Prophylactic abdominal drainage or no drainage after distal pancreatectomy (PANDORINA): a binational multicenter randomized controlled trial

F L Vissers, A Balduzzi, E A van Bodegraven, J van Hilst, S Festen, M Abu Hilal, H J Asbun, J S D Mieog, B Groot Koerkamp, O R Busch, F Daams, M Luyer, M De Pastena, G Malleo, G Marchegiani, J Klaase, I Q Molenaar, R Salvia, H C van Santvoort, M Stommel, D Lips, M Coolsen, C Bassi, C van Eijck, M G Besselink, Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group, F L Vissers, A Balduzzi, E A van Bodegraven, J van Hilst, S Festen, M Abu Hilal, H J Asbun, J S D Mieog, B Groot Koerkamp, O R Busch, F Daams, M Luyer, M De Pastena, G Malleo, G Marchegiani, J Klaase, I Q Molenaar, R Salvia, H C van Santvoort, M Stommel, D Lips, M Coolsen, C Bassi, C van Eijck, M G Besselink, Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group

Abstract

Background: Prophylactic abdominal drainage is current standard practice after distal pancreatectomy (DP), with the aim to divert pancreatic fluid in case of a postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) aimed to prevent further complications as bleeding. Whereas POPF after pancreatoduodenectomy, by definition, involves infection due to anastomotic dehiscence, a POPF after DP is essentially sterile since the bowel is not opened and no anastomoses are created. Routine drainage after DP could potentially be omitted and this could even be beneficial because of the hypothetical prevention of drain-induced infections (Fisher, Surgery 52:205-22, 2018). Abdominal drainage, moreover, should only be performed if it provides additional safety or comfort to the patient. In clinical practice, drains cause clear discomfort. One multicenter randomized controlled trial confirmed the safety of omitting abdominal drainage but did not stratify patients according to their risk of POPF and did not describe a standardized strategy for pancreatic transection. Therefore, a large pragmatic multicenter randomized controlled trial is required, with prespecified POPF risk groups and a homogeneous method of stump closure. The objective of the PANDORINA trial is to evaluate the non-inferiority of omitting routine intra-abdominal drainage after DP on postoperative morbidity (Clavien-Dindo score ≥ 3), and, secondarily, POPF grade B/C.

Methods/design: Binational multicenter randomized controlled non-inferiority trial, stratifying patients to high and low risk for POPF grade B/C and incorporating a standardized strategy for pancreatic transection. Two groups of 141 patients (282 in total) undergoing elective DP (either open or minimally invasive, with or without splenectomy). Primary outcome is postoperative rate of morbidity (Clavien-Dindo score ≥ 3), and the most relevant secondary outcome is grade B/C POPF. Other secondary outcomes include surgical reintervention, percutaneous catheter drainage, endoscopic catheter drainage, abdominal collections (not requiring drainage), wound infection, delayed gastric emptying, postpancreatectomy hemorrhage as defined by the international study group for pancreatic surgery (ISGPS) (Wente et al., Surgery 142:20-5, 2007), length of stay (LOS), readmission within 90 days, in-hospital mortality, and 90-day mortality.

Discussion: PANDORINA is the first binational, multicenter, randomized controlled non-inferiority trial with the primary objective to evaluate the hypothesis that omitting prophylactic abdominal drainage after DP does not worsen the risk of postoperative severe complications (Wente etal., Surgery 142:20-5, 2007; Bassi et al., Surgery 161:584-91, 2017). Most of the published studies on drain placement after pancreatectomy focus on both pancreatoduodenectomy and DP, but these two entities present are associated with different complications and therefore deserve separate evaluation (McMillan et al., Surgery 159:1013-22, 2016; Pratt et al., J Gastrointest Surg 10:1264-78, 2006). The PANDORINA trial is innovative since it takes the preoperative risk on POPF into account based on the D-FRS and it warrants homogenous stump closing by using the same graded compression technique and same stapling device (de Pastena et al., Ann Surg 2022; Asbun and Stauffer, Surg Endosc 25:2643-9, 2011).

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

© 2022. The Author(s).

References

    1. Conlon KC, Labow D, Leung D, et al. Prospective randomized clinical trial of the value of intraperitoneal drainage after pancreatic resection. Ann Surg. 2001;234(4):487–493. doi: 10.1097/00000658-200110000-00008.
    1. Van Buren G, 2nd, Bloomston M, Hughes SJ, et al. A randomized prospective multicenter trial of pancreaticoduodenectomy with and without routine intraperitoneal drainage. Ann Surg. 2014;259(4):605–612. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000460.
    1. Fisher WE. Intraperitoneal drainage and pancreatic resection. Adv Surg. 2018;52(1):205–222. doi: 10.1016/j.yasu.2018.03.013.
    1. Correa-Gallego C, Brennan MF, D'Angelica M, et al. Operative drainage following pancreatic resection: analysis of 1122 patients resected over 5 years at a single institution. Ann Surg. 2013;258(6):1051–1058. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182813806.
    1. Sutcliffe RP, Battula N, Haque A, et al. Utility of drain fluid amylase measurement on the first postoperative day after pancreaticoduodenectomy. World J Surg. 2012;36(4):879–883. doi: 10.1007/s00268-012-1460-0.
    1. Behrman SW, Zarzaur BL, Parmar A, Riall TS, Hall BL, Pitt HA. Routine drainage of the operative bed following elective distal pancreatectomy does not reduce the occurrence of complications. J Gastrointest Surg. 2015;19(1):72–79. doi: 10.1007/s11605-014-2608-z.
    1. Lillemoe KD, Kaushal S, Cameron JL, Sohn TA, Pitt HA, Yeo CJ. Distal pancreatectomy: indications and outcomes in 235 patients. Ann Surg. 1999;229(5):693–698. doi: 10.1097/00000658-199905000-00012.
    1. Balcom JH, Rattner DW, Warshaw AL, Chang Y, Fernandez-del CC. Ten-year experience with 733 pancreatic resections: changing indications, older patients, and decreasing length of hospitalization. Arch Surg (Chicago, Ill : 1960) 2001;136(4):391–398. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.136.4.391.
    1. Kleeff J, Diener MK, Z'Graggen K, et al. Distal pancreatectomy: risk factors for surgical failure in 302 consecutive cases. Ann Surg. 2007;245(4):573–582. doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000251438.43135.fb.
    1. Sledzianowski JF, Duffas JP, Muscari F, Suc B, Fourtanier F. Risk factors for mortality and intra-abdominal morbidity after distal pancreatectomy. Surgery. 2005;137(2):180–185. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2004.06.063.
    1. Nathan H, Cameron JL, Goodwin CR, et al. Risk factors for pancreatic leak after distal pancreatectomy. Ann Surg. 2009;250(2):277–281. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181ae34be.
    1. Pannegeon V, Pessaux P, Sauvanet A, Vullierme MP, Kianmanesh R, Belghiti J. Pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy: predictive risk factors and value of conservative treatment. Arch Surg (Chicago, Ill : 1960) 2006;141(11):1071–1076. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.141.11.1071.
    1. Knaebel HP, Diener MK, Wente MN, Buchler MW, Seiler CM. Systematic review and meta-analysis of technique for closure of the pancreatic remnant after distal pancreatectomy. Br J Surg. 2005;92(5):539–546. doi: 10.1002/bjs.5000.
    1. Karabicak I, Satoi S, Yanagimoto H, et al. Comparison of surgical outcomes of three different stump closure techniques during distal pancreatectomy. Pancreatology. 2017;17(3):497–503. doi: 10.1016/j.pan.2017.04.005.
    1. Ecker BL, McMillan MT, Allegrini V, et al. Risk Factors and Mitigation Strategies for Pancreatic Fistula After Distal Pancreatectomy: Analysis of 2026 Resections From the International, Multi-institutional Distal Pancreatectomy Study Group. Ann Surg. 2019;269(1):143–149. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002491.
    1. Marchegiani G, Perri G, Pulvirenti A, et al. Non-inferiority of open passive drains compared with closed suction drains in pancreatic surgery outcomes: a prospective observational study. Surgery. 2018;164(3):443–449. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2018.04.025.
    1. Asbun HJ, Van Hilst J, Tsamalaidze L, et al. Technique and audited outcomes of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy combining the clockwise approach, progressive stepwise compression technique, and staple line reinforcement. Surg Endosc. 2020;34(1):231–239. doi: 10.1007/s00464-019-06757-3.
