Changes in Serum Lactate Level Predict Postoperative Intra-Abdominal Infection After Pancreatic Resection

Abstract

Objective

Postoperative intra-abdominal infection is one of the most serious complications after pancreatic resection. In this article, we investigated the relationship between serum lactate level and postoperative infection, to suggest a new predictor of potential infection risk after pancreatectomy.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of 156 patients who underwent pancreatic surgery and admitted in the intensive care unit for recovery after surgery between August 2017 and August 2019 was performed.

Results

The basic characteristics, preoperative information, pathological diagnoses, surgical methods, and intraoperative situations of patients in the postoperative intra-abdominal infection group (n = 52) and non-infection group (n = 104) showed no significant differences. With the same postoperative treatments and results of fluid balance, blood pressure maintenance, and laboratory tests, postoperative serum lactate level increased much higher in the infection group than non-infection group (P < 0.001), while the base excess level declined much lower (P = 0.002). Patients in the infection group needed more time to elute lactate (P < 0.001), and stayed longer in the intensive care unit after surgery (P = 0.007). The overall postoperative complications were certainly more in the infection group (P < 0.001), resulting in a longer hospitalization time (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

When patients recovered smoothly from anesthesia with a stable hemodynamics situation and normal results of laboratory tests, abnormally high serum lactate level could be a predictor of postoperative intra-abdominal infection after pancreatic resection.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. 1.

    Harrison LE, Brennan MF (1998) Portal vein resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 7(1):165–181

    CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Johnson CD et al (1993) Resection for adenocarcinoma of the body and tail of the pancreas. Br J Surg 80(9):1177–1179

    CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Li YT et al (2019) Effect of Blumgart anastomosis in reducing the incidence rate of pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. World J Gastroenterol 25(20):2514–2523

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Li Y et al (2017) Comparison of long-term benefits of organ-preserving pancreatectomy techniques for benign or low-grade malignant tumors at the pancreatic head. Medicine 96(51):e9420 (Baltimore)

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Strasberg SM, Drebin JA, Linehan D (2003) Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy. Surgery 133(5):521–527

    PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Whipple AO (1941) The rationale of radical surgery for cancer of the pancreas and ampullary region. Ann Surg 114(4):612–615

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Kawai M, Yamaue H (2010) Analysis of clinical trials evaluating complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a new era of pancreatic surgery. Surg Today 40(11):1011–1017

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Oguro S et al (2017) Three hundred and sixty-eight consecutive pancreaticoduodenectomies with zero mortality. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 24(4):226–234

    PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Zhang Z, Xu X (2014) Lactate clearance is a useful biomarker for the prediction of all-cause mortality in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis*. Crit Care Med 42(9):2118–2125

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Zhang Z, Xu X, Chen K (2014) Lactate clearance as a useful biomarker for the prediction of all-cause mortality in critically ill patients: a systematic review study protocol. BMJ Open 4(5):e004752

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Haas SA et al (2016) Severe hyperlactatemia, lactate clearance and mortality in unselected critically ill patients. Intensiv Care Med 42(2):202–210

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    de Vries HM, Dekker SE, Boer C (2014) Lactate clearance as a predictor of mortality. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 77(1):183

    PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Freitas AD, Franzon O (2015) Lactate as predictor of mortality in polytrauma. Arq Bras Cir Dig 28(3):163–166

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Odom SR et al (2013) Lactate clearance as a predictor of mortality in trauma patients. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 74(4):999–1004

    CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Gu WJ, Zhang Z, Bakker J (2015) Early lactate clearance-guided therapy in patients with sepsis: a meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials. Intensiv Care Med 41(10):1862–1863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Hayashida K et al (2017) Early lactate clearance is associated with improved outcomes in patients with postcardiac arrest syndrome: a prospective, multicenter observational study (SOS-KANTO 2012 Study). Crit Care Med 45(6):e559–e566

    PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Jones AE et al (2010) Lactate clearance versus central venous oxygen saturation as goals of early sepsis therapy: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 303(8):739–746

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Hajjar LA et al (2013) High lactate levels are predictors of major complications after cardiac surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 146(2):455–460

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Lindsay AJ et al (2013) Lactate clearance time and concentration linked to morbidity and death in cardiac surgical patients. Ann Thorac Surg 95(2):486–492

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Zhou BC et al (2018) Blood lactate or lactate clearance: Which is robust to predict the neurological outcomes after cardiac arrest? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Biomed Res Int 2018:8014213

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Weil MH, Afifi AA (1970) Experimental and clinical studies on lactate and pyruvate as indicators of the severity of acute circulatory failure (shock). Circulation 41(6):989–1001

