Novel single-layer continuous suture of pancreaticojejunostomy for robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy.
Pancreatic fistula
Pancreaticoduodenectomy
Pancreaticojejunostomy
Robotic surgery
Journal
Journal of hepato-biliary-pancreatic sciences
ISSN: 1868-6982
Titre abrégé: J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci
Pays: Japan
ID NLM: 101528587
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2020
Feb 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
29
9
2019
medline:
16
10
2021
entrez:
29
9
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The best technique for pancreatic anastomosis after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) remains controversial, and the procedure for robotic PD (RPD) has not been previously reported. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of a novel technique of pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) for RPD. The demographics and perioperative outcomes of a consecutive series of RPD patients who underwent single-layer continuous suture (SCS) for PJ between September 2018 and November 2018 were analyzed. Thirty patients were included in the study. Twenty patients had a soft pancreas, and 15 patients had a small main pancreatic duct (MPD) (<3 mm). The mean operative time was 234.1 min, the mean duration of PJ was 14.9 min, and the median estimated blood loss was 100.0 ml. No patients required conversion to laparotomy. Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) included seven cases of Grade A and two cases of Grade B. No case of Grade C POPF occurred. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 12.3 days. No 90-day readmission or mortality was observed. Neither pancreatic texture nor MPD size affected the perioperative outcomes. Single-layer continuous suture is easy to perform and is associated with favorable clinical outcomes, regardless of the pancreatic duct size and texture.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The best technique for pancreatic anastomosis after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) remains controversial, and the procedure for robotic PD (RPD) has not been previously reported. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of a novel technique of pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) for RPD.
METHODS
METHODS
The demographics and perioperative outcomes of a consecutive series of RPD patients who underwent single-layer continuous suture (SCS) for PJ between September 2018 and November 2018 were analyzed.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Thirty patients were included in the study. Twenty patients had a soft pancreas, and 15 patients had a small main pancreatic duct (MPD) (<3 mm). The mean operative time was 234.1 min, the mean duration of PJ was 14.9 min, and the median estimated blood loss was 100.0 ml. No patients required conversion to laparotomy. Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) included seven cases of Grade A and two cases of Grade B. No case of Grade C POPF occurred. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 12.3 days. No 90-day readmission or mortality was observed. Neither pancreatic texture nor MPD size affected the perioperative outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Single-layer continuous suture is easy to perform and is associated with favorable clinical outcomes, regardless of the pancreatic duct size and texture.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
56-63Subventions
Organisme : China Postdoctoral Science Foundation Grant
ID : 2018T111144
Organisme : National Key Research and Development Program of China
ID : 2017YFC0110405
Informations de copyright
© 2019 Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery.
Références
Giulianotti PC, Sbrana F, Bianco FM, Elli EF, Shah G, Addeo P, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreatic surgery: single-surgeon experience. Surg Endosc. 2010;24:1646-57.
Winer J, Can MF, Bartlett DL, Zeh HJ, Zureikat AH. The current state of robotic-assisted pancreatic surgery. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012;9:468-76.
Giulianotti PC, Coratti A, Angelini M, Sbrana F, Cecconi S, Balestracci T, et al. Robotics in general surgery: personal experience in a large community hospital. Archives of surgery. Arch Surg. 1960;2003:777-84.
Napoli N, Kauffmann EF, Menonna F, Perrone VG, Brozzetti S, Boggi U. Indications, technique, and results of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. Updates Surg. 2016;68:295-305.
Zureikat AH, Moser AJ, Boone BA, Bartlett DL, Zenati M, Zeh HJ. 3rd: 250 robotic pancreatic resections: safety and feasibility. Ann Surg. 2013;258:554-62.
Liu R, Zhang T, Zhao ZM, Tan XL, Zhao GD, Zhang X, et al. The surgical outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy versus laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary neoplasms: a comparative study of a single center. Surg Endosc. 2017;31:2380-6.
McMillan MT, Zureikat AH, Hogg ME, Kowalsky SJ, Zeh HJ, Sprys MH, et al. A propensity score-matched analysis of robotic vs open pancreatoduodenectomy on incidence of pancreatic fistula. JAMA Surg. 2017;152:327-35.
Zureikat AH, Postlewait LM, Liu Y, Gillespie TW, Weber SM, Abbott DE, et al. A multi-institutional comparison of perioperative outcomes of robotic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 2016;264:640-9.
Kendrick ML, van Hilst J, Boggi U, de Rooij T, Walsh RM, Zeh HJ, et al. Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy. HPB (Oxford). 2017;19:215-24.
McMillan MT, Soi S, Asbun HJ, Ball CG, Bassi C, Beane JD, et al. Risk-adjusted outcomes of clinically relevant pancreatic fistula following pancreatoduodenectomy: a model for performance evaluation. Ann Surg. 2016;264:344-52.
Roberts KJ, Sutcliffe RP, Marudanayagam R, Hodson J, Isaac J, Muiesan P, et al. Scoring system to predict pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy: A UK multicenter study. Ann Surg. 2015;261:1191-7.
Hines OJ, Reber HA. Technique of pancreaticojejunostomy reconstruction after pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 2006;13:185-9.
Xiong JJ, Tan CL, Szatmary P, Huang W, Ke NW, Hu WM, et al. Meta-analysis of pancreaticogastrostomy versus pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg. 2014;101:1196-208.
Figueras J, Sabater L, Planellas P, Munoz-Forner E, Lopez-Ben S, Falgueras L, et al. Randomized clinical trial of pancreaticogastrostomy versus pancreaticojejunostomy on the rate and severity of pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg. 2013;100:1597-605.
Hirono S, Kawai M, Okada KI, Miyazawa M, Kitahata Y, Hayami S, et al. Modified Blumgart Mattress Suture Versus Conventional Interrupted Suture in Pancreaticojejunostomy During Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Randomized Controlled Trial. Ann Surg. 2019;269:243-51.
Senda Y, Shimizu Y, Natsume S, Ito S, Komori K, Abe T, et al. Randomized clinical trial of duct-to-mucosa versus invagination pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreatoduodenectomy. Br J Surg. 2018;105:48-57.
Bassi C, Dervenis C, Butturini G, Fingerhut A, Yeo C, Izbicki J, et al. Postoperative pancreatic fistula: an international study group (ISGPF) definition. Surgery. 2005;138:8-13.
Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, Vauthey JN, Dindo D, Schulick RD, et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250:187-96.
Liu Q, Gao Y, Zhao Z, Zhao G, Liu R, Lau WY. Robotic resection of benign nonadrenal retroperitoneal tumors: A consecutive case series. Int J Surg. 2018;55:188-92.
Boggi U, Signori S, De Lio N, Perrone VG, Vistoli F, Belluomini M, et al. Feasibility of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg. 2013;100:917-25.
Nguyen KT, Zureikat AH, Chalikonda S, Bartlett DL, Moser AJ, Zeh HJ. Technical aspects of robotic-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy (RAPD). J Gastrointest Surg. 2011;15:870-5.
Polanco PM, Zenati MS, Hogg ME, Shakir M, Boone BA, Bartlett DL, et al. An analysis of risk factors for pancreatic fistula after robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: outcomes from a consecutive series of standardized pancreatic reconstructions. Surg Endosc. 2016;30:1523-9.
Sugimoto M, Takahashi S, Kojima M, Kobayashi T, Gotohda N, Konishi M. In patients with a soft pancreas, a thick parenchyma, a small duct, and fatty infiltration are significant risks for pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2017;21:846-54.
Fujii T, Sugimoto H, Yamada S, Kanda M, Suenaga M, Takami H, et al. Modified Blumgart anastomosis for pancreaticojejunostomy: technical improvement in matched historical control study. J Gastrointest Surg. 2014;18:1108-15.
Grobmyer SR, Kooby D, Blumgart LH, Hochwald SN. Novel pancreaticojejunostomy with a low rate of anastomotic failure-related complications. J Am Coll Surg. 2010;210:54-9.
Kleespies A, Rentsch M, Seeliger H, Albertsmeier M, Jauch KW, Bruns CJ. Blumgart anastomosis for pancreaticojejunostomy minimizes severe complications after pancreatic head resection. Br J Surg. 2009;96:741-50.
De Pastena M, van Hilst J, de Rooij T, Busch OR, Gerhards MF, Festen S, et al. Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy with modified blumgart pancreaticojejunostomy. J Vis Exp. 2018;136. https://doi.org/10.3791/56819.
Zhang T, Zhao ZM, Gao YX, Lau WY, Liu R. The learning curve for a surgeon in robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a retrospective study in a high-volume pancreatic center. Surg Endosc. 2019;33:2927-33.
Cai Y, Luo H, Li Y, Gao P, Peng B. A novel technique of pancreaticojejunostomy for laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surg Endosc. 2019;33:1572-7.
Shao X, Xie Y, Xu Q, Sun A, Wang Z, Tian Y. A new feasible technique for polytetrafluoroethylene suture buttress-reinforced pancreaticojejunostomy (PBRP): mechanical analysis and a prospective, randomized controlled trial. J Gastrointest Surg. 2019;23:1825-33.
Boone BA, Zenati M, Hogg ME, Steve J, Moser AJ, Bartlett DL, et al. Assessment of quality outcomes for robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: identification of the learning curve. JAMA Surg. 2015;150:416-22.
Lai EC, Yang GP, Tang CN. Robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy-a comparative study. Int J Surg. 2012;10:475-9.
Chen S, Chen JZ, Zhan Q, Deng XX, Shen BY, Peng CH, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a prospective, matched, mid-term follow-up study. Surg Endosc. 2015;29:3698-711.