Optimal management of peripancreatic fluid collection with postoperative pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy: Significance of computed tomography values for predicting fluid infection.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
21
07
2021
accepted:
23
10
2021
entrez:
9
11
2021
pubmed:
10
11
2021
medline:
30
12
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Peripancreatic fluid collections have been observed in most patients with postoperative pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy; however, optimal management remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the management and outcomes of patients with postoperative pancreatic fistula and verify the significance of computed tomography values for predicting peripancreatic fluid infections after distal pancreatectomy. We retrospectively investigated 259 consecutive patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy. Grade B postoperative pancreatic fistula patients were divided into two subgroups (B-antibiotics group and B-intervention group) and outcomes were compared. Predictive factor analysis of peripancreatic fluid infection was performed. Clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistulas developed in 88 (34.0%) patients. The duration of hospitalization was significantly longer in the B-intervention (n = 54) group than in the B-antibiotics group (n = 31; 41 vs. 17 days, p < 0.001). Computed tomography values of the infected peripancreatic fluid collections were significantly higher than those of the non-infected peripancreatic fluid collections (26.3 vs. 16.1 Hounsfield units, respectively; p < 0.001). The outcomes of the patients with grade B postoperative pancreatic fistulas who received therapeutic antibiotics only were considerably better than those who underwent interventions. Computed tomography values may be useful in predicting peripancreatic fluid collection infection after distal pancreatectomy.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34752498
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0259701
pii: PONE-D-21-23713
pmc: PMC8577730
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0259701Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2020 Dec;27(12):1011-1018
pubmed: 33052623
Surgery. 2017 Mar;161(3):584-591
pubmed: 28040257
J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2015 Oct;22(10):731-6
pubmed: 26087943
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2012 Jun;397(5):727-36
pubmed: 22398436
HPB (Oxford). 2018 Nov;20(11):1051-1061
pubmed: 29887259
Asian J Surg. 2020 Jan;43(1):227-233
pubmed: 30982560
Ann Surg. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-13
pubmed: 15273542
Ann Surg. 2019 Jun;269(6):1146-1153
pubmed: 31082914
J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2013 Jun;20(5):538-44
pubmed: 23430057
Br J Surg. 2000 May;87(5):536-44
pubmed: 10792307
Br J Surg. 2017 Apr;104(5):536-543
pubmed: 28112814
Surg Endosc. 2019 Oct;33(10):3314-3324
pubmed: 30535935
J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2017 May;24(5):252-261
pubmed: 28258614
Pancreatology. 2019 Apr;19(3):449-455
pubmed: 30890308
Ann Surg. 2016 May;263(5):961-6
pubmed: 26135691
HPB (Oxford). 2016 Jan;18(1):35-40
pubmed: 26776849
Nagoya J Med Sci. 2015 Nov;77(4):563-9
pubmed: 26663935
J Gastrointest Surg. 2019 Dec;23(12):2449-2458
pubmed: 30815778
Surgery. 2018 Dec;164(6):1185-1190
pubmed: 30217397
Ann Surg. 2009 Aug;250(2):187-96
pubmed: 19638912
Br J Surg. 2021 Apr 5;108(3):265-270
pubmed: 33793753
World J Surg. 2019 Aug;43(8):2069-2076
pubmed: 31004209
World J Surg. 2016 May;40(5):1226-35
pubmed: 26768889
Ann Surg Treat Res. 2016 Nov;91(5):247-253
pubmed: 27847797
J Gastrointest Surg. 2016 Aug;20(8):1482-92
pubmed: 27206502
Ann Surg. 2016 Jul;264(1):180-7
pubmed: 26473652
Invest Radiol. 2015 Jan;50(1):17-23
pubmed: 25198832
Ann Surg. 2012 Jun;255(6):1048-59
pubmed: 22511003