Routine Gastric Decompression after Pancreatoduodenectomy: Treating the Surgeon?

BACKGROUND: The decision to routinely leave a nasogastric tube after pancreatoduodenectomy remains controversial. We sought to determine the impact of immediate nasogastric tube removal versus early nasogastric tube removal (<24 h) on postoperative outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective review of our institution's prospective ACS-NSQIP database identified patients that underwent pancreatoduodenectomy from 2015 to 2018. Outcomes were compared among patients with immediate nasogastric tube removal versus early nasogastric tube removal. RESULTS: A total of 365 patients were included in primary analysis (no nasogastric tube, n = 99; nasogastric tube removed <24 h, n = 266). Thirty-day mortality and infectious, renal, cardiovascular, and pulmonary morbidity were similar in comparing those with no nasogastric tube versus early nasogastric tube removal on univariable and multivariable analyses (P > 0.05). Incidence of delayed gastric emptying (11.1 versus 13.2%) was similar between groups. Patients with no nasogastric tube less frequently required nasogastric tube reinsertion (n = 4, 4%) compared to patients with NGT <24 h (n = 39, 15%) (OR = 3.83, 95% CI [1.39-10.58]; P = 0.009). CONCLUSION: Routine gastric decompression can be safely avoided after uneventful pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Optimal hepatobiliary scintigraphy for gallbladder dyskinesia.

BACKGROUND: The accuracy of hepatobiliary scintigraphy to assess gallbladder function remains controversial. National supply shortages of pharmaceutical-grade cholecystokinin led to the use of an oral fatty meal to stimulate gallbladder contraction during hepatobiliary scintigraphy. The goal of this study was to compare the predictive indices of cholecystokinin and fatty meal ingestion for stimulation of gallbladder contraction. METHODS: Patients evaluated with hepatobiliary iminodiacetic acid scan from 2014 to 2017 were reviewed and grouped based on testing stimulant (fatty meal versus cholecystokinin). Patients who later underwent cholecystectomy were selected for analysis. Hepatobiliary iminodiacetic acid results were correlated with surgical pathology and postoperative resolution of symptoms. Two-way statistical analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 359 patients underwent hepatobiliary iminodiacetic acid scan followed by cholecystectomy for biliary dyskinesia. Patients who received fatty meal stimulant (n = 86) were compared to those that received cholecystokinin (n = 273). Mean gallbladder ejection fraction during hepatobiliary iminodiacetic acid was 38% and 44% for the cholecystokinin and fatty meal groups, respectively, P = .073. Predictive metrics were not statistically different between groups with regard to pathology, symptomatic improvement, or accuracy. Symptomatic resolution (cholecystokinin-hepatobiliary iminodiacetic acid 78%, fatty meal-hepatobiliary iminodiacetic acid 68%; P = 0.058) and specificity (cholecystokinin-hepatobiliary iminodiacetic acid 26%, fatty meal-hepatobiliary iminodiacetic acid 44%, P = 0.417) were comparable in both testing groups. CONCLUSION: Stimulation of gallbladder contraction with a fatty meal during hepatobiliary iminodiacetic acid testing is a more affordable and reliable alternative to cholecystokinin for patients undergoing evaluation for gallbladder dysmotility.

Comparison of skin closure techniques in patients undergoing open pancreaticoduodenectomy: A single center experience.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated closure techniques and incisional surgical site complications (SSCs) and incisional surgical site infections (SSIs) after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). METHODS: Retrospective review of open PDs from 2015 to 2018 was performed. Outcomes were compared among closure techniques (subcuticular + topical skin adhesive (TSA); staples; subcuticular only). SSCs were defined as abscess, cellulitis, seroma, or fat necrosis. SSIs were defined according to the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP). RESULTS: Patients with subcuticular + TSA (n = 205) were less likely to develop an incisional SSC (9.8%) compared to staples (n = 139) (20.1%) and subcuticular (n = 74) (16.2%) on univariable analysis (P = 0.024). Multivariable analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in incisional SSC between subcuticular + TSA and subcuticular (P = 0.528); a significant difference remained between subcuticular + TSA and staples (P = 0.014). Unadjusted median length of stay (LOS) (days) was significantly longer for staples (9) vs. subcuticular (8) vs. subcuticular + TSA (7); P < 0.001. Incisional SSIs were evaluated separately according to the NSQIP definition. When comparing rates, the subcuticular + TSA group experienced lower incisional SSIs compared to the other two techniques (4.9% vs. 10.1%, 10.8%). However, this difference was not statistically significant by either univariable or multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Subcuticular suture + TSA reduces the risk of incisional SSCs when compared to staples alone after pancreaticoduodenectomy.