A risk-adjusted analysis of drain use in pancreaticoduodenectomy: Some is good, but more may not be better.

BACKGROUND: Intraperitoneal drain placement decreases morbidity and mortality in patients who develop a clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). It is unknown whether multiple drains mitigate CR-POPF better than a single drain. We hypothesized that multiple drains decrease the complication burden more than a single drain in cases at greater risk for CR-POPF. METHODS: The Fistula Risk Score (FRS), mitigation strategies (including number of drains placed), and clinical outcomes were obtained from a multi-institutional database of PDs performed from 2003 to 2020. Outcomes were compared between cases utilizing 0, 1, or 2 intraperitoneal drains. Multivariable regression analysis was used to evaluate the optimal drainage approach. RESULTS: A total of 4,292 PDs used 0 (7.3%), 1 (45.2%), or 2 (47.5%) drains with an observed CR-POPF rate of 9.6%, which was higher in intermediate/high FRS zone cases compared with negligible/low FRS zone cases (13% vs 2.4%, P < .001). The number of drains placed also correlated with FRS zone (median of 2 in intermediate/high vs 1 in negligible/low risk cases). In intermediate/high risk cases, the use of 2 drains instead of 1 was not associated with a reduced rate of CR-POPF, average complication burden attributed to a CR-POPF, reoperations, or mortality. Obviation of drains was associated with significant increases in complication burden and mortality - regardless of the FRS zone. CONCLUSION: In intermediate/high risk zone cases, placement of a single drain or multiple drains appears to mitigate the complication burden while use of no drains is associated with inferior outcomes.

Development and external validation of a prediction model for survival in patients with resected ampullary adenocarcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Ampullary adenocarcinoma (AAC) is a rare malignancy with great morphological heterogeneity, which complicates the prediction of survival and, therefore, clinical decision-making. The aim of this study was to develop and externally validate a prediction model for survival after resection of AAC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An international multicenter cohort study was conducted, including patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for AAC (2006-2017) from 27 centers in 10 countries spanning three continents. A derivation and validation cohort were separately collected. Predictors were selected from the derivation cohort using a LASSO Cox proportional hazards model. A nomogram was created based on shrunk coefficients. Model performance was assessed in the derivation cohort and subsequently in the validation cohort, by calibration plots and Uno's C-statistic. Four risk groups were created based on quartiles of the nomogram score. RESULTS: Overall, 1007 patients were available for development of the model. Predictors in the final Cox model included age, resection margin, tumor differentiation, pathological T stage and N stage (8th AJCC edition). Internal cross-validation demonstrated a C-statistic of 0.75 (95% CI 0.73-0.77). External validation in a cohort of 462 patients demonstrated a C-statistic of 0.77 (95% CI 0.73-0.81). A nomogram for the prediction of 3- and 5-year survival was created. The four risk groups showed significantly different 5-year survival rates (81%, 57%, 22% and 14%, p < 0.001). Only in the very-high risk group was adjuvant chemotherapy associated with an improved overall survival. CONCLUSION: A prediction model for survival after curative resection of AAC was developed and externally validated. The model is easily available online via www.pancreascalculator.com.