Outcome of Pancreaticoduodenectomy at Low-Volume Centre in Tier-II City of India

  • Kumar Vinchurkar
  • Vishwanath M. Pattanshetti
  • Manoj Togale
  • Santosh Hazare
  • Varadraj Gokak
Original Article
  • 2 Downloads

Abstract

Currently, pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is considered a common and feasibly performed surgery for periampullary tumours, but it is still a high-risk surgical procedure with potential morbidity and mortality rates. Previously, it was emphasised for the need of high-volume centres to perform specialised surgery such as PD. The authors have made an attempt to know the relation between low-volume centre and outcomes of PD. The study was conducted in a Tier-II city referral hospital located in Karnataka, India. A total of 37 patients with suspected periampullary neoplasms underwent surgical exploration with curative intent over a period of 4 years, i.e. from May 2012 to May 2016. Out of 37 patients, 26 underwent PD, either classic Whipple resection (n = 01) or pylorus-preserving modification (n = 25). In 11 patients, resection was not possible, where biliary and gastric drainage procedures were done. All patients were treated by standardised post-operative care protocols for pancreatic resection used at our centre. We recorded the perioperative outcome along with demographics, indications for surgery, and pre- and intra-operative factors of PD. Post-operative pancreatic fistulae were evident in 4 patients. Two patients had hepaticojejunostomy leak. One patient had chyle leak. Three patients had infection at the surgical site. One patient had post-operative pneumonia leading to mortality. None of the patients had post-op haemorrhage. The surgeon volume and surgeon experience may have minimal contributing factor in post-operative morbidity, especially if there is availability of well-equipped ICU and imaging facilities, along with well-experienced personnel like oncosurgeon, anaesthesiologist, intensivist, radiologist, and nursing staff. There is a need of a multicentre study from Tier-II city hospitals/low-volume centres and high-volume centres to come with perioperative surgical outcomes following PD.

