The optimal choice for pancreatic anastomosis after pancreaticoduodenectomy: A network meta-analysis of randomized control trials. (September 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Wang, Weidong; Zhang, Zhaohui; Gu, Chichang; Liu, Qingbo; Liang, Zhiqiang; He, Wei; Chen, Jianping; Lai, Jiaming
• Is Part Of: International journal of surgery. Volume 57(2018)
• Page Start: 111
• Page End: 116
• Publication Date: 2018-09
• Subjects: Pancreatic anastomosis -- Pancreaticoduodenectomy -- Pancreatic fistula -- Network meta-analysis; Surgery -- Periodicals; Surgical Procedures, Operative -- Periodicals; 617.005
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2018.04.005
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1743-9191

Abstract

Abstract: Background: A number of pancreatic anastomosis methods for pancreaticoduodenectomy including pancreaticogastrostomy(PG), duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy(duct-to-mucosa PJ), invagination pancreaticojejunostomy(invagination PJ) and binding pancreaticojejunostomy(BPJ), but the optimal choice remains unclear. We performed a network meta-analysis to synthesize direct and indirect evidence to identify the optimal choice for pancreatic anastomosis after pancreaticoduodenectomy Methods: We searched the Embase, PubMed and Cochrane library databases for randomized control trials. The relative risk (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. The primary outcome is postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). Result: In total, 16 RCT studies, including a total of 2396 patients, met our criteria. The results showed that PG is not superior to invagination PJ (RR 0.70 95%CI: 0.35–1.39) and duct-to-mucosa PJ (RR 0.58 95%CI: 0.30–1.10) according to the ISGPS definition. Furthermore PG cannot reduce the POPF rates than invagination PJ (RR 0.51 95%CI: 0.2–1.21) and duct-to-mucosa PJ (RR 0.46 95%CI: 0.16–1.14) according to the soft pancreatic texture. BPJ might reduce the incidence of POPF than duct-to-mucosa PJ (RR 0.00 95%CI: 0.00–0.04), invagination PJ (RR 0.00 95%CI: 0.00–0.03), PG (RR 0.00 95%CI: 0.00–0.03), but the results have major limitations with only one RCT reported BPJ and different definition of POPF. Conclusion: There are no significant differences among BPJ, duct-to-mucosa PJ, invagination PJ and PG in the prevention of POPF, overall morbidity, mortality and DGE. However, further randomized controlled trials should be undertaken to ascertain these findings, especially for BPJ. Highlights: A network meta-analysis is performed to synthesize direct and indirect evidence to identify the optimal choice for pancreatic anastomosis after pancreaticoduodenectomy. PG is not superior to duct-to-mucosa PJ and invagination PJ in the prevention of POPF according to the ISGPS definition and pancreatic texture. No significant differences among BPJ, duct-to-mucosa PJ, invagination PJ and PG in the prevention of POPF, overall morbidity, mortality and DGE. However, further randomized controlled trials should be undertaken to ascertain these findings, especially for BPJ.