TY - JOUR
T1 - Pancreatic stump closure techniques and pancreatic fistula formation after distal pancreatectomy
T2 - Meta-analysis and singlecenter experience
AU - Tieftrunk, Elke
AU - Demir, Ihsan Ekin
AU - Schorn, Stephan
AU - Sargut, Mine
AU - Scheufele, Florian
AU - Calavrezos, Lenika
AU - Schirren, Rebekka
AU - Friess, Helmut
AU - Ceyhan, Guralp O.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Tieftrunk et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
PY - 2018/6
Y1 - 2018/6
N2 - Background Pancreatic fistula/PF is the most frequent and feared complication after distal pancreatectomy/ DP. However, the safest technique of pancreatic stump closure remains an ongoing debate. Here, we aimed to compare the safety of different pancreatic stump closure techniques for preventing PF during DP. Methods We performed a PRISMA-based meta-analysis of all relevant studies that compared at least two techniques of stump closure during DP with regard to PF rates/PFR. We further performed a retrospective analysis of our institutional PFR in correlation with stump closure techniques. Results 8301 studies were initially identified. From these, ten randomized controlled trials/RCTs, eleven prospective and 59 retrospective studies were eligible. Stapler closure (26%vs.31%, OR:0.73, p = 0.02), combination of stapler and suture (30%vs.33%, OR:0.70, p = 0.05), or stump anastomosis (14%vs.28%, OR:0.51, p = 0.02) were associated with lower PFR than suture closure alone. Spleen preservation/splenectomy, or laparoscopic/open DP, Tacho- Sil®, fibrin-like glue-application, or bioabsorbable-stapler-reinforcements (Seamguard®) did not influence PFR after DP. In contrast, autologous patches (falciform ligament/seromuscular patches) resulted in lower PFR than no patch application (21.9%vs.25,8%, OR:0.60, p = 0.006). In our institution, the major three techniques of stump closure resulted in comparable PFR (suture:27%, stapler:29%, or combination:24%). However, selective suturing/ clipping of the main pancreatic duct during pancreatic stump closure prevented severe PF (p = 0.02).
AB - Background Pancreatic fistula/PF is the most frequent and feared complication after distal pancreatectomy/ DP. However, the safest technique of pancreatic stump closure remains an ongoing debate. Here, we aimed to compare the safety of different pancreatic stump closure techniques for preventing PF during DP. Methods We performed a PRISMA-based meta-analysis of all relevant studies that compared at least two techniques of stump closure during DP with regard to PF rates/PFR. We further performed a retrospective analysis of our institutional PFR in correlation with stump closure techniques. Results 8301 studies were initially identified. From these, ten randomized controlled trials/RCTs, eleven prospective and 59 retrospective studies were eligible. Stapler closure (26%vs.31%, OR:0.73, p = 0.02), combination of stapler and suture (30%vs.33%, OR:0.70, p = 0.05), or stump anastomosis (14%vs.28%, OR:0.51, p = 0.02) were associated with lower PFR than suture closure alone. Spleen preservation/splenectomy, or laparoscopic/open DP, Tacho- Sil®, fibrin-like glue-application, or bioabsorbable-stapler-reinforcements (Seamguard®) did not influence PFR after DP. In contrast, autologous patches (falciform ligament/seromuscular patches) resulted in lower PFR than no patch application (21.9%vs.25,8%, OR:0.60, p = 0.006). In our institution, the major three techniques of stump closure resulted in comparable PFR (suture:27%, stapler:29%, or combination:24%). However, selective suturing/ clipping of the main pancreatic duct during pancreatic stump closure prevented severe PF (p = 0.02).
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85048960606&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0197553
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0197553
M3 - Article
C2 - 29897920
AN - SCOPUS:85048960606
SN - 1932-6203
VL - 13
JO - PLoS ONE
JF - PLoS ONE
IS - 6
M1 - 0197553
ER -