Effect of Hydrocortisone vs Pasireotide on Pancreatic Surgery Complications in Patients With High Risk of Pancreatic Fistula: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Timo Tarvainen, Jukka Sirén, Arto Kokkola, Ville Sallinen, Timo Tarvainen, Jukka Sirén, Arto Kokkola, Ville Sallinen

Abstract

Importance: Both hydrocortisone and pasireotide have been shown in randomized clinical trials to be effective in reducing postoperative complications of pancreatic surgery, but to date no randomized clinical trial has evaluated the effectiveness of pasireotide compared with hydrocortisone.

Objective: To assess the noninferiority of hydrocortisone compared with pasireotide in reducing complications after partial pancreatectomy.

Design, setting, and participants: A noninferiority, parallel-group, individually randomized clinical trial was conducted at a single academic center between May 19, 2016, and December 17, 2018. Outcome collectors and analyzers were blinded. A total of 281 patients undergoing partial pancreatectomy were assessed for inclusion. Patients younger than 18 years, those allergic to hydrocortisone or pasireotide, patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy with hard pancreas or dilated pancreatic duct, and patients not eventually undergoing partial pancreatectomy were excluded. Modified intention-to-treat analysis was used in determination of the results.

Interventions: Treatment included pasireotide, 900 μg, subcutaneously twice a day for 7 days or hydrocortisone, 100 mg, intravenously 3 times a day for 3 days.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) score within 30 days. The noninferiority limit was set to 9 CCI points.

Results: Of the 281 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.8 years) assessed for eligibility, 168 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.6 years) were randomized and 126 were included in the modified intention-to-treat analyses. Sixty-three patients received pasireotide (35 men [56%]; median [interquartile range] age, 64 [56-70] years) and 63 patients received hydrocortisone (25 men [40%]; median [interquartile range] age, 67 [56-73] years). The mean (SD) CCI score was 23.94 (17.06) in the pasireotide group and 30.11 (20.47) in the hydrocortisone group (mean difference, -6.16; 2-sided 90% CI, -11.73 to -0.60), indicating that hydrocortisone was not noninferior. Postoperative pancreatic fistula was detected in 34 patients (54%) in the pasireotide group and 39 patients (62%) in the hydrocortisone group (odds ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.68-2.82; P = .37). One patient in the pasireotide group and 2 patients in the hydrocortisone group died within 30 days. In subgroup analyses of patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy, the CCI score was a mean of 10.3 points lower (mean [SD], 16.03 [11.94] vs 26.28 [21.76]; 2-sided 95% CI, -19.34 to -2.12; P = .03) and postoperative pancreatic fistula rate was lower (37% vs 67%; P = .02) in the pasireotide group compared with the hydrocortisone group.

Conclusions and relevance: In this study, hydrocortisone was not noninferior compared with pasireotide in patients undergoing partial pancreatectomy. Pasireotide may be more effective than hydrocortisone in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02775227; EudraCT identifier: 2016-000212-16.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Sallinen reported receiving grants from the Finnish Surgical Society, Finska Läkaresällskapet, and the Finnish Gastroenterological Society; lecturing fees from the City of Vantaa, Finnish Gastroenterological Society, Novartis, and the University of Helsinki; and nonfinancial support from Astellas outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure.. Flow Diagram of Patient Recruitment and…
Figure.. Flow Diagram of Patient Recruitment and Randomization
CT indicates computed tomography.

