Postoperative Serum Hyperamylasemia Adds Sequential Value to the Fistula Risk Score in Predicting Pancreatic Fistula after Pancreatoduodenectomy.


Journal

Annals of surgery
ISSN: 1528-1140
Titre abrégé: Ann Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0372354

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 08 2023
Historique:
medline: 12 7 2023
pubmed: 26 7 2022
entrez: 25 7 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To evaluate whether postoperative serum hyperamylasemia (POH), with drain fluid amylase (DFA) and C-reactive protein (CRP), improves the Fistula Risk Score (FRS) accuracy in assessing the risk of a postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). The FRS predicts POPF occurrence using intraoperative predictors with good accuracy but intrinsic limits. Outcomes of patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomies between 2016 and 2021 were evaluated across FRS-risk zones and POH occurrence. POH consists of serum amylase activity greater than the upper limit of normal (52 U/l), persisting within the first 48 hours postoperatively (postoperative day -POD- 1 and 2). Out of 905 pancreaticoduodenectomies, some FRS elements, namely soft pancreatic texture (odds ratio (OR) 11.6), pancreatic duct diameter (OR 0.80), high-risk pathologic diagnosis (OR 1.54), but not higher blood loss (OR 0.99), were associated with POH. POH was an independent predictor of POPF, which occurred in 46.8% of POH cases ( P <0.001). Once POH occurs, POPF incidence rises from 3.8% to 42.9%, 22.9% to 41.7%, and 48.9% to 59.2% in patients intraoperatively classified at low, moderate and high FRS risk, respectively. The predictive ability of multivariable models adding POD 1 drain fluid amylase, POD 1-2 POH and POD 3 C-reactive protein to the FRS showed progressively and significantly higher accuracy (AUC FRS=0.82, AUC FRS-DFA=0.85, AUC FRS-DFA-POH=0.87, AUC FRS-DFA-POH-CRP=0.90, DeLong always P <0.05). POPF risk assessment should follow a dynamic process. The stepwise retrieval of early, postoperative biological markers improves clinical risk stratification by increasing the granularity of POPF risk estimates and affords a possible therapeutic window before the actual morbidity of POPF occurs.

Sections du résumé

OBJECTIVE
To evaluate whether postoperative serum hyperamylasemia (POH), with drain fluid amylase (DFA) and C-reactive protein (CRP), improves the Fistula Risk Score (FRS) accuracy in assessing the risk of a postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF).
SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA
The FRS predicts POPF occurrence using intraoperative predictors with good accuracy but intrinsic limits.
METHODS
Outcomes of patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomies between 2016 and 2021 were evaluated across FRS-risk zones and POH occurrence. POH consists of serum amylase activity greater than the upper limit of normal (52 U/l), persisting within the first 48 hours postoperatively (postoperative day -POD- 1 and 2).
RESULTS
Out of 905 pancreaticoduodenectomies, some FRS elements, namely soft pancreatic texture (odds ratio (OR) 11.6), pancreatic duct diameter (OR 0.80), high-risk pathologic diagnosis (OR 1.54), but not higher blood loss (OR 0.99), were associated with POH. POH was an independent predictor of POPF, which occurred in 46.8% of POH cases ( P <0.001). Once POH occurs, POPF incidence rises from 3.8% to 42.9%, 22.9% to 41.7%, and 48.9% to 59.2% in patients intraoperatively classified at low, moderate and high FRS risk, respectively. The predictive ability of multivariable models adding POD 1 drain fluid amylase, POD 1-2 POH and POD 3 C-reactive protein to the FRS showed progressively and significantly higher accuracy (AUC FRS=0.82, AUC FRS-DFA=0.85, AUC FRS-DFA-POH=0.87, AUC FRS-DFA-POH-CRP=0.90, DeLong always P <0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
POPF risk assessment should follow a dynamic process. The stepwise retrieval of early, postoperative biological markers improves clinical risk stratification by increasing the granularity of POPF risk estimates and affords a possible therapeutic window before the actual morbidity of POPF occurs.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35876366
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000005629
pii: 00000658-202308000-00036
doi:

