Gastric Cancer

, Volume 21, Issue 5, pp 871–878 | Cite as

Two-point measurement of amylase in drainage fluid predicts severe postoperative pancreatic fistula after gastric cancer surgery

  • Satoshi Kamiya
  • Naoki HikiEmail author
  • Koshi Kumagai
  • Michitaka Honda
  • Souya Nunobe
  • Manabu Ohashi
  • Takeshi Sano
  • Toshiharu Yamaguchi
Original Article



Early identification of patients at risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) allows appropriate management after gastrectomy. Although some reports have suggested a correlation between POPF and the concentration of amylase in drained abdominal fluid (D-AMY), this has not been proven to impact sufficiently on clinical decision-making. A sustained high level of D-AMY is often assumed to be due to unsatisfactory drainage or excessive pancreatic leakage. We assessed the clinical utility of measuring D-AMY on postoperative day (POD) 1 and POD3 for prediction of POPF.


Starting in April 2014, 801 patients who underwent radical gastrectomy with prophylactic drain placement were consecutively enrolled. We routinely measured D-AMY on POD1 and POD3, and compared the incidence of problematic POPF and clinical factors including D-AMY. We also attempted to clarify whether such two-point D-AMY measurement was clinically useful for patient management after gastrectomy.


Fifty-one of the patients (6.4%) developed Clavien–Dindo grade III or worse POPF. Using D-AMY cutoffs of 2218 IU/L on POD1 and 555 IU/L on POD3, the patients were successfully classified. The highest risk group, in which D-AMY was higher than the cut-off value on both POD1 and POD3, showed a significantly high rate of occurrence (33/105, 31.4%) and high positive likelihood ratio (6.74). Multivariate analysis showed that classification into this highest risk group was an independent risk factor for development of severe POPF (odds ratio 15.2, 95% CI 7.92–29.0).


Two-point measurement of D-AMY may be an efficient tool for achieving individualized management of POPF following radical gastrectomy.


Gastric cancer Gastrectomy Amylase Complication Pancreatic fistula 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to report.

Ethical standards

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national committees responsible for human experimentation, and with the 1964 and later versions of the Helsinki Declaration. Informed consent for inclusion in the study was obtained from all patients or their representatives.


