Safety of Selective Operative Drainage After Pancreatic Resection: A Retrospective Analysis of 2,607 Patients.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether selective omission of operative drains after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) and distal pancreatectomy (DP) is associated with adverse perioperative outcomes. BACKGROUND: The routine use of operative drains after pancreatectomy is widely practiced; however, prospective randomized clinical trials and retrospective analyses have shown mixed results. METHODS: Patients who underwent PD or DP between November 2009 and May 2021 were reviewed and stratified by operative drain placement. Patient demographics, morbidity, the need for additional procedures, and mortality were compared between patients who did or did not develop a clinically relevant post-operative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF). RESULTS: In total, 1,855 PD and 752 DP cases were analyzed. Among PD patients with a CR-POPF (N=259, 14%), 160 (62%) had an operative drain placed, of whom 141 (88%) required at least 1 additional procedure. Within this subgroup, grade ≥ 4 complications (7.5% vs. 11.1%, P=0.37), 90-day mortality (3.8% vs. 6.1%, P=0.54), length of stay (LOS) (median 12 vs. 13 d, P=0.19) and readmission rates (63.1% vs. 54.6%, P=0.19) were similar between drained and non-drained patients. Of note, drained PD patients without a CR-POPF had a longer hospital stay (8 vs. 7 d, respectively, P=0.004) and more thromboembolic events (2.4% vs. 1.1%, respectively, P=0.04) Among DP patients with a CR-POPF (n=129), 44 had an operative drain, with 37 (84%) requiring an additional procedure. Within this subgroup, grade ≥ 4 complications (4.6% vs. 5.9%, P>0.95), 90-day mortality (0%), LOS (median 7 d for both, P=0.88) and readmission rates (72.7% vs. 80%, P=0.38) were similar in drained and non-drained patients. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that selective omission of operative drains does not compromise perioperative outcomes, as initially reported in our prospective randomized trial.