Substances chimiques

C-Reactive Protein 9007-41-4
Amylases EC 3.2.1.-

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e293-e301

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Références

Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C, et al. The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 years after. Surgery. 2017;161:584–591.
Pulvirenti A, Marchegiani G, Pea A, et al. Clinical implications of the 2016 International Study Group on pancreatic surgery definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula on 775 consecutive pancreatic resections. Ann Surg. 2018;268:1069–1075.
Callery MP, Pratt WB, Kent TS, et al. A prospectively validated clinical risk score accurately predicts pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;216:1–14.
Mungroop TH, van Rijssen LB, van Klaveren D, et al. Alternative fistula risk score for pancreatoduodenectomy (a-FRS): design and international external validation. Ann Surg. 2019;269:937–943.
Mungroop TH, Klompmaker S, Wellner UF, et al. Updated alternative fistula risk score (ua-FRS) to include minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy: pan-european validation. Ann Surg. 2021;273:334–340.
Schuh F, Mihaljevic AL, Probst P, et al. A simple classification of pancreatic duct size and texture predicts postoperative pancreatic fistula: a classification of the international study group of pancreatic surgery (ISGPS). Ann Surg. 2023;277:e597–e608.
Trudeau MT, Casciani F, Ecker BL, et al. The fistula risk score catalog: toward precision medicine for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 2022;275:e463–e472.
Andrianello S, Marchegiani G, Balduzzi A, et al. Pros and pitfalls of externalized trans-anastomotic stent as a mitigation strategy of POPF: a prospective risk-stratified observational series. HPB (Oxford). 2021;23:1046–1053.
Gong J, He S, Cheng Y, et al. Fibrin sealants for the prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula following pancreatic surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;6:CD009621.
Shrikhande SV, Sivasanker M, Vollmer CM, et al. Pancreatic anastomosis after pancreatoduodenectomy: A position statement by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS). Surgery. 2017;161:1221–1234.
PARANOIA Study Group, Writing committee, Pande R, et al. External validation of postoperative pancreatic fistula prediction scores in pancreatoduodenectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. HPB (Oxford). 2022;24:287–298.
Ecker BL, McMillan MT, Maggino L, et al. Taking theory to practice: quality improvement for pancreaticoduodenectomy and development and integration of the fistula risk score. J Am Coll Surg. 2018;227:430–438.e1.
Cloyd JM, Kastenberg ZJ, Visser BC, et al. Postoperative serum amylase predicts pancreatic fistula formation following pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2014;18:348–353.
Partelli S, Pecorelli N, Muffatti F, et al. Early postoperative prediction of clinically relevant pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy: usefulness of c-reactive protein. HPB (Oxford). 2017;19:580–586.
Molinari E, Bassi C, Salvia R, et al. Amylase value in drains after pancreatic resection as predictive factor of postoperative pancreatic fistula: results of a prospective study in 137 patients. Ann Surg. 2007;246:281–287.
Hiyoshi M, Chijiiwa K, Fujii Y, et al. Usefulness of drain amylase, serum C-reactive protein levels and body temperature to predict postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. World J Surg. 2013;37:2436–2442.
Ansorge C, Nordin JZ, Lundell L, et al. Diagnostic value of abdominal drainage in individual risk assessment of pancreatic fistula following pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg. 2014;101:100–108.
Zureikat AH, Casciani F, Ahmad S, et al. Kinetics of postoperative drain fluid amylase values after pancreatoduodenectomy: new insights to dynamic, data-driven drain management. Surgery. 2021;170:639–641.
Jin S, Shi X-J, Wang S-Y, et al. Drainage fluid and serum amylase levels accurately predict development of postoperative pancreatic fistula. World J Gastroenterol. 2017;23:6357–6364.
Marchegiani G, Barreto SG, Bannone E, et al. Postpancreatectomy acute pancreatitis (PPAP): definition and grading from the international study group for pancreatic surgery (ISGPS. Ann Surg. 2022;275:663–672.
Bannone E, Andrianello S, Marchegiani G, et al. Postoperative hyperamylasemia (POH) and acute pancreatitis after pancreatoduodenectomy (POAP): state of the art and systematic review. Surgery. 2021;169:377–387.
Laukkarinen J. Commentary on: postoperative acute pancreatitis. Surgery. 2021;169:742–743.
Shrikhande SV. Invited commentary: evolving landscape of postoperative hyperamylasemia, postoperative acute pancreatitis, and postoperative pancreatic fistula: Time for a unifying definition. Surgery. 2021;169:740–741.
Bassi C, Falconi M, Molinari E, et al. Reconstruction by pancreaticojejunostomy versus pancreaticogastrostomy following pancreatectomy: results of a comparative study. Ann Surg. 2005;242:767–771; discussion 771-773.
Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Giuliani T, et al. Pancreatoduodenectomy at the verona pancreas institute: the evolution of indications, surgical techniques and outcomes: a retrospective analysis of 3000 consecutive cases. Ann Surg. 2022;276:1029–1038.
Salvia R, Marchegiani G, Andrianello S, et al. Redefining the role of drain amylase value for a risk-based drain management after pancreaticoduodenectomy: early drain removal still is beneficial. J Gastrointest Surg. 2021;25:1461–1470.
