Top

Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery

Published in:

01-11-2020 | Pancreatoduodenostomy | Original Article

Dissection with LigaSure Impact™ versus conventional resection in pylorus-preserving partial pancreatoduodenectomy (DISSECT): a single-institution randomized controlled trial

Authors: Tobias Gehrig, V. Josef, A.T. Billeter, R. Warschkow, P. Knebel, C.N. Gutt, M.K. Diener, I. Tarantino

Published in: Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery | Issue 7/2020

Abstract

Purpose

In partial pancreatoduodenectomy, appropriate effective hemostasis during dissection is of major importance for procedural flow, operation time, and postoperative outcome. As ligation, clipping, or suturing of blood vessels is time-consuming and numerous instrument changes are required, the primary aim of this randomized controlled trial was to assess whether LigaSure Impact™ exhibits benefits over named conventional dissection techniques in patients undergoing pylorus-preserving partial pancreatoduodenectomy.

Methods

This single-institution, randomized, superiority trial was performed between September 27, 2009, and February 24, 2012. Patients undergoing pylorus-preserving partial pancreatoduodenectomy were allocated to the study arms in a 1:1 ratio based on an unstratified block randomization with random block sizes to receive either dissection with LigaSure Impact™ or conventional dissection. The primary endpoint was operation time. Secondary endpoints included peri- and postoperative morbidity and mortality, intraoperative blood loss, and length of hospital stay. To observe a time reduction of 40 min, 51 patients per arm were required. The primary analysis was the intention to treat.

Results

The mean operation time did not differ between the Ligasure Impact™ (308 min; SD: 56 min; range: 155–455 min) and the conventional dissection (318 min; SD: 90 min, range: 175–550 min) (p = 0.531). Moreover, LigaSure Impact™ dissection did not show significant advantages over conventional dissection in terms of peri- and postoperative morbidity and mortality, intraoperative blood loss, or length of hospital stay.

Conclusions

The application of LigaSure Impact™ dissection in pylorus-preserving partial pancreatoduodenectomy does not increase effectiveness and safety of dissection.

Trial registration

DRKS00000166

Buchler MW, Wagner M, Schmied BM, Uhl W, Friess H, Z’Graggen K (2003) Changes in morbidity after pancreatic resection: toward the end of completion pancreatectomy. Arch Surg 138(12):1310–1314; discussion 1315. https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.138.12.1310CrossRefPubMed

Belli G, Fantini C, Ciciliano F, D’Agostino A, Barberio M (2003) Pancreaticoduodenectomy in portal hypertension: use of the Ligasure. J Hepato-Biliary-Pancreat Surg 10(3):215–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00534-002-0745-3CrossRef

Youssef T, Mahdy T, Farid M, Latif AA (2008) Thyroid surgery: use of the LigaSure Vessel Sealing System versus conventional knot tying. Int J Surg 6(4):323–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2008.05.005CrossRefPubMed

Uranues S, Salehi B, Kornprat P, Todoric B (2006) Technique of laparoscopic left pancreatic resection preserving the splenic vessels. Eur Surg 38(3):191–196CrossRef

Cipolla C, Graceffa G, Sandonato L, Fricano S, Vieni S, Latteri MA (2008) LigaSure in total thyroidectomy. Surg Today 38(6):495–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-007-3665-7CrossRefPubMed

Eroglu A, Turkyilmaz A, Aydin Y, Erdem AF, Tokur M, Karaoglanoglu N (2007) The use of the LigaSure Vessel Sealing System in esophageal cancer surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 84(6):2076–2079. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2007.04.119CrossRefPubMed

Nienhuijs S, de Hingh I (2009) Conventional versus LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy for patients with symptomatic hemorrhoids. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 1:CD006761. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006761.pub2CrossRef

Saiura A, Yamamoto J, Koga R, Sakamoto Y, Kokudo N, Seki M, Yamaguchi T, Yamaguchi T, Muto T, Makuuchi M (2006) Usefulness of LigaSure for liver resection: analysis by randomized clinical trial. Am J Surg 192(1):41–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2006.01.025CrossRefPubMed

Uzunoglu FG, Bockhorn M, Fink JA, Reeh M, Vettorazzi E, Gawad KA, Bogoevski D, Vashist YK, Tsui TY, Koenig A, Mann O, Izbicki JR (2013) LigaSure vs. conventional dissection techniques in pancreatic surgery--a prospective randomised single-centre trial. J Gastrointest Surg 17(3):494–500. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-012-2107-zCrossRefPubMed

10.

