• Giovanni Marchegiani, Giampaolo Perri, Anna Burelli, Fabio Zoccatelli, Stefano Andrianello, Claudio Luchini, Katia Donadello, Claudio Bassi, and Roberto Salvia.
• Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy.
• Ann. Surg. 2022 Dec 1; 276 (6): e905e913e905-e913.

ObjectiveTo evaluate TP as an alternative to PD in patients at high-risk for popf.BackgroundOutcomes of high-risk PD (HR-PD) and TP have never been compared.MethodsAll patients who underwent PD or TP between July 2017 and December 2019 were identified. HR-PD was defined according to the alternative fistula risk score. Postoperative outcomes (primary endpoint), pancreatic insufficiency, and quality of life after 12 months of follow-up (QoL) were compared between HR-PD or planned PD intraoperatively converted to TP (C-TP).ResultsA total of 566 patients underwent PD and 136 underwent TP during the study period. One hundred one (18%) PD patients underwent HR-PD, whereas 86 (63%) TP patients underwent C-TP. Postoperatively, the patients in the C-TP group exhibited lower rates of postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (15% vs 28%), delayed gastric emptying (16% vs 34%), sepsis (10% vs 31%), and Clavien-Dindo ≥3 morbidity (19% vs 31%) and had shorter median lengths of hospital stay (10 vs 21 days) (all P < 0.05). The rate of POPF in the HR-PD group was 39%. Mortality was comparable between the 2 groups (3% vs 4%). Although general, cancer- and pancreas-specific QoL were comparable between the HR-PD and C-TP groups, endocrine and exocrine insufficiency occurred in all the C-TP patients, compared to only 13% and 63% of the HR-PD patients, respectively, and C-TP patients had worse diabetesspecific QoL.ConclusionsC-TP may be considered rather than HR-PD only in few selected cases and after adequate counseling.Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

24 keywords...

hide…