1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Distal Pancreatectomy : Extent of Resection Determines Surgical Risk Categories

      research-article

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background:

          Recently, subclassification of pancreatoduodenectomy in 4 differing types has been reported, because additional major vascular and multivisceral resections have been shown to be associated with an increased risk of postoperative morbidity and mortality.

          Objective:

          To classify distal pancreatectomy (DP) based on the extent of resection and technical difficulty and to evaluate postoperative outcomes with regards to this classification system.

          Methods:

          All consecutive patients who had undergone DP between 2001 and 2020 in a high-volume pancreatic surgery center were included in this study. DPs were subclassified into 4 distinct categories reflecting the extent of resection and technical difficulty, including standard DP (type 1), DP with venous (type 2), multivisceral (type 3), or arterial resection (type 4). Patient characteristics, perioperative data, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed and compared among the 4 groups.

          Results:

          A total of 2135 patients underwent DP. Standard DP was the most frequently performed procedure (64.8%). The overall 90-day mortality rate was 1.6%. Morbidity rates were higher in patients with additional vascular or multivisceral resections, and 90-day mortality gradually increased with the extent of resection from standard DP to DP with arterial resection (type 1: 0.7%; type 2: 1.3%; type 3: 3%; type 4: 8.7%; P<0.0001). Multivariable analysis confirmed the type of DP as an independent risk factor for 90-day mortality.

          Conclusions:

          Postoperative outcomes after DP depend on the extent of resection and correlate with the type of DP. The implementation of the 4-type classification system allows standardized reporting of surgical outcomes after DP improving comparability of future studies.

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.

          Much biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study's generalisability. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) initiative developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. We defined the scope of the recommendations to cover three main study designs: cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. We convened a 2-day workshop in September, 2004, with methodologists, researchers, and journal editors to draft a checklist of items. This list was subsequently revised during several meetings of the coordinating group and in e-mail discussions with the larger group of STROBE contributors, taking into account empirical evidence and methodological considerations. The workshop and the subsequent iterative process of consultation and revision resulted in a checklist of 22 items (the STROBE statement) that relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of articles.18 items are common to all three study designs and four are specific for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies.A detailed explanation and elaboration document is published separately and is freely available on the websites of PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, and Epidemiology. We hope that the STROBE statement will contribute to improving the quality of reporting of observational studies
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey.

            Although quality assessment is gaining increasing attention, there is still no consensus on how to define and grade postoperative complications. This shortcoming hampers comparison of outcome data among different centers and therapies and over time. A classification of complications published by one of the authors in 1992 was critically re-evaluated and modified to increase its accuracy and its acceptability in the surgical community. Modifications mainly focused on the manner of reporting life-threatening and permanently disabling complications. The new grading system still mostly relies on the therapy used to treat the complication. The classification was tested in a cohort of 6336 patients who underwent elective general surgery at our institution. The reproducibility and personal judgment of the classification were evaluated through an international survey with 2 questionnaires sent to 10 surgical centers worldwide. The new ranking system significantly correlated with complexity of surgery (P < 0.0001) as well as with the length of the hospital stay (P < 0.0001). A total of 144 surgeons from 10 different centers around the world and at different levels of training returned the survey. Ninety percent of the case presentations were correctly graded. The classification was considered to be simple (92% of the respondents), reproducible (91%), logical (92%), useful (90%), and comprehensive (89%). The answers of both questionnaires were not dependent on the origin of the reply and the level of training of the surgeons. The new complication classification appears reliable and may represent a compelling tool for quality assessment in surgery in all parts of the world.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 Years After.

              In 2005, the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula developed a definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula that has been accepted universally. Eleven years later, because postoperative pancreatic fistula remains one of the most relevant and harmful complications of pancreatic operation, the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula classification has become the gold standard in defining postoperative pancreatic fistula in clinical practice. The aim of the present report is to verify the value of the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula and to update the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula classification in light of recent evidence that has emerged, as well as to address the lingering controversies about the original definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Ann Surg
                Ann Surg
                SLA
                Annals of Surgery
                Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (Hagerstown, MD )
                0003-4932
                1528-1140
                March 2024
                1 June 2023
                : 279
                : 3
                : 479-485
                Affiliations
                [* ]Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
                []Department of General and Visceral Surgery, GRN Klinik Sinsheim, Sinsheim, Germany
                []Department of General, Visceral, and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
                Author notes
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3666-5675
                Article
                ANNSURG-D-23-00184 00018
                10.1097/SLA.0000000000005935
                10829897
                37259852
                a45c358b-94fb-4907-b7f5-2ce930c7f583
                Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

                History
                Categories
                Original Articles
                Custom metadata
                TRUE

                distal pancreatectomy,morbidity,mortality,risk stratification

                Comments

                Comment on this article