O-P01 Potential Utility of Intraoperative Fluid Amylase Measurement During Pancreaticoduodenectomy

Background Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is a source of major morbidity and mortality. Early diagnosis and treatment of POPF is mandatory to improve patient outcomes, and clinical risk scores may be combined with postoperative drain fluid amylase (DFA) values to stratify patients. The aim of this study was to determine if intraoperative fluid amylase values (IFA) correlate with DFA1 and POPF. Methods In consecutive patients undergoing PD between February and November 2020, intraoperative samples of intra-abdominal fluid adjacent to the pancreatic anastomosis were taken and sent for fluid amylase measurement prior to abdominal closure. Data regarding patient demographics, postoperative DFA values, complications and mortality were prospectively collected. Results Patient Demographics: Data was obtained for 52 patients with a median alternative Fistula Risk Score (aFRS) of 9.4. Postoperative complications occurred in 20 patients (38%), including five Clavien grade 3+. There were eight POPFs and two patients died (pneumonia/sepsis). There was significant correlation between IFA and DFA1 (Pearson’s correlation: R2=0.713; p < 0.001) and DFA3 (p < 0.001), and median IFA was higher in patients with POPF than patients without (1232.5 vs. 122; p = 0.0003). IFA>260 U/l predicted POPF with sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of 88%, 75%, 39% and 97%, respectively. The incidence of POPF was 43% in high risk (high aFRS/IFA) and 0% in low risk patients (low aFRS/IFA). Complications: Conclusions Intraoperative fluid amylase closely correlated with postoperative pancreatic fistula, and may be a useful adjunct to clinical risk scores to stratify patients during pancreatico-duodenectomy, allowing targeted intervention to reduce the clinical impact of pancreatic fistula.It is possible to detect fluid amylase adjacent to the completed pancreatic anastomosis in patients undergoing PD. Presence of IFA correlates with postoperative DFA and POPF. IFA increases the accuracy of the alternate Fistula Risk Score in predicting POPF. Low risk patients with a low IFA may be suitable for a ‘no drain’ strategy, whilst patients with a high IFA may benefit from intraoperative mitigation strategies to reduce the incidence and/or severity of a postoperative pancreatic fistula.

A Blumgart-Anastomosis Based Half-Invagination Pancreaticoenterostomy With Better Applicability to Laparoscopy and Lower Incidence of Pancreatic Leakage

Background The Blumgart anastomosis has been established as one of the safest anastomoses for pancreas remnant reconstruction, with low rates of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) and postoperative complications. However, how to make laparoscopic pancreaticoenterostomy easier and safer is still a subject to be discussed. Methods Data of patients undergoing laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy from April 2014 to December 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Results 20 cases of half-invagination anastomosis (Group HI) and 26 cases of Cattell-warren anastomosis (Group CW) were included. Intraoperative blood loss, Operative time and Postoperative drainage tube placement time of Group HI was significantly less than those of Group CW. Patients of Clavien-Dindo grade III and above in Group HI was significantly less than Control Group. Group Incidence of POPF in Group HI was significantly lower than that in Group CW. No high-risk group emerged during Fistula risk score analytical phase, and the highest risk of moderate-risk group was pancreatic leakage. Respectively, incidence of pancreatic leakage in Group HI and Group CW was 7.7% and 46.67%, while incidence of Group HI was significantly lower than that in the Group CW. Conclusions The Blumgart-anastomosis based half-invagination pancreaticoenterostomy with better applicability to laparoscopy can effectively reduce the incidence of postoperative pancreatic leakage.

Revisiting the Pancreatic Fistula Risk Score: Clinical Nomogram Accurately Assesses Risk

Objectives Surgeons have created numerous iterations of the pancreatic fistula risk score (FRS) to predict risk for clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF). The multitude of often conflicting models makes it difficult for surgeons to apply data in clinical practice. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study utilizing National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data from 2015 to 2018. The study included patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. Missing data were resolved with multiple imputations. Results The study included 5975 patients; 1018 (17%) had a CR-POPF. On multivariate analysis, male sex (odds ratio (OR) 1.60 CI: 1.29-1.98 P < .001), obesity (OR 1.65 CI: 1.31-2.08 P < .001), and soft gland texture (OR 3.21 CI: 2.45-4.23 P < .001) were all associated with increased odds of a CR-POPF. Variables not associated with CR-POPF included diabetes, preoperative bilirubin, preoperative albumin, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification. On multivariate analysis, duct diameter >6 mm (OR .52 CI: .34-.77 P = .001), pancreatic adenocarcinoma pathology (OR .67 CI: .53-.84 P < .001), and neoadjuvant treatment (OR .71 CI: .51-.98 P = .042) were all associated with decreased odds of a CR-POPF. We constructed a clinically relevant nomogram from this model known as the Portland FRS. Model characteristics were superior to previously published FRS models. The area under the curve (AUC) for the Portland FRS was .72 (CI: .704-.737). In comparison, AUCs for the Alternative and Seoul FRS were .70 and .64, respectively. Conclusion Utilizing readily available clinical data, the Portland FRS can accurately predict the risk for pancreatic fistula. The nomogram may assist surgeons in patient counseling and perioperative management.