McMillan MT, Malleo G, Bassi C, et al. Drain management after pancreatoduodenectomy: reappraisal of a prospective randomized trial using risk stratification. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;221:798–809.
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien P-A. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205–213.
Wente MN, Veit JA, Bassi C, et al. Postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH)-An International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definition. Surgery. 2007;142:20–25.
Wente MN, Bassi C, Dervenis C, et al. Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after pancreatic surgery: a suggested definition by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS). Surgery. 2007;142:761–768.
Besselink MG, van Rijssen LB, Bassi C, et al. Definition and classification of chyle leak after pancreatic operation: a consensus statement by the International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery. Surgery. 2017;161:365–372.
Borchardt RA, Tzizik D. Update on surgical site infections: the new CDC guidelines. JAAPA. 2018;31:52–54.
Hoffman JIE Hoffman JIE. Chapter 33 - Logistic Regression. Basic Biostatistics for Medical and Biomedical Practitioners, Second Edition; 2019:581–589.
Perri G, Marchegiani G, Partelli S, et al. Preoperative risk stratification of postoperative pancreatic fistula: A risk-tree predictive model for pancreatoduodenectomy. Surgery. 2021;170:1596–1601.
Grendar J, Jutric Z, Leal JN, et al. Validation of Fistula Risk Score calculator in diverse North American HPB practices. HPB (Oxford). 2017;19:508–514.
Shubert CR, Wagie AE, Farnell MB, et al. Clinical risk score to predict pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy: independent external validation for open and laparoscopic approaches. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;221:689–698.
Bannone E, Marchegiani G, Balduzzi A, et al. Early and sustained elevation in serum pancreatic amylase activity: a novel predictor of morbidity after pancreatic surgery. Ann Surg. 2023;277:e126–e135.
Chen CB, McCall NS, Pucci MJ, et al. The combination of pancreas texture and postoperative serum amylase in predicting pancreatic fistula risk. Am Surg. 2018;84:889–896.
Wüster C, Shi H, Kühlbrey CM, et al. Pancreatic inflammation and proenzyme activation are associated with clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistulas after pancreas resection. Ann Surg. 2020;272:863–870.
Nahm CB, Brown KM, Townend PJ, et al. Acinar cell density at the pancreatic resection margin is associated with post-pancreatectomy pancreatitis and the development of postoperative pancreatic fistula. HPB (Oxford). 2018;20:432–440.
Ansorge C, Regner S, Segersvärd R, et al. Early intraperitoneal metabolic changes and protease activation as indicators of pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg. 2012;99:104–111.
Winter JM, Cameron JL, Yeo CJ, et al. Biochemical markers predict morbidity and mortality after pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;204:1029–1036; discussion 1037-1038.
Søreide K, Healey AJ, Mole DJ, et al. Pre-, peri- and postoperative factors for the development of pancreatic fistula after pancreatic surgery. HPB. 2019;21:1621–1631.
Casciani F, Trudeau MT, Vollmer CM. Of fistula and football. Ann Surg. 2021;273:e142–e145..
Seykora TF, Maggino L, Malleo G, et al. Evolving the paradigm of early drain removal following pancreatoduodenectomy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2019;23:135–144.
Lee PJ, Papachristou GI. New insights into acute pancreatitis. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019;16:479–496.
Lassen K, Coolsen MME, Slim K, et al. Guidelines for perioperative care for pancreaticoduodenectomy: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society recommendations. Clin Nutr. 2012;31:817–830.
Zaghal A, Tamim H, Habib S, et al. Drain or no drain following pancreaticoduodenectomy: the unsolved dilemma. Scand J Surg. 2020;109:228–237.
Pausch TM, Mitzscherling C, Abbasi S, et al. SmartPAN: a novel polysaccharide-microsphere-based surgical indicator of pancreatic leakage. J Biomater Appl. 2020;35:123–134.
Doussot A, Decrock M, Calame P, et al. Fluorescence-based pancreas stump perfusion is associated with postoperative acute pancreatitis after pancreatoduodenectomy a prospective cohort study. Pancreatology. 2021;21:1023–1029.

Auteurs

Elisa Bannone (E)

Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery-The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.

Giovanni Marchegiani (G)

Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery-The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.

Charles Vollmer (C)

Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA.

Giampaolo Perri (G)

Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery-The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.

Giuseppa Procida (G)

Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery-The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.

Gaetano Corvino (G)

Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery-The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.

Sara Peressotti (S)

Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery-The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.

Pier Giuseppe Vacca (PG)

Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery-The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.

Roberto Salvia (R)

Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery-The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.

Claudio Bassi (C)

Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery-The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy.

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