    1. Wente MN, Veit JA, Bassi C, et al. Postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH): an International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definition. Surgery. 2007;142(1):20–25. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2007.02.001.
    1. 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(3):584–591. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2016.11.014.
    1. Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Altman DG, et al. SPIRIT 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158(3):200–207. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-158-3-201302050-00583.
    1. de Rooij T, van Hilst J, van Santvoort H, et al. Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy (LEOPARD): a multicenter patient-blinded randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2019;269(1):2–9. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002979.
    1. De Pastena M, van Bodegraven EA, Mungroop TH, et al. Distal Pancreatectomy Fistula Risk Score (D-FRS): Development and International Validation. Ann Surg. 2022. 10.1097/SLA.0000000000005497. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35797608.
    1. Freites-Martinez A, Santana N, Arias-Santiago S, et al. Using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE - Version 5.0) to Evaluate the Severity of Adverse Events of Anticancer Therapies. Actas Dermosifiliogr (Engl Ed). 2021;112(1):90–2.
    1. Asbun HJ, Stauffer JA. Laparoscopic approach to distal and subtotal pancreatectomy: a clockwise technique. Surg Endosc. 2011;25(8):2643–2649. doi: 10.1007/s00464-011-1618-0.
    1. Allen PJ, Gonen M, Brennan MF, et al. Pasireotide for postoperative pancreatic fistula. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(21):2014–2022. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1313688.
    1. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):205–213. doi: 10.1097/.
    1. 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(5):761–768. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2007.05.005.
    1. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR. Guideline for Prevention of Surgical Site Infection, 1999. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Am J Infect Control 1999. 1999;27(2):97–132. doi: 10.1016/S0196-6553(99)70088-X.
    1. McMillan MT, Christein JD, Callery MP, et al. Comparing the burden of pancreatic fistulas after pancreatoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy. Surgery. 2016;159(4):1013–1022. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2015.10.028.
    1. Pratt W, Maithel SK, Vanounou T, Callery MP, Vollmer CM., Jr Postoperative pancreatic fistulas are not equivalent after proximal, distal, and central pancreatectomy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2006;10(9):1264–1278. doi: 10.1016/j.gassur.2006.07.011.
    1. Paulus EM, Zarzaur BL, Behrman SW. Routine peritoneal drainage of the surgical bed after elective distal pancreatectomy: is it necessary? Am J Surg. 2012;204(4):422–427. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2012.02.005.
    1. Bassi C, Dervenis C, Butturini G, et al. Postoperative pancreatic fistula: an international study group (ISGPF) definition. Surgery. 2005;138(1):8–13. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2005.05.001.
    1. Bassi C, Molinari E, Malleo G, et al. Early versus late drain removal after standard pancreatic resections: results of a prospective randomized trial. Ann Surg. 2010;252(2):207–214. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181e61e88.
    1. Seykora TF, Liu JB, Maggino L, et al. Drain Management Following Distal Pancreatectomy: Characterization of Contemporary Practice and Impact of Early Removal. Ann Surg. 2020;272(6):1110–1117. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003205.
    1. Nakamura M, Ueda J, Kohno H, et al. Prolonged peri-firing compression with a linear stapler prevents pancreatic fistula in laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. Surg Endosc. 2011;25(3):867–871. doi: 10.1007/s00464-010-1285-6.
    1. Ariyarathenam AV, Bunting D, Aroori S. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy using the modified prolonged prefiring compression technique reduces pancreatic fistula. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2015;25(10):821–825. doi: 10.1089/lap.2015.0200.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren