Post-Pancreatoduodenectomy Outcomes and Epidural Analgesia: A 5-Year Single Institution Experience

Introduction Optimal pain control post-pancreatoduodenectomy is a challenge. Epidural analgesia (EDA) is increasingly utilized despite inherent risks and unclear effects on outcomes. Methods All pancreatoduodenectomies (PD) performed from 1/2013-12/2017 were included. Clinical parameters were obtained from retrospective review of a prospective clinical database, the ACS NSQIP prospective institutional database and medical record review. Chi-Square/Fisher’s Exact and Independent-Samples t-Tests were used for univariable analyses; multivariable regression (MVR) was performed. Results 671 consecutive PD from a single institution were included (429 EDA, 242 non-EDA). On univariable analysis, EDA patients experienced significantly less wound disruption (0.2% vs. 2.1%), unplanned intubation (3.0% vs. 7.9%), pulmonary embolism (0.5% vs. 2.5%), mechanical-ventilation >48hrs (2.1% vs. 7.9%), septic shock (2.6% vs. 5.8%), and lower pain scores. On MVR accounting for baseline group differences (gender, hypertension, pre-operative transfusion, labs, approach, pancreatic duct size), EDA was associated with less superficial wound infections (OR 0.34; CI 0.14-0.83; P=0.017), unplanned intubations (OR 0.36; CI 0.14-0.88; P=0.024), mechanical ventilation >48 hrs (OR 0.22; CI 0.08-0.62; P=0.004), and septic shock (OR 0.39; CI 0.15-1.00; P=0.050). EDA improved pain scores post-PD days 1-3 (P<0.001). No differences were seen in cardiac or renal complications; pancreatic fistula (B+C) or delayed gastric emptying; 30/90-day mortality; length of stay, readmission, discharge destination, or unplanned reoperation. Conclusion Based on the largest single institution series published to date, our data support the use of EDA for optimization of pain control. More importantly, our data document that EDA significantly improved infectious and pulmonary complications

Is American College of Surgeons NSQIP organ space infection a surrogate for pancreatic fistula?

BACKGROUND: In the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP), pancreatic fistula has not been monitored, although organ space infection (OSI) data are collected. Therefore, the purpose of this analysis was to determine the relationship between ACS NSQIP organ space infection and pancreatic fistulas. STUDY DESIGN: From 2007 to 2011, 976 pancreatic resection patients were monitored via ACS NSQIP at our institution. From this database, 250 patients were randomly chosen for further analysis. Four patients were excluded because they underwent total pancreatectomy. Data on OSI were gathered prospectively. Data on pancreatic fistulas and other intra-abdominal complications were determined retrospectively. RESULTS: Organ space infections (OSIs) were documented in 22 patients (8.9%). Grades B (n = 26) and C (n = 5) pancreatic fistulas occurred in 31 patients (12.4%); grade A fistulas were observed in 38 patients (15.2%). Bile leaks and gastrointestinal (GI) anastomotic leaks each developed in 5 (2.0%) patients. Only 17 of 31 grade B and C pancreatic fistulas (55%), and none of 38 grade A fistulas were classified as OSIs in ACS NSQIP. In addition, only 2 of 5 bile leaks (40%) and 2 of 5 GI anastomotic leaks (40%) were OSIs. Moreover, 3 OSIs were due to bacterial peritonitis, a chyle leak, and an ischemic bowel. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests that the sensitivity (55%) and specificity (45%) of organ space infection (OSI) in ACS NSQIP are too low for OSI to be a surrogate for grade B and C pancreatic fistulas. We concluded that procedure-specific variables will be required for ACS NSQIP to improve outcomes after pancreatectomy

Factors associated with delayed gastric emptying after pancreaticoduodenectomy

AbstractBackgroundThe factors associated with delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after a pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) are not definitively known.MethodsFrom November 2011 through to May 2012, data were prospectively collected on 711 patients undergoing a pancreaticoduodenectomy or total pancreatectomy as part of the American College of Surgeons‐National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Pancreatectomy Demonstration Project. Bivariate and multivariate models were employed to determine the factors that predicted DGE.ResultsIn the 711 patients, the overall rate of DGE was 20.1%. In a bivariate analysis, intra‐operative factors such as pylorus‐preservation (47.1% versus 43.7%, P = 0.40), intra‐operative drain placement (85.5%, versus 85.1%, P = 0.91) and an antecolic compared with a retrocolic gastrojejunostomy (60.1% versus 65.1%, P = 0.26) were not different between the DGE and no DGE groups. Pancreatic fistula formation (31.2% versus 10.1%), post‐operative sepsis (21.7% versus 7.0%), organ space surgical site infection (SSI) (23.9% versus 7.9%), need for percutaneous drainage (23.0% versus 10.6%) and reoperation (10.6% versus 3.1%) were higher in patients with DGE (P < 0.0001). In a multivariable model, only pancreatic fistula, post‐operative sepsis and reoperation were independently associated with DGE.DiscussionIn this multicentre study, only post‐operative complications were associated with DGE. Neither pylorus preservation nor route of enteric reconstruction (antecolic versus retrocolic) was associated with delayed gastric emptying

Post-Pancreatoduodenectomy Outcomes and Epidural Analgesia: A 5-Year Single Institution Experience

Introduction Optimal pain control post-pancreatoduodenectomy is a challenge. Epidural analgesia (EDA) is increasingly utilized despite inherent risks and unclear effects on outcomes. Methods All pancreatoduodenectomies (PD) performed from 1/2013-12/2017 were included. Clinical parameters were obtained from retrospective review of a prospective clinical database, the ACS NSQIP prospective institutional database and medical record review. Chi-Square/Fisher’s Exact and Independent-Samples t-Tests were used for univariable analyses; multivariable regression (MVR) was performed. Results 671 consecutive PD from a single institution were included (429 EDA, 242 non-EDA). On univariable analysis, EDA patients experienced significantly less wound disruption (0.2% vs. 2.1%), unplanned intubation (3.0% vs. 7.9%), pulmonary embolism (0.5% vs. 2.5%), mechanical-ventilation >48hrs (2.1% vs. 7.9%), septic shock (2.6% vs. 5.8%), and lower pain scores. On MVR accounting for baseline group differences (gender, hypertension, pre-operative transfusion, labs, approach, pancreatic duct size), EDA was associated with less superficial wound infections (OR 0.34; CI 0.14-0.83; P=0.017), unplanned intubations (OR 0.36; CI 0.14-0.88; P=0.024), mechanical ventilation >48 hrs (OR 0.22; CI 0.08-0.62; P=0.004), and septic shock (OR 0.39; CI 0.15-1.00; P=0.050). EDA improved pain scores post-PD days 1-3 (P<0.001). No differences were seen in cardiac or renal complications; pancreatic fistula (B+C) or delayed gastric emptying; 30/90-day mortality; length of stay, readmission, discharge destination, or unplanned reoperation. Conclusion Based on the largest single institution series published to date, our data support the use of EDA for optimization of pain control. More importantly, our data document that EDA significantly improved infectious and pulmonary complications

Novel Preoperative Patient-centered Surgical Wellness Program Impacts Length of Stay Following Pancreatectomy

Background/Aim: We created a novel, preoperative wellness program (WP) that promotes recovery. This study assessed its impact on patient outcomes after pancreatectomy. Patients and Methods: Pancreatoduodenectomies (PD) and distal pancreatectomies (DP) performed from 2015 to 2018 were reviewed using our institutional NSQIP database. Patients in the WP had their medical conditions optimized and were provided with the following: chlorhexidine, topical mupirocin, incentive spirometer, and immune-nutrition supplements. Results: Out of a total of 669 pancreatectomy patients (411 PD, 258 DP), 308 were enrolled in the WP (188 PD, 120 DP). In the PD subgroup, on multivariable analysis (MVA), the WP patients had shorter lengths of hospital stay (LOS) (12 vs. 10 days, p<0.001). On MVA, WP patients had less post-op transfusion (20 vs. 10%, p=0.027). For the combined groups on MVA, LOS continued to be significant (OR=0.89, 95%CI=0.82-0.97, p<0.007). Conclusion: A preoperative patient centered WP may reduce the length of stay

Peri-operative blood transfusion and operative time are quality indicators for pancreatoduodenectomy

AbstractBackgroundMinimization of blood loss during pancreatoduodenectomy requires careful surgical technique and specific preventative measures. Therefore, red blood cell (RBC) transfusions and operative time are potential surgical quality indicators. The aim of the present study was to compare peri-operative RBC transfusion and operative time with 30-day morbidity/mortality after pancreatoduodenectomy.MethodsAll pancreatoduodenectomies (2005 to 2008) were identified using the American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP). RBC transfusions and operative time were correlated with 30-day morbidity/mortality.ResultsPancreatoduodenectomy was completed in 4817 patients. RBC transfusions were given to 1559 (32%) patients (1–35 units). Overall morbidity and mortality rates were 37% and 3.0%, respectively. Overall 30-day morbidity increased in a stepwise manner with the number of RBC transfusions (R= 0.69, P < 0.01). Although RBC transfusions and operative times were not statistically linked (P= 0.87), longer operative times were linearly associated with increased 30-day morbidity (R= 0.79, P < 0.001) and mortality (R= 0.65, P < 0.01). Patients who were not transfused also displayed less morbidity (33%) and mortality (1.9%) (P < 0.05).DiscussionPeri-operative RBC transfusion after pancreatoduodenectomy is linearly associated with 30-day morbidity. Longer operative time also correlates with increased morbidity and mortality. Therefore, blood transfusions and prolonged operative time should be considered quality indicators for pancreatoduodenectomy