Long-Term Assessment of Pancreatic Function After Pancreatectomy for Cystic Neoplasms.

BACKGROUND: With advances in cross-sectional imaging, pancreatic cysts are more frequently diagnosed and have become a common indication for pancreatectomy. The impact of pancreatectomy in these patients is important. The purpose of this study was to assess short-term outcomes, long-term nutritional status, quality of life (QOL), and pancreas function after pancreatectomy for cystic neoplasms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: At a single institution, patients at least 3 y post-pancreatectomy for benign cystic neoplasms were identified. Using a validated questionnaire, short-term outcomes, long-term outcomes including endocrine and exocrine insufficiency, long-term nutritional status, and preoperative and postoperative QOL were compared based on operation and indication for resection. RESULTS: Among 102 eligible patients, 70 had valid contact information and 51 (72.9%) agreed to participate. Median follow-up was 6 (4-8) y. Patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for benign cysts had higher morbidity than a similar cohort resected for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (patients with at least 1 ≥ grade 2 complication [49.0% versus 31.6%, P = 0.038]). After long-term follow-up, pancreatectomy did not significantly affect perceived QOL. Half of patients had mild-moderate or severe malnourishment, but pancreatic enzyme replacement was reported by only 4 (7.8%) patients. New-onset diabetes was present in 15 (29.4%) patients with median time-to-diagnosis of 6 (1-12) mo after resection. CONCLUSIONS: Pancreatectomy for benign cysts did not negatively impact patients' perceived QOL. However, after long-term follow-up, malnutrition and pancreatic insufficiency occurred in a significant percentage and may be greater than previously estimated. Consideration of short- and long-term outcomes should factor into preoperative counseling, especially in cysts with minimal risk of progression to malignancy.

Venous thrombosis following pancreaticoduodenectomy with venous resection.

BACKGROUND: Addition of en bloc segmental venous reconstruction (VR) to pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for venous involvement of pancreatic tumors increases the complexity of the operation and may increase complications. The long-term mesenteric venous patency rate and oncologic outcome has not been well defined. METHODS: Our prospective database was reviewed to assess 90-day postoperative outcomes for patients who underwent PD or PD + VR (September 2004-June 2016). Two independent observers reviewed CT scans to determine long-term vein patency. In patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, the impact of VR on 5-year overall survival was assessed using multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression. Student's t-test was used to evaluate continuous variables and the chi-square test for categorical variables. RESULTS: Three hundred ninety-three patients underwent PD (51 PD + VR). Patients undergoing PD + VR had longer operations (561 ± 119 versus 433 ± 89 min, P < 0.00001) and greater blood loss (768 ± 812 versus 327 ± 423 cc, P < 0.00001). There was no difference in 90-day mortality, overall postoperative complication rates, complication severity grades, reoperation, readmission, or length of stay. 26.7% experienced venous thrombosis. Most thromboses occurred in the first year after surgery, but we also observed late thrombosis in 1 patient after 89-month follow-up. Among 135 patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, survival was significantly longer in the PD-alone group (31.3 months [95% confidence interval: 22.9-40.0] versus 17.0 [95% confidence interval: 13.0-19.1], plog-rank = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS: PD + VR does not increase short-term morbidity, but venous thrombosis is frequent and can occur long after surgery. Survival is inferior when VR is required especially in the absence of neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Sequential drain amylase to guide drain removal following pancreatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Although used as criterion for early drain removal, postoperative day (POD) 1 drain fluid amylase (DFA) ≤ 5000 U/L has low negative predictive value for clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF). It was hypothesized that POD3 DFA ≤ 350 could provide further information to guide early drain removal. METHODS: Data from a pancreas surgery consortium database for pancreatoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy patients were analyzed retrospectively. Those patients without drains or POD 1 and 3 DFA data were excluded. Patients with POD1 DFA ≤ 5000 were divided into groups based on POD3 DFA: Group A (≤350) and Group B (>350). Operative characteristics and 60-day outcomes were compared using chi-square test. RESULTS: Among 687 patients in the database, all data were available for 380. Fifty-five (14.5%) had a POD1 DFA > 5000. Among 325 with POD1 DFA ≤ 5000, 254 (78.2%) were in Group A and 71 (21.8%) in Group B. Complications (35 (49.3%) vs 87 (34.4%); p = 0.021) and CR-POPF (13 (18.3%) vs 10 (3.9%); p < 0.001) were more frequent in Group B. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with POD1 DFA ≤ 5000, POD3 DFA ≤ 350 may be a practical test to guide safe early drain removal. Further prospective testing may be useful.

A Prospective Randomized Multicenter Trial of Distal Pancreatectomy With and Without Routine Intraperitoneal Drainage.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that distal pancreatectomy (DP) without intraperitoneal drainage does not affect the frequency of grade 2 or higher grade complications. BACKGROUND: The use of routine intraperitoneal drains during DP is controversial. Prior to this study, no prospective trial focusing on DP without intraperitoneal drainage has been reported. METHODS: Patients undergoing DP for all causes at 14 high-volume pancreas centers were preoperatively randomized to placement of a drain or no drain. Complications and their severity were tracked for 60 days and mortality for 90 days. The study was powered to detect a 15% positive or negative difference in the rate of grade 2 or higher grade complications. All data were collected prospectively and source documents were reviewed at the coordinating center to confirm completeness and accuracy. RESULTS: A total of 344 patients underwent DP with (N = 174) and without (N = 170) the use of intraperitoneal drainage. There were no differences between cohorts in demographics, comorbidities, pathology, pancreatic duct size, pancreas texture, or operative technique. There was no difference in the rate of grade 2 or higher grade complications (44% vs. 42%, P = 0.80). There was no difference in clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (18% vs 12%, P = 0.11) or mortality (0% vs 1%, P = 0.24). DP without routine intraperitoneal drainage was associated with a higher incidence of intra-abdominal fluid collection (9% vs 22%, P = 0.0004). There was no difference in the frequency of postoperative imaging, percutaneous drain placement, reoperation, readmission, or quality of life scores. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective randomized multicenter trial provides evidence that clinical outcomes are comparable in DP with or without intraperitoneal drainage.