Preoperative Bile Replacement Improves Immune Function for Jaundiced Patients Treated with External Biliary Drainage

Background

Although preoperative biliary drainage in jaundiced patients is controversial, external biliary drainage (EBD) is beneficial for infection control in patients with biliary cancers. When EBD is performed, additional bile replacement (BR) has the benefit of improving impaired intestinal barrier function, but the detailed mechanism remains unknown. We examined the effect of bile replacement on immune functions over the duration of BR in jaundiced patients.

Methods

Fifteen patients were enrolled into this prospective study. BR was started soon after the total serum bilirubin concentration reached 5.0 mg/dl and was continued for 14 days. Drained bile was given two times orally (2?×?100 ml/day). Concanavalin A (Con A)- and phytohemagglutinin (PHA)-stimulated lymphocyte proliferation and serum diamine oxidase (DAO) activity were measured before starting and during BR. Twenty patients with EBD and no BR were analyzed as a control group.

Results

Serum liver enzymes, prothrombin time–international normalized ratio (PT-INR), and responses to Con A and PHA gradually improved over the 14 days of BR, but percentages of lymphocytes and DAO levels did not. PT-INR, and Con A and PHA responses did not improve during EBD in the control group. PT-INR significantly decreased in patients with a greater fraction of their drained bile replaced.

Conclusions

Our results indicate that preoperative BR using as large a quantity of bile as possible is useful for improving blood coagulability and cellular immunity in patients with EBD.     

A Matched Case-Control Study of Preoperative Biliary Drainage in Patients with Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Routine Drainage Is Not Justified

Background  

Preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) prior to pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) continues to be routine in many centers despite retrospective and randomized data showing that PBD increases perioperative infectious complications.     

Association of Preoperative Biliary Drainage With Postoperative Outcome Following Pancreaticoduodenectomy

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether preoperative biliary instrumentation and preoperative biliary drainage are associated with increased morbidity and mortality rates after pancreaticoduodenectomy. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Pancreaticoduodenectomy is accompanied by a considerable rate of postoperative complications and potential death. Controversy exists regarding the impact of preoperative biliary instrumentation and preoperative biliary drainage on morbidity and mortality rates after pancreaticoduodenectomy. METHODS: Two hundred forty consecutive cases of pancreaticoduodenectomy performed between January 1994 and January 1997 were analyzed. Multiple preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative variables were examined. Pearson chi square analysis or Fisher's exact test, when appropriate, was used for univariate comparison of all variables. Logistic regression was used for multivariate analysis. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-five patients (73%) underwent preoperative biliary instrumentation (endoscopic, percutaneous, or surgical instrumentation). One hundred twenty-six patients (53%) underwent preoperative biliary drainage (endoscopic stents, percutaneous drains/stents, or surgical drainage). The overall postoperative morbidity rate after pancreaticoduodenectomy was 48% (114/240). Infectious complications occurred in 34% (81/240) of patients. Intraabdominal abscess occurred in 14% (33/240) of patients. The postoperative mortality rate was 5% (12/240). Preoperative biliary drainage was determined to be the only statistically significant variable associated with complications (p = 0.025), infectious complications (p = 0.014), intraabdominal abscess (p = 0.022), and postoperative death (p = 0.037). Preoperative biliary instrumentation alone was not associated with complications, infectious complications, intraabdominal abscess, or postoperative death. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative biliary drainage, but not preoperative biliary instrumentation alone, is associated with increased morbidity and mortality rates in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. This suggests that preoperative biliary drainage should be avoided whenever possible in patients with potentially resectable pancreatic and peripancreatic lesions. Such a change in current preoperative management may improve patient outcome after pancreaticoduodenectomy.     

Effect of Preoperative Biliary Decompression on Pancreaticoduodenectomy-Associated Morbidity in 300 Consecutive Patients

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between preoperative biliary drainage and the morbidity and mortality associated with pancreaticoduodenectomy. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Recent reports have suggested that preoperative biliary drainage increases the perioperative morbidity and mortality rates of pancreaticoduodenectomy. METHODS: Peri-operative morbidity and mortality were evaluated in 300 consecutive patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were done to evaluate the relationship between preoperative biliary decompression and the following end points: any complication, any major complication, infectious complications, intraabdominal abscess, pancreaticojejunal anastomotic leak, wound infection, and postoperative death. RESULTS: Preoperative prosthetic biliary drainage was performed in 172 patients (57%) (stent group), 35 patients (12%) underwent surgical biliary bypass performed during prereferral laparotomy, and the remaining 93 patients (31%) (no-stent group) did not undergo any form of preoperative biliary decompression. The overall surgical death rate was 1% (four patients); the number of deaths was too small for multivariate analysis. By multivariate logistic regression, no differences were found between the stent and no-stent groups in the incidence of all complications, major complications, infectious complications, intraabdominal abscess, or pancreaticojejunal anastomotic leak. Wound infections were more common in the stent group than the no-stent group. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative biliary decompression increases the risk for postoperative wound infections after pancreaticoduodenectomy. However, there was no increase in the risk of major postoperative complications or death associated with preoperative stent placement. Patients with extrahepatic biliary obstruction do not necessarily require immediate laparotomy to undergo pancreaticoduodenectomy with acceptable morbidity and mortality rates; such patients can be treated by endoscopic biliary drainage without concern for increased major complications and death associated with subsequent pancreaticoduodenectomy.     

