Browse by author
Lookup NU author(s): Gourab Sen, Jeremy French, Steven White, Professor Sanjay PandanaboyanaORCiD
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND).
© 2019. Background: Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains a major cause of morbidity following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). This network meta-analysis (NMA) compared techniques of pancreatic anastomosis following PD to determine the technique with the best outcome profile. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed on the Scopus, EMBASE, Medline and Cochrane databases to identify RCTs employing the international study group of pancreatic fistula (ISGPF) definition of POPF. The primary outcome was clinically relevant POPF. Results: Five techniques of pancreatic anastomosis following PD were directly compared in 15 RCTs comprising 2428 patients. Panreatojejunostomy (PJ) end-to-side invagination vs. PJ end-to-side duct-to-mucosa was the most frequent comparison (n = 7). Overall, 971 patients underwent PJ end-to-side duct-to-mucosa, 791 patients PJ end-to-side invagination, 505 patients pancreatogastrostomy (PG) end-to-side invagination, 98 patients PG end-to-side duct-to-mucosa, and 63 patients PJ end-to-side single layer. PG duct-to-mucosa was associated with the lowest rates of clinically relevant POPF, delayed gastric emptying, intra-abdominal abscess, all postoperative morbidity and postoperative mortality, the shortest operative time and postoperative hospital stay and the lowest volume of intra-operative blood loss. Conclusion: Duct-to-mucosa pancreaticogastrostomy was associated with the lowest rates of clinically relevant POPF and had the best outcome profile among all techniques of pancreatico-anastomosis following PD.
Author(s): Ratnayake CBB, Wells CI, Kamarajah SK, Loveday B, Sen G, French JJ, White S, Pandanaboyana S
Publication type: Review
Publication status: Published
Journal: International Journal of Surgery
Year: 2020
Volume: 73
Pages: 72-77
Print publication date: 01/01/2020
Online publication date: 13/12/2019
Acceptance date: 09/12/2019
ISSN (print): 1743-9191
ISSN (electronic): 1743-9159
Publisher: Elsevier Ltd
URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2019.12.003
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2019.12.003
