Fibrin sealants for the prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula following pancreatic surgery.


Journal

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews
ISSN: 1469-493X
Titre abrégé: Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100909747

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 03 2020
Historique:
entrez: 12 3 2020
pubmed: 12 3 2020
medline: 1 8 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Postoperative pancreatic fistula is one of the most frequent and potentially life-threatening complications following pancreatic resections. Fibrin sealants have been used in some centers to reduce postoperative pancreatic fistula. However, the use of fibrin sealants during pancreatic surgery is controversial. This is an update of a Cochrane Review last published in 2018. To assess the safety, effectiveness, and potential adverse effects of fibrin sealants for the prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula following pancreatic surgery. We searched trial registers and the following biomedical databases: the Cochrane Library (2019, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1946 to 13 March2019), Embase (1980 to 11 March 2019), Science Citation Index Expanded (1900 to 13 March 2019), and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) (1978 to 13 March 2019). We included all randomised controlled trials that compared fibrin sealant (fibrin glue or fibrin sealant patch) versus control (no fibrin sealant or placebo) in people undergoing pancreatic surgery. Two review authors independently identified the trials for inclusion, collected the data, and assessed the risk of bias. We performed the meta-analyses using Review Manager 5. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes (or a Peto odds ratio (OR) for very rare outcomes), and the mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We included 12 studies involving 1604 participants in the review. Application of fibrin sealants to pancreatic stump closure reinforcement after distal pancreatectomy We included seven studies involving 860 participants: 428 were randomised to the fibrin sealant group and 432 to the control group after distal pancreatectomy. Fibrin sealants may lead to little or no difference in postoperative pancreatic fistula (fibrin sealant 19.3%; control 20.1%; RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.35; 755 participants; four studies; low-quality evidence). Fibrin sealants may also lead to little or no difference in postoperative mortality (0.3% versus 0.5%; Peto OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.03; 804 participants; six studies; low-quality evidence), or overall postoperative morbidity (28.5% versus 23.2%; RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.58; 646 participants; three studies; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether fibrin sealants reduce reoperation rate (2.0% versus 3.8%; RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.71; 376 participants; two studies; very low-quality evidence) or length of hospital stay (MD 0.99 days, 95% CI -1.83 to 3.82; 371 participants; two studies; very low-quality evidence). The studies did not report serious adverse events, quality of life, or cost effectiveness. Application of fibrin sealants to pancreatic anastomosis reinforcement after pancreaticoduodenectomy We included four studies involving 393 participants: 186 were randomised to the fibrin sealant group and 207 to the control group after pancreaticoduodenectomy. We are uncertain whether fibrin sealants reduce postoperative pancreatic fistula (16.7% versus 11.7%; RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.28 to 4.69; 199 participants; two studies; very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether fibrin sealants reduce postoperative mortality (0.5% versus 2.4%; Peto OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.32; 393 participants; four studies; low-quality evidence) or length of hospital stay (MD 0.01 days, 95% CI -3.91 to 3.94; 323 participants; three studies; very low-quality evidence). There is probably little or no difference in overall postoperative morbidity (52.6% versus 50.3%; RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.24; 323 participants; three studies; moderate-quality evidence) between the groups. We are uncertain whether fibrin sealants reduce reoperation rate (5.2% versus 7.7%; RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.66; 323 participants; three studies, very low-quality evidence). The studies did not report serious adverse events, quality of life, or cost effectiveness. Application of fibrin sealants to pancreatic duct occlusion after pancreaticoduodenectomy We included two studies involving 351 participants: 188 were randomised to the fibrin sealant group and 163 to the control group after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Fibrin sealants may lead to little or no difference in postoperative mortality (8.4% versus 6.1%; Peto OR 1.41, 95% CI 0.63 to 3.13; 351 participants; two studies; low-quality evidence) or length of hospital stay (median 16 to 17 days versus 17 days; 351 participants; two studies; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether fibrin sealants reduce overall postoperative morbidity (32.0% versus 27.6%; RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.02; 351 participants; two studies; very low-quality evidence), or reoperation rate (13.6% versus 16.0%; RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.41; 351 participants; two studies; very low-quality evidence). Serious adverse events were reported in one study (169 participants; low-quality evidence): more participants developed diabetes mellitus when fibrin sealants were applied to pancreatic duct occlusion, both at three months' follow-up (33.7% fibrin sealant group versus 10.8% control group; 29 participants versus 9 participants) and 12 months' follow-up (33.7% fibrin sealant group versus 14.5% control group; 29 participants versus 12 participants). The studies did not report postoperative pancreatic fistula, quality of life, or cost effectiveness. Based on the current available evidence, fibrin sealants may have little or no effect on postoperative pancreatic fistula in people undergoing distal pancreatectomy. The effects of fibrin sealants on the prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula are uncertain in people undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Postoperative pancreatic fistula is one of the most frequent and potentially life-threatening complications following pancreatic resections. Fibrin sealants have been used in some centers to reduce postoperative pancreatic fistula. However, the use of fibrin sealants during pancreatic surgery is controversial. This is an update of a Cochrane Review last published in 2018.