Alternative Fistula Risk Score and First Postoperative Day Drain Fluid Amylase as Predictors of Pancreatic Fistula After Pancreatoduodenectomy

Objectives: The alternative fistula risk score (aFRS) and the first postoperative day drain fluid amylase (DFA) are predictors of the occurrence of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF). No consensus has been reached on which of the scores is a better predictor; moreover, their combined predictive power remains unclear. To our knowledge, this association had not yet been studied.Methods: This study assessed the predictive effect of aFRS and/or DFA on CR-POPF in a retrospective cohort of 58 patients following PD. The Shapiro-Wilk and the Mann-Whitney tests were applied for assessing the distribution of the samples and for comparing the medians, respectively. The receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve and the confusion matrix were used to analyze the predictive models.Results: The aFRS values were not statistically different between patients in the CR-POPF and non-CR-POPF groups (Mann-Whitney U test: 59.5, p=0.12). The DFA values were statistically different between the CR-POPF and non-CR-POPF groups (Mann-Whitney U test: 27, p=0.004). The aFRS and DFA were independently less predictive for CR-POPF, compared to combined aFRS + DFA.Conclusions: The combined model involving aFRS>20% + DFA≥5,000 U/L was the most effective predictor of CR-POPF occurrence following PD.

The prognostic value of external vs internal pancreatic duct stents after pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with FRS ≥ 4: a retrospective cohort study

Background The prognostic value of external vs internal pancreatic duct stents after pancreaticoduodenectomy remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the benefits of external and internal stents using the Fistula Risk Score system with regard to the incidence of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula. Methods A total of 382 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy with duct to mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy were retrospectively enrolled from January 2015 to October 2019. The receiver operating characteristic curve was performed for subgroup analysis of the patients at different levels of risk for pancreatic fistula. Results There were no significant differences in terms of pancreatic fistula or other postoperative complications. According to the receiver operating characteristic curve threshold of 3.5, 172 patients with a Fistula Risk Score ≥ 4 and 210 patients with a Fistula Risk Score < 4 were divided into separate groups. The number of valid cases was insufficient to support the subsequent research in patients with a Fistula Risk Score < 4. In patients with a Fistula Risk Score ≥ 4, the use of an external pancreatic duct stent was significantly more effective than the use of an internal stent, especially with regard to the risk for pancreatic fistula (Grade C) (P = 0.039), at ameliorating the incidence of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (P = 0.019). Additionally, the incidence of lymphatic leakage was significantly higher in the external stent group compared with the internal stent group (P = 0.040). Conclusions Compared with internal stents, the use of an external stent could reduce the incidence of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula in patients with a Fistula Risk Score ≥ 4. More large-scale prospective clinical trials are warranted to further clarify our results.

Retrospective Comparative Analysis of POPF Using Fistula Risk Score According to Pancreaticoenterostomy Method

Background The aim of this study is to examine whether pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) or pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) is the better reconstructive method to reduce postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) according to the fistula risk. Methods An institutional database was reviewed for patients undergoing PD between January 2008 and August 2019. A total of 159 patients were stratified into 4 groups according to the Clinical Risk Score-Pancreatic Fistula. POPF according to 4 risk groups was compared between PJ and PG. Results Of the 159 patients, 82 underwent PG (51.6%) and 77 underwent PJ (48.4%) reconstruction. POPF rate was 17.1% (n = 14) in the PG group and 12.9% (n = 10) in the PJ group (P = 0.51). POPF rates were not different in intermediate, low, and negligible risks between 2 reconstructive methods. In the high-risk group (n = 47), there were 4 POPFs (22.2%) in PJ group and 9 (31.0%) in the PG group, respectively (P = 0.74). Conclusion In PD, there was no superior method of reconstruction with regard to POPF, even in high-risk glands.