Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Surgery Today
Published in: Surgery Today 8/2018

01-08-2018 | Original Article

Number of acinar cells at the pancreatic stump predicts pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy

Authors: Naoki Umezaki, Daisuke Hashimoto, Shigeki Nakagawa, Yuki Kitano, Kensuke Yamamura, Akira Chikamoto, Fujio Matsumura, Hideo Baba

Published in: Surgery Today | Issue 8/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To establish if the number of pancreatic acinar cells at the pancreatic cut end is a predictor of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF).

Methods

The number of acinar cells was assessed histologically in 121 consecutive patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) between April, 2012 and July, 2016.

Results

POPF developed in 23 of the 121 patients. Univariate analysis revealed that male sex, long operating time, high volume of blood loss, soft remnant pancreas, large pancreatic duct, and the number of pancreatic acinar cells were significantly associated with POPF. Multivariate analysis revealed that male sex (p = 0.022) and the number of pancreatic acinar cells (p < 0.0001) were independently associated with POPF. In the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, the area under curve was 0.83895 when the cut off value of the number of pancreatic acinar cells to predict POPF was 890. Sensitivity and specificity of the number of pancreatic acinar cells were 82.6 and 77.6%, respectively.

Conclusions

A large number of pancreatic acinar cells at the cut end of the stump is predictive of POPF after PD. Although POPF is associated with multiple factors and the number of acinar cells is only one of these, our study is the first to confirm this common intuition of surgeons, which has not been assessed definitively before.
Literature
1.
Miyata H, Gotoh M, Hirai I, Kenjo A, Kitagawa Y, Shimada M, et al. A pancreaticoduodenectomy risk model derived from 8575 cases from a national single-race population (Japanese) using a web-based data entry system: the 30-day and in-hospital mortality rates for pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 2014;259:773–80.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Hirono S, Murakami Y, Tani M, Kawai M, Okada K, Uemura K, et al. Identification of risk factors for pancreatic exocrine insufficiency after pancreaticoduodenectomy using a 13C-labeled mixed triglyceride breath test. World J Surg. 2015;39:516–25.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Motoi F, Egawa S, Rikiyama T, Katayose Y, Unno M. Randomized clinical trial of external stent drainage of the pancreatic duct to reduce postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreaticojejunostomy. Br J Surg. 2012;99:524–31.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Aoki S, Miyata H, Konno H, Gotoh M, Motoi F, Kumamaru H, et al. Risk factors of serious postoperative complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy and risk calculators for predicting postoperative complications: a nationwide study of 17,564 patients in Japan. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2017;24:243–51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
Krautz C, Nimptsch U, Weber G, Mansky T, Grützmann. R Effect of hospital volume on in-hospital morbidity and mortality following pancreatic surgery in Germany. Ann Surg. 2017 (Epub ahead of print).
6.
Otsubo T, Kobayashi S, Sano K, Misawa T, Ota T, Katagiri S, et al. Safety-related outcomes of the Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery board certification system for expert surgeons. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2017;24:252–61.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Satoi S, Yamamoto T, Yoshitomi H, Motoi F, Kawai M, Fujii T, et al. Developing better practices at the institutional level leads to better outcomes after pancreaticoduodenectomy in 3,378 patients: domestic audit of the Japanese Society of Pancreatic Surgery. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2017;24:501–10.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Hashimoto D, Chikamoto A, Harimoto N, Ikegami T, Uchiyama H, Yoshizumi T, et al. A comparative study on the complications of conventional and end-to-side inserting pancreatojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surg Today. 2017;47:238–44.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Machado M, Machado M. Systematic use of isolated pancreatic anastomosis after pancreatoduodenectomy: five years of experience with zero mortality. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016;42:1584–90.CrossRefPubMed
10.
McMillan M, Malleo G, Bassi C, Allegrini V, Casetti L, Drebin J, et al. Multicenter, prospective trial of selective drain management for pancreatoduodenectomy using risk stratification. Ann Surg. 2017;265:1209–18.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Relles D, Burkhart R, Pucci M, Sendecki J, Tholey R, Drueding R, et al. Does resident experience affect outcomes in complex abdominal surgery? Pancreaticoduodenectomy as an example. J Gastrointest Surg. 2014;18:279–85.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Hashimoto D, Chikamoto A, Ohmuraya M, Hirota M, Baba H. Pancreaticodigestive anastomosis and the postoperative management strategies to prevent postoperative pancreatic fistula formation after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surg Today. 2014;44:1207–13.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Kawai M, Tani M, Hirono S, Miyazawa M, Shimizu A, Uchiyama K, et al. Pylorus ring resection reduces delayed gastric emptying in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial of pylorus-resecting versus pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 2011;253:495–501.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Low J, Shukla A, Thorn. P Pancreatic acinar cell: new insights into the control of secretion. Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 2010;42:1586–9.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Stockhausen KT. Declaration of Helsinki: revising ethical research guidelines for the 21st century. Med J Aust. 2000;172:252–3.PubMed
