RESUMO
Background: Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is associated with major postoperative morbidity and mortality. Several scoring systems have been described to stratify patients into risk groups according to the risk of POPF. The aim of this study was to compare scoring systems in patients who underwent a PD. Methods: A total of 196 patients undergoing PD from July 2019 to June 2022 were identified from a prospectively maintained database of the University Hospital Ghent. After performing a literature search, four validated, solely preoperative risk scores and the intraoperative Fistula Risk Score (FRS) were included in our analysis. Furthermore, we eliminated the variable blood loss (BL) from the FRS and created an additional score. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed for all risk factors, followed by a ROC analysis for the six scoring systems. Results: All scores showed strong prognostic stratification for developing POPF (p < 0.001). FRS showed the best predictive accuracy in general (AUC 0.862). FRS without BL presented the best prognostic value of the scores that included solely preoperative variables (AUC 0.783). Soft pancreatic texture, male gender, and diameter of the Wirsung duct were independent prognostic factors on multivariate analysis. Conclusions: Although all predictive scoring systems stratify patients accurately by risk of POPF, preoperative risk stratification could improve clinical decision-making and implement preventive strategies for high-risk patients. Therefore, the preoperative use of the FRS without BL is a potential alternative.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Liver trauma is common and can be treated non-operatively, through radiological embolisation, or surgically. Non-operative management (NOM) is preferred when possible, but specific criteria remain unclear. This retrospective study at a level I trauma centre assessed the evolution and outcomes of liver injury management over more than 20 years. METHODS: Data from January 1996 to June 2020 were analysed for liver trauma cases. Variables were evaluated, including the type of injury, diagnostic modalities, liver injury grade, transfer from other hospitals, treatment type, and length of hospital stay. Outcomes were assessed using soft (hospitalisation time and intensive care unit stay) and hard (mortality) endpoints. RESULTS: In total 406 patients were analysed, of which 375 (92.4%) had a blunt and 31 (7.6%) a penetrating liver trauma. Approximately one-third (31.2%) were hemodynamically unstable, although 78.8% had low-grade liver lesions. The initial treatment was non-operative in 72.9% of the patients (68.5% conservative, 4.4% interventional radiology). Blunt trauma was treated by surgery in 23.2% of the patients, while 74.2% in case of penetrating trauma. Overall mortality was 11.1% including death caused by associated lesions. The 24-h mortality was 5.7%. Indication for surgical treatment was determined by hemodynamic instability, high grade liver lesion, penetrating trauma, and associated lesions. CONCLUSIONS: Although the role of surgery in liver trauma management has strongly diminished over recent decades, hemodynamically unstable patients, high-grade lesions, penetrating trauma, and severe associated lesions are the main indications for surgery. In other situations, NOM by full conservative therapy or radiological embolisation seems effective.