References

    1. Ecker BL, McMillan MT, Asbun HJ, et al. . Characterization and optimal management of high-risk pancreatic anastomoses during pancreatoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 2018;267(4):608-616. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000002327
    1. Witzigmann H, Diener MK, Kienkötter S, et al. . No need for routine drainage after pancreatic head resection: the dual-center, randomized, controlled PANDRA trial (ISRCTN04937707). Ann Surg. 2016;264(3):528-537. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000001859
    1. McMillan MT, Malleo G, Bassi C, et al. . Multicenter, prospective trial of selective drain management for pancreatoduodenectomy using risk stratification. Ann Surg. 2017;265(6):1209-1218. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000001832
    1. Jiang H, Liu N, Zhang M, Lu L, Dou R, Qu L. A Randomized trial on the efficacy of prophylactic active drainage in prevention of complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Scand J Surg. 2016;105(4):215-222. doi:10.1177/1457496916665543
    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. Hassenpflug M, Hinz U, Strobel O, et al. . Teres ligament patch reduces relevant morbidity after distal pancreatectomy (the DISCOVER randomized controlled trial). Ann Surg. 2016;264(5):723-730. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000001913
    1. Volk A, Nitschke P, Johnscher F, et al. . Perioperative application of somatostatin analogs for pancreatic surgery—current status in Germany. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2016;401(7):1037-1044. doi:10.1007/s00423-016-1502-4
    1. Adiamah A, Arif Z, Berti F, Singh S, Laskar N, Gomez D. The use of prophylactic somatostatin therapy following pancreaticoduodenectomy: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. World J Surg. 2019;43(7):1788-1801. doi:10.1007/s00268-019-04956-6
    1. Kantor O, Talamonti MS, Pitt HA, et al. . Using the NSQIP Pancreatic Demonstration Project to derive a modified fistula risk score for preoperative risk stratification in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Am Coll Surg. 2017;224(5):816-825. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2017.01.054
    1. Schmid HA. Pasireotide (SOM230): development, mechanism of action and potential applications. Mol Cell Endocrinol. 2008;286(1-2):69-74. doi:10.1016/j.mce.2007.09.006
    1. Allen PJ, Gönen M, Brennan MF, et al. . Pasireotide for postoperative pancreatic fistula. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(21):2014-2022. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1313688
    1. Young S, Sung ML, Lee JA, DiFronzo LA, O’Connor VV. Pasireotide is not effective in reducing the development of postoperative pancreatic fistula. HPB (Oxford). 2018;20(9):834-840. doi:10.1016/j.hpb.2018.03.007
    1. Dominguez-Rosado I, Fields RC, Woolsey CA, et al. . Prospective evaluation of pasireotide in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy: the Washington University experience. J Am Coll Surg. 2018;226(2):147-154.e1. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2017.10.021
    1. Elliott IA, Dann AM, Ghukasyan R, et al. . Pasireotide does not prevent postoperative pancreatic fistula: a prospective study. HPB (Oxford). 2018;20(5):418-422. doi:10.1016/j.hpb.2017.10.018
    1. Laaninen M, Sand J, Nordback I, Vasama K, Laukkarinen J. Perioperative hydrocortisone reduces major complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2016;264(5):696-702. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000001883
    1. Antila A, Siiki A, Sand J, Laukkarinen J. Perioperative hydrocortisone treatment reduces postoperative pancreatic fistula rate after open distal pancreatectomy: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Pancreatology. 2019;19(5):786-792. doi:10.1016/j.pan.2019.05.457
    1. Mungroop TH, Klompmaker S, Wellner UF, et al. ; European Consortium on Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery (E-MIPS) . Updated Alternative Fistula Risk Score (ua-FRS) to include minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy: pan-European validation [published online September 4, 2019]. Ann Surg. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000003234
    1. Lassen K, Coolsen MME, Slim K, et al. ; Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society, for Perioperative Care; European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN); International Association for Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition (IASMEN) . Guidelines for perioperative care for pancreaticoduodenectomy: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations. World J Surg. 2013;37(2):240-258. doi:10.1007/s00268-012-1771-1
    1. Slankamenac K, Nederlof N, Pessaux P, et al. . The comprehensive complication index: a novel and more sensitive endpoint for assessing outcome and reducing sample size in randomized controlled trials. Ann Surg. 2014;260(5):757-762. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000000948
    1. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien P-A. 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. Bassi C, Dervenis C, Butturini G, et al. ; International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula Definition . Postoperative pancreatic fistula: an international study group (ISGPF) definition. Surgery. 2005;138(1):8-13. doi:10.1016/j.surg.2005.05.001
    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. 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. Dusch N, Lietzmann A, Barthels F, Niedergethmann M, Rückert F, Wilhelm TJ. International Study Group of pancreatic surgery definitions for postpancreatectomy complications: applicability at a high-volume center. Scand J Surg. 2017;106(3):216-223. doi:10.1177/1457496916680944
    1. Callery MP, Pratt WB, Kent TS, Chaikof EL, Vollmer CM Jr. A prospectively validated clinical risk score accurately predicts pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;216(1):1-14. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2012.09.002
    1. Ma LW, Dominguez-Rosado I, Gennarelli RL, et al. . The cost of postoperative pancreatic fistula versus the cost of pasireotide: results from a prospective randomized trial. Ann Surg. 2017;265(1):11-16. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000001892
    1. Goyert N, Eeson G, Kagedan DJ, et al. . Pasireotide for the prevention of pancreatic fistula following pancreaticoduodenectomy: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann Surg. 2017;265(1):2-10. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000001889
    1. Welsch T, Müssle B, Distler M, Knoth H, Weitz J, Häckl D. Cost-effectiveness comparison of prophylactic octreotide and pasireotide for prevention of fistula after pancreatic surgery. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2016;401(7):1027-1035. doi:10.1007/s00423-016-1456-6
    1. Nahm CB, Connor SJ, Samra JS, Mittal A. Postoperative pancreatic fistula: a review of traditional and emerging concepts. Clin Exp Gastroenterol. 2018;11:105-118. doi:10.2147/CEG.S120217
    1. Gartemann H, Zeitz M, Emde C, Stelzer M, Riecken EO. Three-day continuous drainage of pancreatic juice in the cortisone-treated conscious rat: analysis of enzyme activities and ultrastructural changes. Cell Tissue Res. 1985;242(1):191-196. doi:10.1007/BF00225576
    1. Otsuki M, Okabayashi Y, Ohki A, Suehiro I, Baba S. Dual effects of hydrocortisone on exocrine rat pancreas. Gastroenterology. 1987;93(6):1398-1403. doi:10.1016/0016-5085(87)90271-X

Source: PubMed

Подписаться