4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

The influence of transection site on the development of pancreatic fistula in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy: A review of 294 consecutive cases

Journal

SURGERY
Volume 157, Issue 6, Pages 1080-1087

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2015.01.014

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Pancreatic fistula (PF) is a significant cause of morbidity in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy (DP), with an incidence of 15-40%. It remains unclear if the location of pancreatic transection affects the rate of PF occurrence. This study examines the correlation between the transection site of the pancreas during DP and the incidence of PF. Methods. All cases of DP from October 2005 to January 2012 were reviewed retrospectively from an institutional review board-approved database at the Thomas Jefferson University Hospital. Patient demographics and pen operative outcomes were analyzed. The pancreatic transection location was determined by review of operative reports, and then dichotomized into 2 groups: neck/body or tail. PF were graded following the International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula guidelines. Results. During the study period, 294 DP were performed with 244 pancreas transections at the neck/body and 50 at the tail. Of the 294 patients, 52 (17.7%) developed a postoperative PR The incidence of PR after transection at the tail of the pancreas was higher (28%) when compared with transection at the neck/body (15.6%; P = .04). When stratified by PF grade, grade A PR occurred more commonly when transection of the gland was at the tail (22% tail vs 8.2% neck/body; P = .007); however, no difference was found for grade B/C PR (6% tail vs 7.4% neck/body; P = 1). Conclusion. Our data suggest that PF occurs more often when the tail is transected during DP, although the majority are low grade and of minimal clinical significance. More severe PR occurred equally between the transection sites.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available