Treatment of Postoperative Lymphatic Leakage Applying Transpedal Lymphangiography - Experience in 355 Consecutive Patients.

PURPOSE: Report of experience from a single institution in treating postoperative lymphatic leakage (PLL) applying conventional transpedal lymphangiography (TL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: 453 patients with the initial diagnosis of PLL receiving TL between 03/1993 and 09/2018 were identified in the database. Only patients with confirmed PLL were included in the study. The technical success, safety, and treatment success of TL were evaluated. Independent predictors of TL treatment failure were examined using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: 355 consecutive patients (218 men, 137 women; median age of 62 years) who underwent TL for PLL (e. g., chylothorax) after ineffective conservative treatment were included. The median time between causal surgery and TL was 27 days. The median technical success rate of TL was 88.5 %, with a median volume of Lipiodol of 10.0 ml. No complication of TL was recorded. Three groups were defined according to the different clinical courses: group A (41/355, 11.5 %) - TL with technical failure; group B (258/355, 72.7 %) - "therapeutic" TL alone with technical success; and group C (56/355, 15.8 %) - "diagnostic" TL with simultaneously invasive treatment (incl. surgical revision and percutaneous sclerotherapy). Treatment success rate and median time to treatment success were higher in group C than in group B, but without significant differences (64.3 % vs. 61.6 %, p = 0.710; six vs. five days, p = 0.065). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses for group B confirmed drainage volume (> 500 ml/d) and Lipiodol extravasation as independent predictors of TL clinical failure (odds ratios [ORs] of 2.128 and 2.372 [p = 0.005 and p = 0.003, respectively]). CONCLUSION: TL is technically reliable, safe, and effective in treating PLL. When conservative treatment fails, TL can be regarded as the next treatment option. KEY POINTS: · TL is technically reliable, safe, and effective for treating PLL.. · When conservative treatment fails, TL can be regarded as the next treatment option.. · Drainage volume > 500 ml/day is an independent predictor of clinical failure after TL.. · Lipiodol extravasation is an independent predictor of clinical failure after TL.. CITATION FORMAT: · Pan F, Richter GM, Do TD et al. Treatment of Postoperative Lymphatic Leakage Applying Transpedal Lymphangiography - Experience in 355 Consecutive Patients. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2022; 194: 634 - 643.

Evaluation of robotic versus open partial pancreatoduodenectomy-study protocol for a randomised controlled pilot trial (EUROPA, DRKS00020407).

BACKGROUND: Partial pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is the indicated surgical procedure for a wide range of benign and malignant diseases of the pancreatic head and distal bile duct and offers the only potential cure for pancreatic head cancer. The current gold standard, open PD (OPD) performed via laparotomy, is associated with morbidity in around 40% of cases, even at specialised centres. Robotic PD (RPD) might offer a viable alternative to OPD and has been shown to be feasible. Encouraging perioperative results have been reported for RPD in a number of small, non-randomised studies. However, since those studies showed a considerable risk of bias, a thorough comparison of RPD with OPD is warranted. METHODS: The EUROPA (EvalUation of RObotic partial PAncreatoduodenectomy) trial is designed as a randomised controlled unblinded exploratory surgical trial with two parallel study groups. A total of 80 patients scheduled for elective PD will be randomised after giving written informed consent. Patients with borderline or non-resectable carcinoma of the pancreatic head as defined by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, distant metastases or an American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) score > III will be excluded. The experimental intervention, RPD, will be compared with the control intervention, OPD. An intraoperative dropout of approximately eight patients per group is expected because they may receive another type of surgical procedure than planned. Overall, 64 patients need to be analysed. The primary endpoint of the trial is overall postoperative morbidity within 90 days after index operation, measured using the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI). The secondary endpoints include the feasibility of recruitment and assessment of clinical, oncological and safety parameters and quality of life and cost-effectiveness. DISCUSSION: The EUROPA trial is the first randomised controlled trial comparing RPD with OPD. Differences in postoperative morbidity will be evaluated to design a future multicentre confirmatory efficacy trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trial Register DRKS00020407 . Registered on 9 March 2020.

Continuous wound infiltration versus epidural analgesia for midline abdominal incisions - a randomized-controlled pilot trial (Painless-Pilot trial; DRKS Number: DRKS00008023).

OBJECTIVES: To test the feasibility of a randomized controlled study design comparing epidural analgesia (EDA) with continuous wound infiltration (CWI) in respect to postoperative complications and mobility to design a future multicentre randomized controlled trial. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: CWI has been developed to address drawbacks of EDA. Previous studies have established the equivalent analgesic potential of CWI compared to EDA. This is a single centre, non-blinded pilot randomized controlled trial at a tertiary surgical centre. Patients undergoing elective non-colorectal surgery via a midline laparotomy were randomized to EDA or CWI. Endpoints included recruitment, feasibility of assessing postoperative mobility with a pedometer and morbidity. No primary endpoint was defined and all analyses were explorative. INTERVENTIONS: CWI with local anaesthetics (experimental group) vs. thoracic EDA (control). RESULTS: Of 846 patients screened within 14 months, 71 were randomized and 62 (31 per group) included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Mobility was assessed in 44 of 62 patients and revealed no differences within the first 3 postoperative days. Overall morbidity did not differ between the two groups (measured via the comprehensive complication index). Median pain scores at rest were comparable between the two groups, while EDA was superior in pain treatment during movement on the first, but not on the second and third postoperative day. Duration of preoperative induction of anaesthesia was shorter with CWI than with EDA. Of 17 serious adverse events, 3 were potentially related to EDA, while none was related to CWI. CONCLUSION: This trial confirmed the feasibility of a randomized trial design to compare CWI and EDA regarding morbidity. Improvements in the education and training of team members are necessary to improve recruitment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DRKS00008023.