Keywords

Pancreaticoduodenectomy Low-volume centre High-volume centre Outcome 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Hughes RG, Garnick DW, Luft HS, McPhee SC, Hunt SS (1988) Hospital volume and patient outcomes: the case of hip fracture patients. Med Care 26:1057–1067CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cebul R, Snow RJ, Pine R, Hertzer NR, Norris DG (1998) Indications, outcomes, and provider volumes for carotid endarterectomy. JAMA 279:1282–1287CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Begg CB, Cramer LD, Hoskins WJ, Brennan MF (1998) Impact of hospital volume on operative mortality for major cancer surgery. JAMA 280:1747–1751CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Imperato PJ, Nenner RP, Starr HA, Will TO, Rosenberg CR, Dearie MB (1996) The effects of regionalization on clinical outcomes for a high-risk surgical procedure: a study of the Whipple procedure in New York state. Am J Med Qual 11:193–197CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Birkmeyer JD, Finlayson SRG, Tosteson ANA, Sharp SM, Warshaw AL, Fisher ES (1999) Effect of hospital volume on in-hospital mortality with pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surgery 125:250–256CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C, Sarr M, Abu Hilal M, Adham M, Allen P, Andersson R, Asbun HJ, Besselink MG, Conlon K, Del Chiaro M, Falconi M, Fernandez-Cruz L, Fernandez-Del Castillo C, Fingerhut A, Friess H, Gouma DJ, Hackert T, Izbicki J, Lillemoe KD, Neoptolemos JP, Olah A, Schulick R, Shrikhande SV, Takada T, Takaori K, Traverso W, Vollmer CR, Wolfgang CL, Yeo CJ, Salvia R, Buchler M (2017) The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 years after. Surgery 161:584–591CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lieberman MD, Kilburn H, Lindsey M, Brennan MF (1995) Relation of perioperative deaths to hospital volume among patients undergoing pancreatic resection for malignancy. Ann Surg 222:638–645CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gordon TA, Burleyson GP, Tielsch JM et al (1995) The effects of regionalization on cost and outcomes for one general high-risk surgical procedure. Ann Surg 221:44–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gordon TA, Bowman HM, Tielsch JM, Bass EB, Burleyson GP, Cameron JL (1998) Statewide regionalization of pancreaticoduodenectomy and its effect on in-hospital mortality. Ann Surg 228:71–78CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Glasgow RE, Mulvihill SJ (1996) Hospital volume influences outcome in patients undergoing pancreatic resection for cancer. West J Med 165:294–300PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sosa JA, Bowman HM, Gordon TA, Bass EB, Yeo CJ, Lillemoe KD, Pitt HA, Tielsch JM, Cameron JL (1998) Importance of hospital volume in the overall management of pancreatic cancer. Ann Surg 228:429–438CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Birkmeyer JD, Warshaw AL, Finlayson SRG et al (1999) Relationship between hospital volume and late survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surgery 126:183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shrikhande SV, Barreto SG, Somashekar BA, Suradkar K, Shetty GS, Talole S, Sirohi B, Goel M, Shukla PJ (2013) Evolution of pancreatoduodenectomy in a tertiary cancer center in India: improved results from service reconfiguration. Pancreatology 13:63–71CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ghaferi AA, Birkmeyer JD, Dimick JB (2011) Hospital volume and failure to rescue high-risk patient. Med Care 49(12):1076–1081CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Merrill AL, Jha AK, Dimick JB (2016) Clinical effect of surgical volume. N Engl J Med 374:1380–1382CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zhang L, Li Z, Wu X et al (2015) Sealing pancreaticojejunostomy in combination with duct parenchyma to mucosa seromuscular one-layer anastomosis: a novel technique to prevent pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Am Coll Surg 220:e71ee77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yanagimoto H, Satoi S, Toyokawa H et al (2014) Pancreaticogastrostomy following distal pancreatectomy prevents pancreatic fistula-related complications. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 21:473e478Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    De Carlis LG, Sguinzi R, Ferla F et al (2014) Pancreatoduodenectomy: risk factors of postoperative pancreatic fistula. Hepatogastroenterology 61:1124e1132Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bassi C, Falconi M, Molinari E, Mantovani W, Butturini G, Gumbs AA, Salvia R, Pederzoli P (2003) Duct-to-mucosa versus end-to-side pancreaticojejunostomy reconstruction after pancreaticoduodenectomy: results of a prospective randomized trial. Surgery 134:766–771CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shrikhande SV, Qureshi SS, Rajneesh N, Shukla PJ (2005) Pancreatic anastomoses after pancreaticoduodenectomy: do we need further studies? World J Surg 29(12):1642–1649CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shrikhande SV, Barreto G, Shukla PJ (2008) Pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy: the impact of a standardized technique of pancreaticojejunostomy. Langenbeck's Arch Surg 393(1):87–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Patra DP, Basu A, De S, Vatsal S (2010 Oct) Pancreaticoduodenectomy in a government medical college—should we proceed!!! Indian J Surg 72(5):381–385CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kim CG, Jo S, Kim JS (2012) Impact of surgical volume on nationwide hospital mortality after pancreaticoduodenectomy. World J Gastroenterol 18:4175–4181CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Topal B, Van de Sande S, Fieuws S, Penninckx F (2007) Effect of centralization of pancreaticoduodenectomy on nationwide hospital mortality and length of stay. Br J Surg 94:1377–1381CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kennedy TJ, Cassera MA, Wolf R, Swanstrom LL, Hansen PD (2010) Surgeon volume versus morbidity and cost in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy in an academic community medical center. J Gastrointest Surg 14:1990–1996CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Afsari A, Zhandoug Z, Young S, Ferguson L, Silapaswan S, Mittal V (2002) Outcome analysis of pancreaticoduodenectomy at a community hospital. Am Surg 68:281–284PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Schwartz GS, Swan RZ, Ruangvoravat L, Attiyeh FF (2011) Morbidity and mortality after hepatic and pancreatic resections: results from one surgeon at a low-volume urban hospital over thirty years. Am J Surg 201:438–444CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schmidt CM, Turrini O, Parikh P, House MG, Zyromski NJ, Nakeeb A, Howard TJ, Pitt HA, Lillemoe KD (2010) Effect of hospital volume, surgeon experience, and surgeon volume on patient outcomes after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a single-institution experience. Arch Surg 145:634–640CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Eppsteiner RW, Csikesz NG, McPhee JT, Tseng JF, Shah SA (2009) Surgeon volume impacts hospital mortality for pancreatic resection. Ann Surg 249:635–640CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kim H, Chung JK, Ahn YJ, Lee HW, Jung IM (2017) The 13-year experience of performing pancreaticoduodenectomy in a mid-volume municipal hospital. Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research 92(2):73–81.  https://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2017.92.2.73 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Association of Surgical Oncology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kumar Vinchurkar
    • 1
  • Vishwanath M. Pattanshetti
    • 2
  • Manoj Togale
    • 2
  • Santosh Hazare
    • 3
  • Varadraj Gokak
    • 3
  1. 1.Consultant Surgical OncologyKLES Dr Prabhakar Kore Hospital & MRCBelagaviIndia
  2. 2.Department of General Surgery, J N Medical CollegeKLE University and KLES Dr Prabhakar Kore Hospital & MRCBelagaviIndia
  3. 3.Gastroenterology, J N Medical CollegeKLE University and KLES Dr Prabhakar Kore Hospital & MRCBelagaviIndia

Personalised recommendations