Abstract

IntroductionProphylactic intra-peritoneal drainage has been considered to be an effective measure to reduce postoperative complications after pancreatectomy. However, routinely placed drainage during abdominal surgery may be unnecessary or even harmful to some patients, due to the possibility of increasing complications. And there is still controversy about the prophylactic intra-peritoneal drainage after pancreatectomy. This meta-analysis aimed to analyze the incidence of complications after either pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) or distal pancreatectomy (DP) in the drain group and no-drain group.MethodsData were retrieved from four electronic databases PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science up to December 2020, including the outcomes of individual treatment after PD and DP, mortality, morbidity, clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF), bile leak, wound infection, postoperative hemorrhage, delayed gastric emptying (DGE), intra-abdominal abscess, reoperation, intervened radiology (IR), and readmission. Cochrane Collaboration Handbook and the criteria of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used to assess the quality of studies included.ResultsWe included 15 studies after strict screening. 13 studies with 16,648 patients were analyzed to assess the effect of drain placement on patients with different surgery procedures, and 4 studies with 6,990 patients were analyzed to assess the effect of drain placement on patients with different fistula risk. For patients undergoing PD, the drain group had lower mortality but higher rate of CR-POPF than the no-drain group. For patients undergoing DP, the drain group had higher rates of CR-POPF, wound infection and readmission. There were no significant differences in bile leak, hemorrhage, DGE, intra-abdominal abscess, and IR in either overall or each subgroup. For Low-risk subgroup, the rates of hemorrhage, DGE and morbidity were higher after drainage. For High-risk subgroup, the rate of hemorrhage was higher while the rates of reoperation and morbidity were lower in the drain group.ConclusionsIntraperitoneal drainage may benefit some patients undergoing PD, especially those with high pancreatic fistula risk. For DP, current evidences suggest that routine drainage might not benefit patients, but no clear conclusions can be drawn because of the study limitations.

Highlights

  • Prophylactic intra-peritoneal drainage has been considered to be an effective measure to reduce postoperative complications after pancreatectomy

  • Pancreatic resection is an essential treatment for malignancy/ benign lesions of the pancreas, and includes two main types in the procedure: pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) and distal pancreatectomy (DP) [1, 2]

  • After integrating and analyzing all the related studies, our results showed that prophylactic intra-abdominal drainage could significantly increase the rate of CR-POPF in Low-risk subgroup, but not in High-risk subgroup

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Prophylactic intra-peritoneal drainage has been considered to be an effective measure to reduce postoperative complications after pancreatectomy. Routinely placed drainage during abdominal surgery may be unnecessary or even harmful to some patients, due to the possibility of increasing complications. There is still controversy about the prophylactic intra-peritoneal drainage after pancreatectomy This meta-analysis aimed to analyze the incidence of complications after either pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) or distal pancreatectomy (DP) in the drain group and no-drain group. Routine intra-peritoneal drainage after pancreatectomy was considered to be an effective measure to reduce postoperative complications [8, 9]. Some studies have shown that prophylactic placement of abdominal drainage could not reduce and even increase the incidence of postoperative complications [10, 11].

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.