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Bassi C et al (2017) The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 Years after. Surgery 161(3):584–591

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Sugiura T et al (2012) Risk factor of surgical site infection after pancreaticoduodenectomy. World J Surg 36(12):2888–2894. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-012-1742-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Callery MP et al (2013) A prospectively validated clinical risk score accurately predicts pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. J Am Coll Surg 216(1):1–14

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Bassi C et al (2005) Postoperative pancreatic fistula: an international study group (ISGPF) definition. Surgery 138(1):8–13

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Bassi C et al (2010) Early versus late drain removal after standard pancreatic resections: results of a prospective randomized trial. Ann Surg 252(2):207–214

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Fujii T et al (2014) Modified Blumgart anastomosis for pancreaticojejunostomy: technical improvement in matched historical control study. J Gastrointest Surg 18(6):1108–1115

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Wente MN et al (2007) Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after pancreatic surgery: a suggested definition by the international study group of pancreatic surgery (ISGPS). Surgery 142(5):761–768

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Wente MN et al (2007) Postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH): an international study group of pancreatic surgery (ISGPS) definition. Surgery 142(1):20–25

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Vin Y et al (2008) Management and outcomes of postpancreatectomy fistula, leak, and abscess: results of 908 patients resected at a single institution between 2000 and 2005. J Am Coll Surg 207(4):490–498

    PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Lee J, Little TD (2017) A practical guide to propensity score analysis for applied clinical research. Behav Res Ther 98:76–90

    PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Reiffel JA (2018) Propensity-score matching: optimal, adequate, or incomplete? J Atr Fibrillation 11(4):2130

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Grendar J et al (2017) Validation of fistula risk score calculator in diverse North American HPB practices. HPB (Oxford) 19(6):508–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Okabayashi T et al (2005) Postoperative pancreatic fistula following surgery for gastric and pancreatic neoplasm; is distal pancreaticosplenectomy truly safe? Hepatogastroenterology 52(61):233–236

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Shi N et al (2016) Splenic preservation versus splenectomy during distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 23(2):365–374

    PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Liu Z et al (2019) Prognostic accuracy of the serum lactate level, the SOFA score and the qSOFA score for mortality among adults with Sepsis. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 27(1):51

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Ryoo SM et al (2018) Lactate level versus lactate clearance for predicting mortality in patients with septic shock defined by sepsis-3. Crit Care Med 46(6):e489–e495

    CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Shankar-Hari M et al (2016) Developing a new definition and assessing new clinical criteria for septic shock: for the third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (sepsis-3). JAMA 315(8):775–787

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Singer M et al (2016) The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (sepsis-3). JAMA 315(8):801–810

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Polk HJ, Lopez-Mayor JF (1969) Postoperative wound infection: a prospective study of determinant factors and prevention. Surgery 66(1):97–103

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    (2012) Antimicrobial prophylaxis for surgery. Treat Guidel Med Lett 10(122):73–8; quiz 79–80

  42. 42.

    Bratzler DW et al (2013) Clinical practice guidelines for antimicrobial prophylaxis in surgery. Surg Infect 14(1):73–156 (Larchmt)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    Kasatpibal N et al (2017) Failure to redose antibiotic prophylaxis in long surgery increases risk of surgical site infection. Surg Infect 18(4):474–484 (Larchmt)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Mitchell NJ, Evans DS, Pollock D (1980) Pre-operation single-dose cefuroxime antimicrobial prophylaxis with and without metronidazole in elective gastrointestinal surgery. J Antimicrob Chemother 6(3):393–399

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Okamura K et al (2017) Randomized controlled trial of perioperative antimicrobial therapy based on the results of preoperative bile cultures in patients undergoing biliary reconstruction. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 24(7):382–393

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the project of Capital’s Funds for Health Improvement and Research (2020-1-4011), and the project of application and promotion of capital special clinical research from Beijing Municipal Science & Technology Commission (Z171100001017017018).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

YL and LC are the co-first authors of this article, who took in charge of data collection, analysis, article writing and language editing; CX, CD, HZ, and SW helped to collect data; MD is the correspondence author of this article, who guided the whole work, while YZ, YL, JG, QL, and TZ helped to conduct the research.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Menghua Dai.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors have disclosed that they have no significant relationships with, or financial interest in, any commercial companies pertaining to this article.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Yatong Li and Lixin Chen are co-first authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, Y., Chen, L., Xing, C. et al. Changes in Serum Lactate Level Predict Postoperative Intra-Abdominal Infection After Pancreatic Resection. World J Surg (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-021-05987-8

Download citation