4.5 Article

Prognostic Impact of Bacterobilia on Morbidity and Postoperative Management After Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Journal

WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY
Volume 42, Issue 9, Pages 2951-2962

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00268-018-4546-5

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Intraoperative bile analysis during pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is performed routinely at specialized centers worldwide. However, it remains controversial if and how intraoperative bacterobilia during PD affects morbidity and its management. The aim of the study was a systematic review and meta-analysis of intraoperative bacterobilia and its impact on patient outcome after PD. Five relevant outcomes of interest were defined, and a systematic review of the literature with meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. A total of 28 studies (8523 patients) were included. The median incidence of bacterobilia was 58% (interquartile range 51-67%). The most frequently isolated bacteria were Enterococcus species (51%), Klebsiella species (28%), and Escherichia coli (27%). Preoperative biliary drainage was significantly associated with bacterobilia (86 vs. 25%; RR 3.27; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.42-4.42; p < 0.001). The incidence of surgical site infections (SSI) was significantly increased in cases with bacterobilia (RR 2.84; 95% CI 2.17-3.73; p < 0.001). Postoperative pancreatic fistula, overall postoperative morbidity, and mortality were not significantly influenced. Identical bacteria in bile and the infectious sources were found in 48% (interquartile range 34-59%) of the cases. Bacterobilia is detected during almost every second PD and is associated with an increased rate of SSI. The microbiome from intraoperative bile and postoperative infectious sources match in 50% of patients, providing the option of early administration of calculated antibiotics and the determination of resistance patterns.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available