16.
Dale O, Salo M. The Helsinki Declaration, research guidelines and regulations: present and future editorial aspects. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1996;40:771–2.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Clavien P, Barkun J, de Oliveira M, Vauthey J, Dindo D, Schulick R, et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250:187–96.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Japan Pancreas Society. General rules for the study of pancreatic cancer (the 6th edition). 2009.
19.
Japan Pancreas Society. General rules for the study of pancreatic cancer (the 7th edition). 2016.
20.
Japanese society of biliary surgery Society. General rules for surgical and pathological studies on cancer of the biliary tract (the 5th ed.). 2003.
21.
Japanese society of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery. General rules for surgical and pathological studies on cancer of the biliary tract (the 6th ed.). 2013.
22.
Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C, Sarr M, Abu Hilal M, Adham M, 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.CrossRefPubMed
23.
DeOliveira M, Winter J, Schafer M, Cunningham S, Cameron J, Yeo C, et al. Assessment of complications after pancreatic surgery a novel grading system applied to 633 patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 2006;244:931–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
Tani M, Kawai M, Hirono S, Hatori T, Imaizumi T, Nakao A, et al. Use of omentum or falciform ligament does not decrease complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy: nationwide survey of the Japanese Society of Pancreatic Surgery. Surgery. 2012;151:183–91.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Kawai M, Yamaue. H Analysis of clinical trials evaluating complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a new era of pancreatic surgery. Surg Today. 2010;40:1011–7.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Nordback I, Räty S, Laukkarinen J, Järvinen S, Piironen A, Leppiniemi J, et al. A novel radiopaque biodegradable stent for pancreatobiliary applications–the first human phase I trial in the pancreas. Pancreatology. 2012;12:264–71.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Sugiura T, Mizuno T, Okamura Y, Ito T, Yamamoto Y, Kawamura I, et al. Impact of bacterial contamination of the abdominal cavity during pancreaticoduodenectomy on surgical-site infection. Br J Surg. 2015;102:1561–6.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Okano K, Kakinoki K, Suto H, Oshima M, Kashiwagi H, Yamamoto N, et al. Persisting ratio of total amylase output in drain fluid can predict postoperative clinical pancreatic fistula. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2011;18:815–20.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Yoshida H, Yamashita Y, Shimazu T, Cosatto E, Kiyuna T, Taniguchi H, et al. Automated histological classification of whole slide images of colorectal biopsy specimens. Oncotarget. 2017;8:90719–29.PubMedPubMedCentral
30.
Lin JW, Cameron JL, Yeo CJ, Riall TS, Lillemoe KD. Risk factors and outcomes in post pancreaticoduodenectomy pancreaticocutaneous fistula. J Gastrointest Surg. 2004;8:951–9.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Fujii T, Kanda M, Nagai S, Suenaga M, Takami H, Yamada S, et al. Excess weight adversely influences treatment length of postoperative pancreatic fistula: a retrospective study of 900 patients. Pancreas. 2015;44:971–6.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Fujii T, Sugimoto H, Yamada S, Kanda M, Suenaga M, Takami H, et al. Modified Blumgart anastomosis for pancreaticojejunostomy: technical improvement in matched historical control study. J Gastrointest Surg. 2014;18:1108–15.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Kawai M, Hirono S, Okada K, Sho M, Nakajima Y, Eguchi H, et al. Randomized controlled trial of pancreaticojejunostomy versus stapler closure of the pancreatic stump during distal pancreatectomy to reduce pancreatic fistula. Ann Surg. 2016;264:180–7.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Number of acinar cells at the pancreatic stump predicts pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy
Authors
Naoki Umezaki
Daisuke Hashimoto
Shigeki Nakagawa
Yuki Kitano
Kensuke Yamamura
Akira Chikamoto
Fujio Matsumura
Hideo Baba
Publication date
01-08-2018
Publisher
Springer Singapore
Published in
Surgery Today / Issue 8/2018
Print ISSN: 0941-1291
Electronic ISSN: 1436-2813
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-018-1656-5

Other articles of this Issue 8/2018

Surgery Today 8/2018 Go to the issue

Original Article

Sternal semi-closure using a bioresorbable osteosynthesis device: a new method for delayed sternal closure

Original Article

A comparison of the clinical outcomes of esophagectomy and chemoradiotherapy after noncurative endoscopic submucosal dissection for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Original Article

Surgical outcomes after gastrectomy in very elderly patients with gastric cancer

Original Article

Predictors of portal and splenic vein thrombosis after laparoscopic splenectomy: a retrospective analysis of a single-center experience

Original Article

Decreasing prevalence of chronic pain after laparoscopic groin hernia repair: a nationwide cross-sectional questionnaire study

Review Article

Regenerative medicine for the esophagus