Sarcopenia adversely impacts clinical outcomes in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia is a syndrome marked by a gradual and widespread reduction in skeletal muscle mass and strength, as well as a decline in functional ability, which is associated with malnutrition, hormonal changes, chronic inflammation, disturbance of intestinal flora, and exercise quality. Pancreatoduodenectomy is a commonly employed clinical intervention for conditions such as pancreatic head cancer, ampulla of Vater cancer, and cholangiocarcinoma, among others, with a notably high rate of postoperative complications. Sarcopenia is frequent in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy. However, data regarding the effects of sarcopenia in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) are both limited and inconsistent. AIM: To assess the influence of sarcopenia on outcomes in patients undergoing PD. METHODS: The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase databases were screened for studies published from the time of database inception to June 2023 that described the effects of sarcopenia on the outcomes and complications of PD. Two researchers independently assessed the quality of the data extracted from the studies that met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis using RevMan 5.3.5 and Stata 14.0 software was conducted. Forest and funnel plots were used, respectively, to demonstrate the outcomes of the sarcopenia group vs the non-sarcopenia group after PD and to evaluate potential publication bias. RESULTS: Sixteen studies encompassing 2381 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The patients in the sarcopenia group (n = 833) had higher overall postoperative complication rates [odds ratio (OR) = 3.42, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.95-5.99, P < 0.0001], higher Clavien-Dindo class ≥ III major complication rates (OR = 1.41, 95%CI: 1.04-1.90, P = 0.03), higher bacteremia rates (OR = 4.46, 95%CI: 1.42-13.98, P = 0.01), higher pneumonia rates (OR = 2.10, 95%CI: 1.34-3.27, P = 0.001), higher pancreatic fistula rates (OR = 1.42, 95%CI: 1.12-1.79, P = 0.003), longer hospital stays (OR = 2.86, 95%CI: 0.44-5.28, P = 0.02), higher mortality rates (OR = 3.17, 95%CI: 1.55-6.50, P = 0.002), and worse overall survival (hazard ratio = 2.81, 95%CI: 1.45-5.45, P = 0.002) than those in the non-sarcopenia group (n = 1548). However, no significant inter-group differences were observed regarding wound infections, urinary tract infections, biliary fistulas, or postoperative digestive bleeding. CONCLUSION: Sarcopenia is a common comorbidity in patients undergoing PD. Patients with preoperative sarcopenia have increased rates of complications and mortality, in addition to a poorer overall survival rate and longer hospital stays after PD.

Effect of Blumgart anastomosis in reducing the incidence rate of pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic fistula is one of the most serious complications after pancreatoduodenectomy for treating any lesions at the pancreatic head. For years, surgeons have tried various methods to reduce its incidence. AIM: To investigate and emphasize the clinical outcomes of Blumgart anastomosis compared with traditional anastomosis in reducing postoperative pancreatic fistula. METHODS: In this observational study, a retrospective analysis of 291 patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy, including Blumgart anastomosis (201 patients) and traditional embedded pancreaticojejunostomy (90 patients), was performed in our hospital. The preoperative and perioperative courses and long-term follow-up status were analyzed to compare the advantages and disadvantages of the two methods. Moreover, 291 patients were then separated by the severity of postoperative pancreatic fistula, and two methods of pancreaticojejunostomy were compared to detect the features of different anastomosis. Six experienced surgeons were involved and all of them were proficient in both surgical techniques. RESULTS: The characteristics of the patients in the two groups showed no significant differences, nor the preoperative information and pathological diagnoses. The operative time was significantly shorter in the Blumgart group (343.5 ± 23.0 vs 450.0 ± 40.1 min, P = 0.028), as well as the duration of pancreaticojejunostomy drainage tube placement and postoperative hospital stay (12.7 ± 0.9 d vs 17.4 ± 1.8 d, P = 0.031; and 21.9 ± 1.3 d vs 28.9 ± 1.3 d, P = 0.020, respectively). The overall complications after surgery were much less in the Blumgart group than in the embedded group (11.9% vs 26.7%, P = 0.002). Patients who underwent Blumgart anastomosis would suffer less from severe pancreatic fistula (71.9% vs 50.0%, P = 0.006), and this pancreaticojejunostomy procedure did not have worse influences on long-term complications and life quality. Thus, Blumgart anastomosis is a feasible pancreaticojejunostomy procedure in pancreatoduodenectomy surgery. It is safe in causing less postoperative complications, especially pancreatic fistula, and thus shortens the hospitalization duration. CONCLUSION: Surgical method should be a key factor in reducing pancreatic fistula, and Blumgart anastomosis needs further promotion.

Splenic Preservation Versus Splenectomy During Distal Pancreatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Studies have been published comparing spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) with distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (DPS), but the results remain inconsistent. The aim of this study was to compare SPDP with DPS by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: Literature searches of the Medline/PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were performed to identify relevant studies published before April 30,2015. Perioperative outcomes of SPDP and DPS were evaluated. The meta-analysis was performed in random- or fixed-effects models, as appropriate. A subanalysis was conducted to compare the two techniques of splenic preservation: splenic vessel preservation (SVP) and Warshaw technique (WT). RESULTS: Eighteen studies and 1156 patients were included in the comparison between SPDP and DPS. A total of 502 of these patients underwent SPDP and 654 underwent DPS. Meta-analysis showed the SPDP group had significantly fewer infectious complications (odds ratio [OR] 0.57, P = 0.006), less operative blood loss (P<0.0001), lower overall morbidity rate (OR 0.66, P = 0.002), and lower clinical pancreatic fistula rate (OR 0.42, P = 0.002) than the DPS group. Subanalysis indicated the SVP group had significantly lower rate of spleen infarction (OR 0.12, P<0.00001) and fewer secondary splenectomies (OR 0.13, P = 0.008) than the WT group. CONCLUSIONS: SPDP was a safe procedure associated with better short-term outcomes than DPS. SVP could provide more sufficient blood perfusion for the conserved spleen than WT. However, the evidence is limited, and more randomized controlled trials are warranted.