Preoperative Biliary Drainage Increases Infectious Complications after Hepatectomy for Proximal Bile Duct Tumor Obstruction

Background  The role of preoperative biliary drainage before liver resection in jaundiced patients remains controversial. The objective of this study is to compare the perioperative outcome of liver resection for carcinoma involving the proximal bile duct in jaundiced patients with and without preoperative biliary drainage. Methods  Seventy-four consecutive jaundiced patients underwent hepatectomy for carcinoma involving the proximal bile duct from January 1989 to June 2006 and their data were retrospectively analyzed. Fourteen patients underwent biliary drainage before portal vein embolization and were excluded from the study. Thirty patients underwent biliary drainage before hepatectomy and 30 underwent liver resection without preoperative biliary drainage. All patients underwent resection of the extrahepatic bile duct. Results  Overall mortality and operative morbidity were similar in the two groups (3% vs. 10%, p = 0.612 and 70% vs. 63%, p = 0.583, respectively). The incidence of noninfectious complications was similar in the two groups. There was no difference in hospital stay between the two groups. Patients with preoperative biliary drainage had a significantly higher rate of infectious complications (40% vs. 17%, p = 0.044). At multivariate analysis, preoperative biliary drainage was the only independent risk factor for infectious complication in the postoperative course (RR = 4.411, 95%CI = 1.216-16.002, p = 0.024). Even considering patients with preoperative biliary drainage in whom the bilirubin level went below 5 mg/dl, the risk of infectious complications was higher compared with patients without biliary drainage (47.6% vs. 16.6%, p = 0.017). Conclusions  Overall mortality and morbidity after liver resection are not improved by preoperative biliary drainage in jaundiced patients. Prehepatectomy biliary drainage increases the incidence of infectious complications.     

Preoperative Biliary Drainage in Patients with Obstructive Jaundice: History and Current Status

Rationale  Preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) has been introduced to improve outcome after surgery in patients suffering from obstructive jaundice due to a potentially resectable proximal or distal bile duct/pancreatic head lesion. In experimental models, PBD is almost exclusively associated with beneficial results: improved liver function and nutritional status; reduction of systemic endotoxemia; cytokine release; and, as a result, an improved immune response. Mortality was significantly reduced in these animal models. Human studies show conflicting results. Findings  For distal obstruction, currently the “best-evidence” available clearly shows that routine PBD does not yield the appreciated improvement in postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing resection. Moreover, PBD harbors its own complications. However, most of the available data are outdated or suffer from methodological deficits. Conclusion  The highest level of evidence for PBD to be performed in proximal obstruction, as well as over the preferred mode, is lacking but, nevertheless, assimilated in the treatment algorithm for many centers. Logistics and waiting lists, although sometimes inevitable, could be factors that might influence the decision to opt for PBD, as well as an extended diagnostic workup with laparoscopy (on indication) or scheduled preoperative chemotherapy.     

Endoscopic and Percutaneous Preoperative Biliary Drainage in Patients with Suspected Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma

Introduction  

Controversy exists over the preferred technique of preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) in patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HCCA) requiring major liver resection. The current study compared outcomes of endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) in patients with resectable HCCA.     

Good Quality of Life in Severely Obese Total Knee Replacement Patients: A Case-Control Study

Background  

The impact of obesity on total knee replacement (TKR) outcomes is unclear. Studies use different classifications of obesity and heterogeneous methods, making comparisons difficult. The aim of this study was to evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQL) preoperatively and at 12 months of follow-up in severe and morbidly obese patients with knee osteoarthritis and a control group of nonobese patients undergoing TKR.     

Combined Major Hepatectomy and Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Locally Advanced Biliary Carcinoma: Long-Term Results

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to define the role of combined major hepatectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy in the surgical management of biliary carcinoma and to identify potential candidates for this aggressive procedure. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 28 patients who underwent a combined major hepatectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy for extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (n = 17) or gallbladder carcinoma (n = 11). Major hepatectomy was defined as hemihepatectomy or more extensive hepatectomy. Altogether, 11 patients underwent a Whipple procedure, and 17 had a pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy. The median follow-up time was 169 months. RESULTS: Morbidity and in-hospital mortality were 82% and 21%, respectively. Overall cumulative survival rates after resection were 32% at 2 years and 11% at 5 years (median survival time 9 months). The median survival time was 6 months with a 2-year survival rate of 0% in 11 patients with residual tumor, whereas the median survival time was 26 months with a 5-year survival rate of 18% in 17 patients with no residual tumor (P = 0.0012). Residual tumor status was the only independent prognostic factor of significance (relative risk 4.65; P = 0.003). There were three 5-year survivors (two with diffuse cholangiocarcinoma and one with gallbladder carcinoma with no bile duct involvement) among the patients with no residual tumor. CONCLUSIONS: Combined major hepatectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy provides survival benefit for some patients with locally advanced biliary carcinoma only if potentially curative (R0) resection is feasible. Patients with diffuse cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder carcinoma with no bile duct involvement are potential candidates for this aggressive procedure.     

Pylorus-Resecting Pancreaticoduodenectomy Offers Long-Term Outcomes Similar to Those of Pylorus-Preserving Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Results of a Prospective Study

Background

We showed in a previous study that pylorus-resecting pancreaticoduodenectomy (PrPD), which divides the stomach adjacent to the pylorus ring, preserves more than 95 % of the stomach and significantly reduced the incidence of delayed gastric emptying (DGE) compared with pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PpPD). However, long-term outcomes of PrPD and the adverse effect of early postoperative DGE on long-term outcomes remain unclear.

Methods

A total of 130 patients enrolled in a previous study were followed for 24 months after surgery. Primary endpoint was whether PrPD is a better surgical procedure than PpPD regarding long-term outcomes.

Results

Weight loss > grade 2 (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, Version 4.03) at 24 months after surgery was significantly better in group PrPD (16.2 %) than in group PpPD (42.2 %) (p = 0.011). Nutritional status and late postoperative complications were similar for the two groups. The incidence of weight loss > grade 2 at 24 months was 63.6 % in DGE patients with DGE and 25.3 % in non-DGE patients (p = 0.010). T _max (time to peak ¹³CO₂ content in ¹³C-acetate breath test) at 24 months in DGE patients was significantly delayed compared with that in non-DGE patients (27.9 ± 22.7 vs. 16.5 ± 10.1 min, p = 0.023). Serum albumin level at 24 months was higher in non-DGE patients than in those with DGE (3.7 ± 0.6 vs. 4.1 ± 0.4 g/dl, p = 0.013).

Conclusions

PrPD offers long-term outcomes similar to those of PpPD. DGE may be associated with weight loss and poor nutritional status in patients with long-term outcomes.     

Surgical Apgar Score Predicts Perioperative Morbidity in Patients Undergoing Pancreaticoduodenectomy at a High-Volume Center

Objectives  

Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) remains a procedure that carries considerable morbidity. Numerous studies have evaluated factors to predict patients at risk. The aim of this study was to determine whether the surgical Apgar score (SAS) predicts perioperative morbidity and mortality.     

Feasibility and Safety of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage (EUS-BD) for Malignant Biliary Obstruction Associated with Ascites: Results of a Pilot Study

Background

It has been suggested that EUS-BD may be a feasible and safer alternative to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) after failed ERCP in patients with ascites. To date, no study has specifically evaluated the performance of EUS-BD in this context.

Methods

Retrospective analysis was done for patients with and without ascites who underwent EUS-BD for malignant biliary obstruction after failed ERCP between July 2010 and September 2014. Complications and technical and clinical successes between the two groups were compared.

Results

A total of 31 patients were included: 20 patients without ascites (group 1) and 11 with ascites (group 2). Nineteen patients underwent EUS-hepaticogastrostomy (six in group 2), and 12 underwent EUS-choledochoduodenostomy (five in group 2). Technical success was achieved in all patients. Clinical success was observed in 95% (n?=?19) in group 1 and 64% (n?=?7) in group 2 (p?=?0.042). In three out of four patients without clinical success in group 2, the follow-up period was not long enough to observe the clinical response because of early death within the 2 weeks after EUS-BD secondary to disease progression or preprocedural unresponsive sepsis. No significant differences were observed between groups 1 and 2 either in the overall rates of procedural-related complications (20 and 9%, respectively, p?=?0.63) or in the rates of major complications (15 vs 9%, respectively, p?=?0.639). Stent migration occurred in one patient in each group, intra- or post-procedural bleeding occurred in two patients in group 1, which was conservatively managed, and one patient in group 1 presented biliary leakage. Stent patency and the number of re-interventions were not significantly different.

Conclusions

EUS-BD is technically feasible in patients with ascites. Our results suggest that EUS-BD may be a clinically effective and safe alternative after failed ERCP in patients with ascites.