Gehrig T, Knebel P, Scheel V, Hinz U, Seiler CM, Muller-Stich BP, Buchler MW, Gutt CN (2011) LigaSure impact versus conventional dissection technique in pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy in clinical suspicion of cancerous tumours on the head of the pancreas: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials 12:162. https://doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-12-162CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Pahlke F, König IR, Ziegler A (2004) Randomization in Treatment Arms (RITA): Ein Randomisierungsprogramm für klinische Studien. Informatik, Biometrie und Epidemiologie in Medizin und Biologie 35:1–22

12.

Horan TC, Gaynes RP, Martone WJ, Jarvis WR, Emori TG (1992) CDC definitions of nosocomial surgical site infections, 1992: a modification of CDC definitions of surgical wound infections. Am J Infect Control 20(5):271–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0196-6553(05)80201-9CrossRefPubMed

13.

Wente MN, Bassi C, Dervenis C, Fingerhut A, Gouma DJ, Izbicki JR, Neoptolemos JP, Padbury RT, Sarr MG, Traverso LW, Yeo CJ, Buchler MW (2007) Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after pancreatic surgery: a suggested definition by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS). Surgery 142(5):761–768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2007.05.005CrossRefPubMed

14.

Butturini G, Daskalaki D, Molinari E, Scopelliti F, Casarotto A, Bassi C (2008) Pancreatic fistula: definition and current problems. J Hepato-Biliary-Pancreat Surg 15(3):247–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00534-007-1301-yCrossRef

15.

Gehrig T, Muller-Stich BP, Kenngott H, Fischer L, Mehrabi A, Buchler MW, Gutt CN (2011) LigaSure versus conventional dissection technique in pancreatoduodenectomy: a pilot study. Am J Surg 201(2):166–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2010.02.023CrossRefPubMed

16.

Montedori A, Bonacini MI, Casazza G, Luchetta ML, Duca P, Cozzolino F, Abraha I (2011) Modified versus standard intention-to-treat reporting: are there differences in methodological quality, sponsorship, and findings in randomized trials? A cross-sectional study. Trials 12:58. https://doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-12-58CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Abraha I, Cozzolino F, Orso M, Marchesi M, Germani A, Lombardo G, Eusebi P, De Florio R, Luchetta ML, Iorio A, Montedori A (2017) A systematic review found that deviations from intention-to-treat are common in randomized trials and systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 84:37–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.11.012CrossRefPubMed

18.

ICH Harmonised Tripartite Guideline. Statistical principles for clinical trials. International Conference on Harmonisation E9 Expert Working Group (1999) Stat. Med 18(15):1905–1942

19.

Fergusson D, Aaron SD, Guyatt G, Hebert P (2002) Post-randomisation exclusions: the intention to treat principle and excluding patients from analysis. BMJ 325(7365):652–654CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Philipson PM, Ho WK, Henderson R (2008) Comparative review of methods for handling drop-out in longitudinal studies. Stat Med 27(30):6276–6298. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.3450CrossRefPubMed

21.

Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw 67(1):1–48CrossRef

22.

Uzunoglu FG, Stehr A, Fink JA, Vettorazzi E, Koenig A, Gawad KA, Vashist YK, Kutup A, Mann O, Gavazzi F, Zerbi A, Bassi C, Dervenis C, Montorsi M, Bockhorn M, Izbicki JR (2012) Ultrasonic dissection versus conventional dissection techniques in pancreatic surgery: a randomized multicentre study. Ann Surg 256(5):675–679. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e318271cefaCrossRefPubMed

Title: Dissection with LigaSure Impact™ versus conventional resection in pylorus-preserving partial pancreatoduodenectomy (DISSECT): a single-institution randomized controlled trial
Authors: Tobias Gehrig
V. Josef
A.T. Billeter
R. Warschkow
P. Knebel
C.N. Gutt
M.K. Diener
I. Tarantino
Publication date: 01-11-2020
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keywords: Pancreatoduodenostomy
Pancreatoduodenostomy
Published in: Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery / Issue 7/2020
Print ISSN: 1435-2443
Electronic ISSN: 1435-2451
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-020-01968-y

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Dissection with LigaSure Impact™ versus conventional resection in pylorus-preserving partial pancreatoduodenectomy (DISSECT): a single-institution randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 7/2020

Invasion category-oriented lymph node metastases of cholangiocarcinoma and the prognostic impact

Systematic review and meta-analysis of contemporary pancreas surgery with arterial resection

The factors related to failure of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) in colon cancer surgery

Intention-to-treat curative liver resection in patients with “very early” intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

Preventing chylous ascites after right hemicolectomy with D3 extended mesenterectomy

Innovations in pancreatic anastomosis technique during pancreatoduodenectomies