Effect of artificial or autologous coverage of the pancreatic remnant or anastomosis on postoperative pancreatic fistulas after partial pancreatectomy: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pancreatic fistulas remain a driver of major complications after partial pancreatectomy. It is unclear whether coverage of the anastomosis or pancreatic remnant can reduce the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistulas. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of autologous or artificial coverage of the pancreatic remnant or anastomosis on outcomes after partial pancreatectomy. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed using MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up to March 2024. All RCTs analysing a coverage method in patients undergoing partial pancreatoduodenectomy or distal pancreatectomy were included. The primary outcome was postoperative pancreatic fistula development. Subgroup analyses for pancreatoduodenectomy or distal pancreatectomy and artificial or autologous coverage were conducted. RESULTS: A total of 18 RCTs with 2326 patients were included. In the overall analysis, coverage decreased the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistulas by 29% (OR 0.71, 95% c.i. 0.54 to 0.93, P < 0.01). This decrease was also seen in the 12 RCTs covering the remnant after distal pancreatectomy (OR 0.69, 95% c.i. 0.51 to 0.94, P < 0.02) and the 4 RCTs applying autologous coverage after pancreatoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy (OR 0.53, 95% c.i. 0.29 to 0.96, P < 0.04). Other subgroup analyses (artificial coverage or pancreatoduodenectomy) showed no statistically significant differences. The secondary endpoints of mortality, reoperations, and re-interventions were each affected positively by the use of coverage techniques. The certainty of evidence was very low to moderate. CONCLUSION: The implementation of coverage, whether artificial or autologous, is beneficial after partial pancreatectomy, especially in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy with autologous coverage.

Perioperative Drug Treatment in Pancreatic Surgery-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Pancreatic resections for malignant or benign diseases are associated with major morbidity and changes in physiology. To reduce perioperative complications and enhance recovery, many types of perioperative medical management have been introduced. The aim of this study was to provide an evidence-based overview on the best perioperative drug treatment. METHODS: The electronic bibliographic databases Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and Web of Science were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) evaluating perioperative drug treatments in pancreatic surgery. The investigated drugs were somatostatin analogues, steroids, pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT), prokinetic therapy, antidiabetic drugs, and proton pump inhibitors (PPI). Targeted outcomes in each drug category were meta-analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 49 RCT were included. The analysis of somatostatin analogues showed a significantly lower incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) in the somatostatin group compared to the control group (OR 0.58, 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.74). The comparison of glucocorticoids versus placebo showed significantly less POPF in the glucocorticoid group (OR 0.22, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.77). There was no significant difference in DGE when erythromycin was compared to placebo (OR 0.33, 95% CI: 0.08 to 1.30). The other investigated drug regimens could only be analyzed qualitatively. CONCLUSION: This systematic review provides a comprehensive overview on perioperative drug treatment in pancreatic surgery. Some often-prescribed perioperative drug treatments lack high quality evidence and further research is needed.

Clinical outcomes of patients treated on the Heidelberg interprofessional training ward vs. care on a conventional surgical ward: A retrospective cohort study.

Interprofessional training wards (IPTW) are a form of interprofessional education enabling trainees of different healthcare professions to work together in teams. Concerns about patient safety are a major barrier to the implementation of IPTWs. The objective of this retrospective study was to analyze patient relevant clinical outcomes on Germany's first IPTW (Heidelberger Interprofessionelle Ausbildungsstation; HIPSTA) in the Department of Surgery at University Hospital Heidelberg in comparison to a conventional surgical ward (CSW). The setting is a large tertiary care center with a focus on major oncological surgery. The endpoints were postoperative complications according to the Dindo-Clavien Classification and a set of patient-safety outcomes. In total, 232 patients treated on HIPSTA were retrospectively compared with 465 patients on a CSW. Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. No significant difference between rate or severity of overall postoperative complications was observed. In-hospital mortality did not significantly differ between groups. However, the mean length of hospital stay was significantly shorter on HIPSTA. Furthermore, HIPSTA patients had less frequent reoperations. Patient safety in surgical IPTW was not compromised in comparison to a CSW, and there were some areas where significantly better outcomes were identified.

Maximizing time from the constraining European Working Time Directive (EWTD): The Heidelberg New Working Time Model.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of the European Working Time Directive (EWTD) has greatly reduced training hours of surgical residents, which translates into 30% less surgical and clinical experience. Such a dramatic drop in attendance has serious implications such compromised quality of medical care. As the surgical department of the University of Heidelberg, our goal was to establish a model that was compliant with the EWTD while avoiding reduction in quality of patient care and surgical training. METHODS: We first performed workload analyses and performance statistics for all working areas of our department (operation theater, emergency room, specialized consultations, surgical wards and on-call duties) using personal interviews, time cards, medical documentation software as well as data of the financial- and personnel-controlling sector of our administration. Using that information, we specifically designed an EWTD-compatible work model and implemented it. RESULTS: Surgical wards and operating rooms (ORs) were not compliant with the EWTD. Between 5 pm and 8 pm, three ORs were still operating two-thirds of the time. By creating an extended work shift (7:30 am-7:30 pm), we effectively reduced the workload to less than 49% from 4 pm and 8 am, allowing the combination of an eight-hour working day with a 16-hour on call duty; thus, maximizing surgical resident training and ensuring patient continuity of care while maintaining EDTW guidelines. CONCLUSION: A precise workload analysis is the key to success. The Heidelberg New Working Time Model provides a legal model, which, by avoiding rotating work shifts, assures quality of patient care and surgical training.