an absorbable fibrin sealant patch (TachoSil) after distal pancreatectomy: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Ann Surg 256(5):853–859 discussion 859–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sa Cunha A, Carrere N, Meunier B et al (2015) Stump closure reinforcement with absorbable fibrin collagen sealant sponge (TachoSil) does not prevent pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy: the FIABLE multicenter controlled randomized study. Am J Surg 210(4):739–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Park JS, Lee DH, Jang JY et al (2016) Use of TachoSil(®) patches to prevent pancreatic leaks after distal pancreatectomy: a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled study. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 23(2):110–117 dCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Butturini G, Damoli I, Crepaz L et al (2015) A prospective non-randomised single-center study comparing laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy. Surg Endosc 29(11):3163–3170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kim H, Jang JY, Son D et al (2016) Optimal stapler cartridge selection according to the thickness of the pancreas in distal pancreatectomy. Medicine (Baltimore) 95(35):e4441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yoshioka R, Saiura A, Koga R et al (2010) Risk factors for clinical pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy: analysis of consecutive 100 patients. World J Surg 34(1):121–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Goh BK, Tan YM, Chung YF et al (2008) Critical appraisal of 232 consecutive distal pancreatectomies with emphasis on risk factors, outcome, and management of the postoperative pancreatic fistula: a 21-year experience at a single institution. Arch Surg 143(10):956–965CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Subhedar PD, Patel SH, Kneuertz PJ et al (2011) Risk factors for pancreatic fistula after stapled gland transection. Am Surg 77(8):965–970Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Distler M, Kersting S, Rückert F et al (2014) Chronic pancreatitis of the pancreatic remnant is an independent risk factor for pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy. BMC Surg 14:54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chang YR, Kang JS, Jang JY et al (2017) Prediction of pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy based on cross-sectional images. World J Surg 41(6):1610–1617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Arai T, Kobayashi A, Yokoyama T et al (2015) Signal intensity of the pancreas on magnetic resonance imaging: prediction of postoperative pancreatic fistula after a distal pancreatectomy using a triple-row stapler. Pancreatology 15(4):380–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Takahashi H, Ogawa H, Ohigashi H et al (2011) Preoperative chemoradiation reduces the risk of pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Surgery 150(3):547–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Frozanpor F, Lundell L, Segersvärd R et al (2012) The effect of prophylactic transpapillary pancreatic stent insertion on clinically significant leak rate following distal pancreatectomy: results of a prospective controlled clinical trial. Ann Surg 255(6):1032–1036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Allen PJ, Gönen M, Brennan MF et al (2014) N Engl J Med 370(21):2014–2022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Jang JY, Shin YC, Han Y, et al. (2016) Effect of polyglycolic acid mesh for prevention of pancreatic fistula following distal pancreatectomy: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Surg 152(2):150–155.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2016.3644
  34. 34.
    Oláh A, Issekutz A, Belágyi T et al (2009) Randomized clinical trial of techniques for closure of the pancreatic remnant following distal pancreatectomy. Br J Surg 96(6):602–607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Carter TI, Fong ZV, Hyslop T et al (2013) A dual-institution randomized controlled trial of remnant closure after distal pancreatectomy: does the addition of a falciform patch and fibrin glue improve outcomes? J Gastrointest Surg 17(1):102–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Klein F, Glanemann M, Faber W et al (2012) Pancreatoenteral anastomosis or direct closure of the pancreatic remnant after a distal pancreatectomy: a single-centre experience. HPB (Oxford) 14(12):798–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hassenpflug M, Hinz U, Strobel O et al (2016) Teres ligament patch reduces relevant morbidity after distal pancreatectomy (the DISCOVER randomized controlled trial). Ann Surg 264(5):723–730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kah Heng CA, Salleh I, San TS et al (2010) Pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy: incidence, risk factors and management. ANZ J Surg 80(9):619–623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Harris LJ, Abdollahi H, Newhook T et al (2010) Optimal technical management of stump closure following distal pancreatectomy: a retrospective review of 215 cases. J Gastrointest Surg 14:998–1005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ferrone CR, Warshaw AL, Rattner DW et al (2008) Pancreatic fistula rates after 462 distal pancreatectomies. Stapler do not decrease fistula rates. J Gastrointest Surg 12:1691–1698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sugimoto M, Gotohda N, Kato Y et al (2013) Risk factor analysis and prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy with stapler use. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 20(5):538–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Jensen EH, Portschy PR, Chowaniec J et al (2013) Meta-analysis of bioabsorbable staple line reinforcement and risk of fistula following pancreatic resection. J Gastrointest Surg 17(2):267–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hamilton NA, Porembka MR, Johnston FM et al (2012) Mesh reinforcement of pancreatic transection decreases incidence of pancreatic occlusion failure for left pancreatectomy: a single-blinded, randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 255(6):1037–1042CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Mendoza AS 3rd, Han HS, Ahn S et al (2016) Predictive factors associated with postoperative pancreatic fistula after laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a 10-year single-institution experience. Surg Endosc 30(2):649–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Sepesi B, Moalem J, Galka E et al (2012) The influence of staple size on fistula formation following distal pancreatectomy. J Gastrointest Surg 16(2):267–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Paulus EM, Zarzaur BL, Behrman SW (2012) Routine peritoneal drainage of the surgical bed after elective distal pancreatectomy: is it necessary? Am J Surg 204(4):422–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Adham M, Chopin-Laly X, Lepilliez V et al (2013) Pancreatic resection: drain or no drain? Surgery 154(5):1069–1077CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Behrman SW, Zarzaur BL, Parmar A et al (2015) Routine drainage of the operative bed following elective distal pancreatectomy does not reduce the occurrence of complications. J Gastrointest Surg 19(1):72–79 discussion 79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Van Buren G 2nd, Bloomston M, Schmidt CR et al (2017) A prospective randomized multicenter trial of distal pancreatectomy with and without routine intraperitoneal drainage. Ann Surg 266(3):421–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Sierzega M, Kulig P, Kolodziejczyk P et al (2013) Natural history of intra-abdominal fluid collections following pancreatic surgery. J Gastrointest Surg 17(8):1406–1413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Tjaden C, Hinz U, Hassenpflug M et al (2016) Fluid collection after distal pancreatectomy: a frequent finding. HPB (Oxford) 18(1):35–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Zureikat AH, Moser AJ, Boone BA et al (2013) 250 robotic pancreatic resections: safety and feasibility. Ann Surg 258(4):554–559 discussion 559–62Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Sadot E, Brennan MF, Lee SY et al (2014) Readmission after pancreatic resection: causes and causality pattern. Ann Surg Oncol 21(13):4342–4350CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Safi Dokmak
    • 1
    Email author
  • Fadhel Samir Ftériche
    • 1
  • Roberto Luca Meniconi
    • 1
  • Béatrice Aussilhou
    • 1
  • Igor Duquesne
    • 1
  • Genaro Perrone
    • 1
  • Chihebeddine Romdhani
    • 2
  • Jacques Belghiti
    • 1
  • Philippe Lévy
    • 3
  • Olivier Soubrane
    • 1
  • Alain Sauvanet
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of HPB surgery and liver transplantation, Beaujon Hospital, APHPUniversity Paris VIIClichyFrance
  2. 2.Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive care medicineMilitary Hospital of TunisTunisTunisia
  3. 3.Department of Gastroenterology and Pancreatic Diseases, Beaujon Hospital, APHPUniversity Paris VIIClichyFrance

Personalised recommendations