Users Online : 41 About us |  Subscribe |  e-Alerts  | Feedback | Login   
Journal of Minimal Access Surgery Current Issue | Archives | Ahead Of Print Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
           Print this page Email this page   Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Ahead of Print

Prophylactic active irrigation drainage reduces the risk of post-operative pancreatic fistula-related complications in patients undergoing limited pancreatic resection


 Department of General Surgery, The Affiliated Changzhou No. 2 People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Changzhou 213003, Jiangsu Province, China

Correspondence Address:
Xihu Qin,
Department of General Surgery, The Affiliated Changzhou No. 2 People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, No. 29, Xinglong Road, Changzhou 213000, Jiangsu Province
China
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jmas.JMAS_290_19

Objective: The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of prophylactic active irrigation drainage in preventing post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) and POPF-related complications in patients undergoing limited pancreatic resection (LPR). Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent LPR for benign or borderline pancreatic lesions between February 2014 and March 2019 were enroled in this retrospective study. Patients were divided into two groups according to the type of intraperitoneal drainage used: closed-suction drainage (CSD) or continuous active irrigation drainage (CAID). Data regarding the outcomes and complications of surgery were collected and analysed. Results: A total of 50 patients (33 women; age, 50.1 ± 10.8 years) were included in this study. Twenty-nine patients were treated with CSD, and 21 patients were treated with CAID. Clinically relevant POPF and POPF-related complications occurred in 11 patients in the CSD group and in two patients in the CAID group ( P = 0.024). Patients in the CSD group demonstrated a longer tube indwelling time than those in the CAID group (17.1 ± 10.2 days vs. 13.7 ± 7.5 days; P = 0.044). Mean post-operative hospital stay was also longer in the CSD group than in the CAID group (20.6 ± 7.9 days vs. 16.1 ± 6.3 days; P = 0.039). Conclusions: Prophylactic CAID appears to be an effective alternative for the management of POPF and POPF-related complications in patients undergoing LPR.


Print this article
Search
 Back
 
  Search Pubmed for
 
    -  Chao J
    -  Zhu C
    -  Jia Z
    -  Zhang X
    -  Qin X
 Citation Manager
 Article Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed56    
    PDF Downloaded2    

Recommend this journal

2004 Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
Online since 15th August '04