Radiofrequency-assisted transection of the pancreas versus stapler in distal pancreatectomy: study protocol for a multicentric randomised clinical trial (TRANSPAIRE)

Patricia Sánchez-Velázquez, Eva Pueyo-Périz, J M Álamo, Gonzalo Suarez Artacho, Miguel Ángel Gómez Bravo, Manuel Marcello, Emilio Vicente, Yolanda Quijano, Valentina Ferri, Riccardo Caruso, Dimitri Dorcaratto, Luis Sabater, Pilarena González Chávez, Jose Noguera, Ana Navarro Gonzalo, Juan Bellido-Luque, Clara Téllez-Marques, Benedetto Ielpo, Fernando Burdio, Patricia Sánchez-Velázquez, Eva Pueyo-Périz, J M Álamo, Gonzalo Suarez Artacho, Miguel Ángel Gómez Bravo, Manuel Marcello, Emilio Vicente, Yolanda Quijano, Valentina Ferri, Riccardo Caruso, Dimitri Dorcaratto, Luis Sabater, Pilarena González Chávez, Jose Noguera, Ana Navarro Gonzalo, Juan Bellido-Luque, Clara Téllez-Marques, Benedetto Ielpo, Fernando Burdio

Abstract

Introduction: To date, no pancreatic stump closure technique has been shown to be superior to any other in distal pancreatectomy. Although several studies have shown a trend towards better results in transection using a radiofrequency device (radiofrequency-assisted transection (RFT)), no randomised trial for this purpose has been performed to date. Therefore, we designed a randomised clinical trial, with the hypothesis that this technique used in distal pancreatectomies is superior in reducing clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) than mechanical closures.

Methods and analysis: TRANSPAIRE is a multicentre randomised controlled trial conducted in seven Spanish pancreatic centres that includes 112 patients undergoing elective distal pancreatectomy for any indication who will be randomly assigned to RFT or classic stapler transections (control group) in a ratio of 1:1. The primary outcome is the CR-POPF percentage. Sample size is calculated with the following assumptions: 5% one-sided significance level (α), 80% power (1-β), expected POPF in control group of 32%, expected POPF in RFT group of 10% and a clinically relevant difference of 22%. Secondary outcomes include postoperative results, complications, radiological evaluation of the pancreatic stump, metabolomic profile of postoperative peritoneal fluid, survival and quality of life. Follow-ups will be carried out in the external consultation at 1, 6 and 12 months postoperatively.

Ethics and dissemination: TRANSPAIRE has been approved by the CEIM-PSMAR Ethics Committee. This project is being carried out in accordance with national and international guidelines, the basic principles of protection of human rights and dignity established in the Declaration of Helsinki (64th General Assembly, Fortaleza, Brazil, October 2013), and in accordance with regulations in studies with biological samples, Law 14/2007 on Biomedical Research will be followed. We have defined a dissemination strategy, whose main objective is the participation of stakeholders and the transfer of knowledge to support the exploitation of activities.

Registration details: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04402346).

Keywords: Clinical trials; Hepatobiliary surgery; Pancreatic surgery.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart followed by patients once they meet inclusion criteria and can be randomised. ASA, American Society of Anesthesiologists; QoL, quality of life; RF radiofrequency; SAEs, serious adverse effects. SMV: superior mesenteric vein; PAN-26/ EORTC-C30: EORT Quality of life Questionnarie - Pancreatic Cancer Module

References

    1. Peng Y-P, Zhu X-L, Yin L-D, et al. . Risk factors of postoperative pancreatic fistula in patients after distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep 2017;7:1–8. 10.1038/s41598-017-00311-8
    1. Sánchez-Velázquez P, Muller X, Malleo G, et al. . Benchmarks in pancreatic surgery: a novel tool for unbiased outcome comparisons. Ann Surg 2019;270:211–8. 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003223
    1. Diener MK, Seiler CM, Rossion I, et al. . Efficacy of stapler versus hand-sewn closure after distal pancreatectomy (DISPACT): a randomised, controlled multicentre trial. Lancet 2011;377:1514–22. 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60237-7
    1. Landoni L, De Pastena M, Fontana M, et al. . A randomized controlled trial of stapled versus ultrasonic transection in distal pancreatectomy. Surg Endosc 2022;36:4033–41. 10.1007/s00464-021-08724-3
    1. Suc B, Msika S, Fingerhut A, et al. . Temporary fibrin glue occlusion of the main pancreatic duct in the prevention of intra-abdominal complications after pancreatic resection: prospective randomized trial. Ann Surg 2003;237:57–65. 10.1097/00000658-200301000-00009
    1. Montorsi M, Zerbi A, Bassi C, et al. . Efficacy of an absorbable fibrin sealant patch (TachoSil) after distal pancreatectomy: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Ann Surg 2012;256:853–60. 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318272dec0
    1. Dorcaratto D, Burdío F, Fondevila D, et al. . Radiofrequency is a secure and effective method for pancreatic transection in laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: results of a randomized, controlled trial in an experimental model. Surg Endosc 2013;27:3710–9. 10.1007/s00464-013-2952-1
    1. Dorcaratto D, Burdío F, Fondevila D, et al. . Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: feasibility study of radiofrequency-assisted transection in a porcine model. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2012;22:242–8. 10.1089/lap.2011.0417
    1. Fronza JS, Bentrem DJ, Baker MS, et al. . Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy using radiofrequency energy. Am J Surg 2010;199:401–4. 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2009.09.007
    1. Blansfield JA, Rapp MM, Chokshi RJ, et al. . Novel method of stump closure for distal pancreatectomy with a 75% reduction in pancreatic fistula rate. J Gastrointest Surg 2012;16:524-8. 10.1007/s11605-011-1794-1
    1. Pueyo-Périz E, Téllez-Marquès C, Radosevic A, et al. . Radiofrequency-assisted transection of the pancreas vs stapler in distal pancreatectomy: a propensity score matched cohort analysis. Sci Rep 2022;12:7486. 10.1038/s41598-022-11583-0
    1. Chan A-W, Tetzlaff JM, Gøtzsche PC, et al. . Spirit 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials. BMJ 2013;346:e7586–42. 10.1136/bmj.e7586
    1. Delgado M, Domenech J. Fundamentos de diseño Y estadística, diseño de estudios. 16a, 2015.
    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;269:2–9. 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002979
    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;161:584–91. 10.1016/j.surg.2016.11.014
    1. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien P-A. Classification of surgical complications. Ann Surg 2004;240:205–13. 10.1097/
    1. Slankamenac K, Graf R, Barkun J, et al. . The comprehensive complication index: a novel continuous scale to measure surgical morbidity. Ann Surg 2013;258:1–7. 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318296c732
    1. Jiang Z, Wen C, Wang C, et al. . Plasma metabolomics of early parenteral nutrition followed with enteral nutrition in pancreatic surgery patients. Sci Rep 2019;9:18846. 10.1038/s41598-019-55440-z
    1. Topp SA, McClurken M, Lipson D, et al. . Saline-linked surface radiofrequency ablation: factors affecting steam popping and depth of injury in the pig liver. Ann Surg 2004;239:518–27. 10.1097/01.sla.0000118927.83650.a4
    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;142:761–8. 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;142:20–5. 10.1016/j.surg.2007.02.001
    1. Quality of Life . Quality of life group website; 2020.

Source: PubMed

3
订阅