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the safety, effectiveness, and potential adverse effects of fibrin sealants for the prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula following pancreatic surgery.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched trial registers and the following biomedical databases: the Cochrane Library (2019, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1946 to 13 March2019), Embase (1980 to 11 March 2019), Science Citation Index Expanded (1900 to 13 March 2019), and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) (1978 to 13 March 2019).
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials that compared fibrin sealant (fibrin glue or fibrin sealant patch) versus control (no fibrin sealant or placebo) in people undergoing pancreatic surgery.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently identified the trials for inclusion, collected the data, and assessed the risk of bias. We performed the meta-analyses using Review Manager 5. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes (or a Peto odds ratio (OR) for very rare outcomes), and the mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
MAIN RESULTS
We included 12 studies involving 1604 participants in the review. Application of fibrin sealants to pancreatic stump closure reinforcement after distal pancreatectomy We included seven studies involving 860 participants: 428 were randomised to the fibrin sealant group and 432 to the control group after distal pancreatectomy. Fibrin sealants may lead to little or no difference in postoperative pancreatic fistula (fibrin sealant 19.3%; control 20.1%; RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.35; 755 participants; four studies; low-quality evidence). Fibrin sealants may also lead to little or no difference in postoperative mortality (0.3% versus 0.5%; Peto OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.03; 804 participants; six studies; low-quality evidence), or overall postoperative morbidity (28.5% versus 23.2%; RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.58; 646 participants; three studies; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether fibrin sealants reduce reoperation rate (2.0% versus 3.8%; RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.71; 376 participants; two studies; very low-quality evidence) or length of hospital stay (MD 0.99 days, 95% CI -1.83 to 3.82; 371 participants; two studies; very low-quality evidence). The studies did not report serious adverse events, quality of life, or cost effectiveness. Application of fibrin sealants to pancreatic anastomosis reinforcement after pancreaticoduodenectomy We included four studies involving 393 participants: 186 were randomised to the fibrin sealant group and 207 to the control group after pancreaticoduodenectomy. We are uncertain whether fibrin sealants reduce postoperative pancreatic fistula (16.7% versus 11.7%; RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.28 to 4.69; 199 participants; two studies; very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether fibrin sealants reduce postoperative mortality (0.5% versus 2.4%; Peto OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.32; 393 participants; four studies; low-quality evidence) or length of hospital stay (MD 0.01 days, 95% CI -3.91 to 3.94; 323 participants; three studies; very low-quality evidence). There is probably little or no difference in overall postoperative morbidity (52.6% versus 50.3%; RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.24; 323 participants; three studies; moderate-quality evidence) between the groups. We are uncertain whether fibrin sealants reduce reoperation rate (5.2% versus 7.7%; RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.66; 323 participants; three studies, very low-quality evidence). The studies did not report serious adverse events, quality of life, or cost effectiveness. Application of fibrin sealants to pancreatic duct occlusion after pancreaticoduodenectomy We included two studies involving 351 participants: 188 were randomised to the fibrin sealant group and 163 to the control group after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Fibrin sealants may lead to little or no difference in postoperative mortality (8.4% versus 6.1%; Peto OR 1.41, 95% CI 0.63 to 3.13; 351 participants; two studies; low-quality evidence) or length of hospital stay (median 16 to 17 days versus 17 days; 351 participants; two studies; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether fibrin sealants reduce overall postoperative morbidity (32.0% versus 27.6%; RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.02; 351 participants; two studies; very low-quality evidence), or reoperation rate (13.6% versus 16.0%; RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.41; 351 participants; two studies; very low-quality evidence). Serious adverse events were reported in one study (169 participants; low-quality evidence): more participants developed diabetes mellitus when fibrin sealants were applied to pancreatic duct occlusion, both at three months' follow-up (33.7% fibrin sealant group versus 10.8% control group; 29 participants versus 9 participants) and 12 months' follow-up (33.7% fibrin sealant group versus 14.5% control group; 29 participants versus 12 participants). The studies did not report postoperative pancreatic fistula, quality of life, or cost effectiveness.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based on the current available evidence, fibrin sealants may have little or no effect on postoperative pancreatic fistula in people undergoing distal pancreatectomy. The effects of fibrin sealants on the prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula are uncertain in people undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32157697
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009621.pub4
pmc: PMC7064369
doi:

Substances chimiques

Fibrin Tissue Adhesive 0
Tissue Adhesives 0

Types de publication

Journal Article Meta-Analysis Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

CD009621

Commentaires et corrections

Type : UpdateOf
Type : UpdateIn

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Références

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jun 23;6:CD009621
pubmed: 29934987
Ital J Gastroenterol. 1994 Jul-Aug;26(6):283-6
pubmed: 7949264
World J Surg. 2016 Nov;40(11):2771-2781
pubmed: 27343014
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014;29(7):1342
pubmed: 25040619
Ann Surg. 2008 Sep;248(3):459-67
pubmed: 18791366
BMJ. 2001 Mar 17;322(7287):660-3
pubmed: 11250854
J Gastrointest Surg. 2009 Jul;13(7):1184-6
pubmed: 19399562
J Gastrointest Surg. 2013 Jan;17(1):102-9
pubmed: 22798186
Acta Oncol. 2016 Sep - Oct;55(9-10):1158-1160
pubmed: 27551890
J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2016 Feb;23(2):110-7
pubmed: 26681272
Ann Surg. 2016 Aug;264(2):344-52
pubmed: 26727086
J Gastrointest Surg. 2009 Jul;13(7):1396-8; author reply 1399-400
pubmed: 19381733
Ann Surg. 2003 Jan;237(1):57-65
pubmed: 12496531
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097
pubmed: 19621072
Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2006 Apr;20(2):197-209
pubmed: 16549324
J Gastrointest Surg. 2011 Sep;15(9):1625-9
pubmed: 21671113
J Am Coll Surg. 2010 Jul;211(1):114-25
pubmed: 20610257
Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2008;22(1):45-63
pubmed: 18206812
Surgery. 2017 Mar;161(3):584-591
pubmed: 28040257
J Gastrointest Surg. 2004 Nov;8(7):766-72; discussion 772-4
pubmed: 15531229
Am J Surg. 1960 Jun;99:898-903
pubmed: 13808137
Br J Surg. 2005 Sep;92(9):1059-67
pubmed: 16044410
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Sep 12;9:CD012257
pubmed: 28898386
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Feb 15;2:CD009621
pubmed: 26876721
Surg Innov. 2015 Dec;22(6):601-5
pubmed: 25857807
World J Surg. 2010 Apr;34(4):632-4
pubmed: 19820991
Br J Surg. 1987 May;74(5):392-4
pubmed: 3594133
J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 2005;12(4):283-5
pubmed: 16133693
Expert Opin Biol Ther. 2009 Jul;9(7):897-907
pubmed: 19527109
Pancreas. 2008 Apr;36(3):261-6
pubmed: 18362839
HPB (Oxford). 2015 Nov;17(11):1033-9
pubmed: 26292846
Am J Otolaryngol. 2001 Jul-Aug;22(4):230-5
pubmed: 11464318
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2016 Mar;401(2):151-9
pubmed: 26897031
Surgery. 2005 Jul;138(1):8-13
pubmed: 16003309
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 May 06;(5):CD008914
pubmed: 27153248
Arch Surg. 1995 Sep;130(9):952-5
pubmed: 7661678
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003;(2):CD004171
pubmed: 12804501
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Apr 30;(4):CD008370
pubmed: 23633353
Am Surg. 2011 Mar;77(3):257-69
pubmed: 21375833
Am J Surg. 2015 Oct;210(4):739-48
pubmed: 26160763
Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am. 2002 May;10(2):147-54
pubmed: 15062317
HPB (Oxford). 2013 Aug;15(8):561-6
pubmed: 23458447
HPB (Oxford). 2014 Jan;16(1):3-11
pubmed: 23461684
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Nov 11;(11):CD006053
pubmed: 25387229
World J Surg. 1998 May;22(5):494-8
pubmed: 9564295
Ann Surg. 2007 Feb;245(2):222-31
pubmed: 17245175
Br J Surg. 2018 Jun;105(7):811-819
pubmed: 29664999
Ann Surg. 2009 Aug;250(2):187-96
pubmed: 19638912
Surgeon. 2011 Aug;9(4):211-7
pubmed: 21672661
Gastroenterol Clin Biol. 2006 Jun-Jul;30(6-7):838-44
pubmed: 16885867
Ann Surg. 2012 Nov;256(5):853-9; discussion 859-60
pubmed: 23095631
J Gastrointest Surg. 2010 May;14(5):884-90
pubmed: 20177808
Minerva Chir. 2015 Jun;70(3):175-80
pubmed: 25960031
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2004 Sep;19(9):998-1004
pubmed: 15304116
Dig Surg. 2009;26(1):7-14
pubmed: 19145082
Lancet. 2011 Apr 2;377(9772):1184-97
pubmed: 21397320
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jun 21;6:CD010583
pubmed: 29928755
Ann Surg. 2002 Oct;236(4):422-8; discussion 428
pubmed: 12368670
BMJ. 2003 Sep 6;327(7414):557-60
pubmed: 12958120

Auteurs

Yilei Deng (Y)

The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, No. 1, Jianshe East Road, Zhengzhou, Henan Province, China, 450000.

Sirong He (S)

Chongqing Medical University, Department of Immunology, College of Basic Medicine, No. 1 Yixue Road, Chongqing, China, 450000.

Yao Cheng (Y)

The Second Affiliated Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, No. 74, Lin Jiang Road, Chongqing, Chongqing, China, 400010.

Nansheng Cheng (N)

West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Department of Bile Duct Surgery, No. 37, Guo Xue Xiang, Chengdu, Sichuan, China, 610041.

Jianping Gong (J)

The Second Affiliated Hospital, Chongqing Medical University, Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, No. 74, Lin Jiang Road, Chongqing, Chongqing, China, 400010.

Junhua Gong (J)

First Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Organ Transplant Center, No. 295, Xi Chang Road, Kunming, Yunnan, China, 650032.

Zhong Zeng (Z)

First Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Organ Transplant Center, No. 295, Xi Chang Road, Kunming, Yunnan, China, 650032.

Longshuan Zhao (L)

The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, No. 1, Jianshe East Road, Zhengzhou, Henan Province, China, 450000.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH