Use of an intraoperative wound protector to prevent surgical-site infection after pancreatoduodenectomy: randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Surgical-site infection (SSI) increases treatment costs, duration of hospital stay and readmission rate after pancreatic surgery. This study aimed to assess whether a wound protector could reduce the risk of superficial incisional SSI after pancreatoduodenectomy. METHODS: This RCT included patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy at Verona University Hospital, between 2017 and 2018. The experimental group had a dual-ring wound protector, whereas the control group had standard surgical drapes. The groups were stratified by preoperative biliary stent placement. The primary outcome was the overall rate of superficial SSI. RESULTS: An interim analysis was conducted after 212 patients had been enrolled; 22 patients (10·4 per cent) were excluded owing to inability to complete the pancreatoduodenectomy, or the need for postoperative reintervention. Some 94 patients (49·5 per cent) had a wound protector and 96 (50·5 per cent) had standard drapes. There were no differences between groups in demographics, or in intraoperative findings, pathological data or surgical outcomes. The overall superficial SSI rate was 7·4 per cent, which did not differ between groups (7 per cent in each group; P = 0·585). Subanalysis of patients with a preoperative biliary stent showed a similar outcome (superficial SSI rate 9 versus 8 per cent with wound protector versus surgical drapes respectively; P = 0·536). The trial was stopped prematurely on the grounds of futility. CONCLUSION: Use of a wound protector did not reduce the rate of superficial SSI after pancreatoduodenectomy. Registration number: NCT03820648 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

ANTECEDENTES: La infección de la herida quirúrgica (surgical-site infection, SSI), especialmente de la incisión, aumenta sobremanera los costes del tratamiento, la duración de la estancia y la tasa de reingresos en la cirugía de páncreas. En los últimos años se han introducido los protectores de las heridas (wound protectors, WP) con la intención de reducir la tasa de SSI. Este estudio tuvo como objetivo evaluar si un WP podría reducir la incidencia de la SSI superficial de la incisión (superficial incisional surgical-site infection, SI-SSI) en pacientes sometidos a duodenopancreatectomía cefálica (pancreaticoduodenectomy, PD). MÉTODOS: Ensayo aleatorizado controlado en el que se incluyeron los pacientes a los que se realizó una PD en la Universidad de Verona entre 2017 y 2018. En el grupo experimental se utilizó un WP de doble anillo, mientras que el grupo control se utilizaron tallas quirúrgicas convencionales (standard drape, SD). Los grupos se estratificaron también según la colocación preoperatoria de una prótesis biliar. RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron 212 pacientes, de los que 22 (10%) abandonaron el estudio debido a la imposibilidad de realizar la DP o a la necesidad de una reintervención durante el curso postoperatorio. Los pacientes se dividieron en 94 (49%) en el grupo WP y 96 (51%) en el grupo SD. No se detectaron diferencias entre grupos en cuanto a las variables demográficas y a los resultados intraoperatorios, patológicos o quirúrgicos. La tasa global de SI-SSI fue del 7,4%, que no difirió entre los grupos (WP 7,5% versus SD 7,3%, P = 0,585). Teniendo en cuenta los resultados descritos, se cumplieron los criterios de futilidad del análisis y el ensayo se interrumpió prematuramente. CONCLUSIÓN: En el entorno de un centro de alto volumen, la WP por si sola no redujo la tasa de SI-SSI. Cabría plantear su utilización dentro de un programa multimodal, que debería incluir un replanteamiento interno de la institución encaminado a la reducción de complicaciones infecciosas.

Importance of main pancreatic duct dilatation in IPMN undergoing surveillance.

BACKGROUND: The association between risk of pancreatic cancer and a dilated main pancreatic duct (MPD) in intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) is debated. The aim of this study was to assess the role of MPD size in predicting pancreatic cancer in resected IPMNs and those kept under surveillance. METHODS: All patients with IPMN referred to the Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, from 2006 to 2016 were included. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of malignancy detected at surgery or during follow-up. RESULTS: The final cohort consisted of 1688 patients with a median follow-up of 60 months. Main pancreatic duct dilatation was associated with other features of malignancy in both the resected and surveillance groups. In patients who underwent resection, only a MPD of at least 10 mm was an independent predictor of malignancy. In patients kept under surveillance, MPD dilatation was not associated with malignancy. Fifteen of 71 patients (21 per cent) with malignancy in the resection cohort had a dilated MPD alone, whereas only one of 30 (3 per cent) under surveillance with MPD dilatation alone developed malignancy. Patients with a dilated MPD and other worrisome features had an increased 5-year cumulative incidence of malignancy compared with those with a non-dilated duct (11 versus 1·2 per cent; P < 0·001); however, the risk of malignancy was not significantly increased in patients with a dilated MPD alone (4 versus 1·2 per cent; P = 0·448). CONCLUSION: In patients under surveillance, a dilated MPD alone was not associated with an increased incidence of malignancy in IPMN.