  1. 1.
    Sano T, Sasako M, Katai H, Maruyama K. Amylase concentration of drainage fluid after total gastrectomy. Br J Surg. 1997;84:1310–2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Miki Y, Tokunaga M, Bando E, Tanizawa Y, Kawamura T, Terashima M. Evaluation of postoperative pancreatic fistula after total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy by ISGPF classification. J Gastrointest Surg. 2011;15:1969–76.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Iwata N, Kodera Y, Eguchi T, Ohashi N, Nakayama G, Koike M, et al. Amylase concentration of the drainage fluid as a risk factor for intra-abdominal abscess following gastrectomy for gastric cancer. World J Surg. 2010;34:1534–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tomimaru Y, Miyashiro I, Kishi K, Motoori M, Yano M, Shingai T, et al. Is routine measurement of amylase concentration in drainage fluid necessary after total gastrectomy for gastric cancer? J Surg Oncol. 2011;104:274–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    De Sol A, Cirocchi R, Di Patrizi MS, Boccolini A, Barillaro I, Cacurri A, et al. The measurement of amylase in drain fluid for the detection of pancreatic fistula after gastric cancer surgery: an interim analysis. World J Surg Oncol. 2015;19(13):65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Obama K, Okabe H, Hosogi H, Tanaka E, Itami A, Sakai Y. Feasibility of laparoscopic gastrectomy with radical lymph node dissection for gastric cancer: from a viewpoint of pancreas-related complications. Surgery. 2011;149:15–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kanda M, Fujiwara M, Tanaka C, Kobayashi D, Iwata N, Mizuno A, et al. Predictive value of drain amylase content for peripancreatic inflammatory fluid collections after laparoscopic (assisted) distal gastrectomy. Surg Endosc. 2016;30:4353–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kobayashi D, Iwata N, Tanaka C, Kanda M, Yamada S, Nakayama G, et al. Factors related to occurrence and aggravation of pancreatic fistula after radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2015;112:381–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jiang X, Hiki N, Nunobe S, Kumagai K, Nohara K, Sano T, et al. Postoperative pancreatic fistula and the risk factors of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:115–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lo CH, Chen JH, Wu CW, Lo SS, Hsieh MC, Lui WY. Risk factors and management of intra-abdominal infection after extended radical gastrectomy. Am J Surg. 2008;196:741–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nobuoka D, Gotohda N, Konishi M, Nakagohri T, Takahashi S, Kinoshita T. Prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula after total gastrectomy. World J Surg. 2008;32:2261–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Aranha GV, Aaron JM, Shoup M, Pickleman J. Current management of pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surgery. 2006;140:561–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma: 3rd English edition. Gastric Cancer. 2011;14(2):101–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    International Union Against Cancer. TNM classification of malignant tumours. 7th ed. Chichester: Wiley; 2009.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2014 (ver. 4). Gastric Cancer. 2017;20(1):1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bassi C, Dervenis C, Butturini G, Fingerhut A, Yeo C, Izbicki J, International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula Definition, et al. Postoperative pancreatic fistula: an international study group (ISGPF) definition. Surgery. 2005;138:8–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kung CH, Lindblad M, Nilsson M, Rouvelas I, Kumagai K, Lundell L, et al. Postoperative pancreatic fistula formation according to ISGPF criteria after D2 gastrectomy in Western patients. Gastric Cancer. 2014;17:571–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, Vauthey JN, Dindo D, Schulick RD, et al. The Clavien–indo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250:187–96.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bratzler DW, Houck PM, Surgical Infection Prevention Guideline Writers Workgroup. Antimicrobial prophylaxis for surgery: an advisory statement from the National Surgical Infection Prevention Project. Am J Surg. 2005;189:395–404.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Imamura H, Kurokawa Y, Tsujinaka T, Inoue K, Kimura Y, Iijima S, Shimokawa T, Furukawa H. Intraoperative versus extended antimicrobial prophylaxis after gastric cancer surgery: a phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2012;12:381–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fritz S, Hartwig W, Lehmann R, Will-Schweiger K, Kommerell M, Hackert T, Schneider L, Büchler MW, Werner J. Prophylactic antibiotic treatment is superior to therapy on-demand in experimental necrotising pancreatitis. Crit Care. 2008;12(6):R141.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Xu T, Cai Q. Prophylactic antibiotic treatment in acute necrotizing pancreatitis: results from a meta-analysis. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2008;43(10):1249–58.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mourad MM, Evans R, Kalidindi V, Navaratnam R, Dvorkin L, Bramhall SR. Prophylactic antibiotics in acute pancreatitis: endless debate. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2017;99(2):107–12.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR, Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection. Hospital infection control practices advisory committee. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999;1999(20):250–78.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kawai M, Tani M, Terasawa H, Ina S, Hirono S, Nishioka R, et al. Early removal of prophylactic drains reduces the risk of intra-abdominal infections in patients with pancreatic head resection: prospective study for 104 consecutive patients. Ann Surg. 2006;244:1–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Petrowsky H, Demartines N, Rousson V, Clavien PA. Evidence-based value of prophylactic drainage in gastrointestinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analyses. Ann Surg. 2004;240:1074–84.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The International Gastric Cancer Association and The Japanese Gastric Cancer Association 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Satoshi Kamiya
    • 1
  • Naoki Hiki
    • 1
    Email author
  • Koshi Kumagai
    • 1
  • Michitaka Honda
    • 1
  • Souya Nunobe
    • 1
  • Manabu Ohashi
    • 1
  • Takeshi Sano
    • 1
  • Toshiharu Yamaguchi
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of SurgeryCancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer ResearchTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations