Медицинская литература. Новинки

 

 

 

 

 

 

Панкреатический свищ при проксимальной резекции поджелудочной железы: корреляция компьютерно-томографических и морфологических предикторов

Вы можете загрузить полный текст статьи в формате pdf

Цель исследования: определить возможности компьютерной томографии с контрастным усилением в оценке степени фиброза и количества ацинарных структур в паренхиме поджелудочной железы для прогнозирования тяжелого течения послеоперационного периода при проксимальных резекциях поджелудочной железы. Материал и методы. В отделении абдоминальной хирургии в 2016-2019 гг было выполнено 196 панкреатодуоденальных резекций. Ретроспективно было отобрано 49 пациентов. Пациенты были разделены на 2 группы в соответствии с течением послеоперационного периода. Послеоперационный период протекал гладко в 41 (84%) случае. Клинически значимый панкреатический свищ развился в 8 (16%) случаях. По данным дооперационной компьютерной томографии (КТ) с контрастным усилением оценивали структуру дистального отдела железы, плотность дистального отдела железы в нативную фазу сканирования (HU), коэффициент накопления контрастного вещества паренхимой (КН), коэффициент накопления контрастного препарата в венозную (КНвен.) и выделительную (КНвыдел.) фазы, коэффициент относительного вымывания контрастного вещества (L/E). Гистологически оценивали количество фиброза, жира и ацинарных клеток в срезе удаленной железы. Результаты. “Мягкая” структура поджелудочной железы (r = 0,747, p = 0,000), значения коэффициента КН (r = 0,631, p = 0,000), плотность дистального отдела железы в нативную фазу сканирования (r = 0,568, p = 0,000) положительно коррелировали с тяжелым течением послеоперационного периода и количеством ацинарных клеток. Значения коэффициента КНвыдел. положительно коррелировали с количеством фиброза (r = 0,562, p = 0,000) в железе и отрицательно с течением послеоперационного периода. Риск развития панкреатического свища в 3 раза выше при значениях КН больше 1, чувствительности 75%, специфичности 73%. Риск развития панкреатического свища в 3 раза выше при значениях КНвыдел. менее 0,45, чувствительности 75%, специфичности 63%. Заключение. КТ с контрастным усилением позволяет оценить структуру паренхимы железы, количество фиброза и ацинарных клеток на дооперационном этапе для выделения группы повышенного риска тяжелого течения послеоперационного периода.

Ключевые слова:
компьютерная томография с контрастным усилением, ацинусы, фиброз, послеоперационные осложнения, панкреатический свищ, коэффициент накопления контрастного вещества, коэффициент вымывания контрастного вещества, computed tomography with contrast enhancement, acinar cells, fibrosis, postoperative complications, pancreatic fistula, parenchyma accumulation coefficient, parenchyma accumulation coefficien

Литература:
1.Hashimoto Y., Traverso L.W. Incidence of pancreatic anastomoticfailure and delayed gastric emptying after pancreatoduodenectomyin 507 consecutive patients: use of a web-based calculator toimprove homogeneity of definition. Surgery. 2010; 147: 503-515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2009.10.034
2.Pedrazzoli S., Liessi G., Pasquali C., Ragazzi R., Berselli M., Sperti C. Postoperative pancreatic fistulas: preventing severe complicationsand reducing reoperation and mortality rate. Ann. Surg. 2009; 249: 97-104. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e31819274fe
3.Bassi C., Dervenis C., Butturini G., Fingerhut A., Yeo C., Izbicki J., Neoptolemos J., Sarr M., Traverso W., Buchler M.. Postoperativepancreatic fistula: an international study group (ISGPF) definition. Surgery. 2005; 138: 8e13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2005.05.001
4.Bassi C., Marchegiani G., Dervenis C., Sarr M., Hilal M.A., Adham, M., Allen P., Andersson R., Asbun H.J., Besselink M.G., Conlon K., Chiaro M.D., Falconi M., Fernandez-Cruz L., Castillo C.F., Fingerhu A., Friess H., Gouma D., Buchler M. The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 years after. Surgery. 2017; 161 (3): 584-591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2016.11.014
5.Murakami Y., Uemura K., Hayashidani Y., Sudo T., Hashimoto Y., Nakagawa N., Ohge H., Sueda T. No mortality after 150 consecutive pancreatoduodenectomies with duct-to-mucosa pancreaticogastrostomy. J. Surg. Oncol. 2008; 97: 205-209. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.20903
6.Poon R.T., Fan S.T., Lo C.M., Ng K.K., Yuen W.K., Yeung C., Wong J. External drainage of pancreatic duct with a stent to reduce leakage rate of pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a prospective randomized trial. Ann. Surg. 2007; 246: 425-433; discussion 433-425. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181492c28
7.Pratt W.B., Maithel S.K., Vanounou T., Huang Z.S., Callery M.P., Vollmer C.M. Jr. Clinical and economic validation of the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula (ISGPF) classification scheme. Ann. Surg. 2007; 245: 443-451. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000251708.70219.d2
8.Wellner U.F., Kayser G., Lapshyn H., Sick O., Makowiec F., Hoppner J., Hopt U.T., Keck T. A simple scoring system based on clinical factors related to pancreatic texture predicts postoperative pancreatic fistula preoperatively. HPB (Oxford). 2010; 12: 696-702. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-2574.2010.00239.x
9.Kawai M., Kondo S., Yamaue H., Wada K., Sano K., Motoi F., Unno M., Satoi S., Kwon A.H., Hatori T., Yamamoto M., Matsumoto J., Murakami Y., Doi R., Ito M., Miyakawa S., Shinchi H., Natsugoe S., Nakagawara H., Ohta T., Takada T. Predictive risk factors for clinicallyrelevant pancreatic fistula analyzed in 1,239 patients with pancreaticoduodenectomy: multicenter data collection as a project study of pancreatic surgery by the Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery. J. Hepatobiliary Pancreat. Sci. 2011; 18: 601-608. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00534-011-0373-x
10.El Nakeeb A., Salah T., Sultan A., El Hemaly M., Askr W., Ezzat H., Hamdy E, Atef E., El Hanafy E., El-Geidie A., Abdel Wahab M., Abdallah T. Pancreatic anastomotic leakage after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Risk factors, clinical predictors, and management (single center experience). Wld J. Surg. 2013; 37: 1405-1418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-013-1998-5
11.Hashimoto Y., Traverso L.W. Pancreatic anastomotic failure rate after pancreaticoduodenectomy decreases with microsurgery. J. Am. Coll. Surg. 2010; 211: 510-521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.06.018
12.Nakamura H., Murakami Y., Uemura K., Hayashidani Y., Sudo T., Ohge H., Sueda T. Predictive factors for exocrine pancreatic insufficiency after pancreatoduoden ectomy with pancreaticogastrostomy. J. Gastrointest. Surg. 2009; 13: 1321-1327. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-009-0896-5
13.Braga M., Capretti G., Pecorelli N., Balzano G., Doglioni C., Ariotti R., Di Carlo V.A prognostic score to predict major complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann. Surg. 2011; 254: 702-707. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e31823598fb
14.Uchida E., Tajiri T., Nakamura Y., Aimoto T., Naito Z. Relationship between grade of fibrosis in pancreatic stump and postoperative pancreatic exocrine activity after pancreaticoduodenectomy. J. Nippon Med. School. 2002; 69 (6): 549-556. https://doi.org/10.1272/jnms.69.549
15.Takahashi N., Fletcher J.G., Hough D.M., Fidler J.L., Kawashima A., Mandrekar J.N., Chari S.T. Autoimmune pancreatitis: differentiation from pancreatic carcinoma and normal pancreas on the basis of enhancement characteristics at dual-phase CT. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2009; 193: 479-484. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.08.1883
16.Laaninen M., Blauer M., Vasama K., Jin H., Raty S., Sand J., Nordback I., Laukkarinen J. The risk for immediate postoperative complications after pancreatico duodenectomy is increased by high frequency of acinar cells and decreased by prevalent fibrosis of the cut edge of pancreas. Pancreas. 2012; 41 (6): 957-961. https://doi.org/10.1097/MPA.0b013e3182480b81
17.Sugimoto M., Takahashi S., Kojima M., Kobayashi T., Gotohda N., Konishi M. In patients with a soft pancreas, a thick parenchyma, a small duct, and fatty infiltration are significant risks for pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. J. Gastrointest. Surg. 2017; 21 (5): 846-854. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-017-3356-7
18.Dinter D.J., Aramin N., Weiss C., Singer C., Weisser G., Schoenberg S.O., Post S., Niedergethmann M. Prediction of anastomotic leakage after pancreatic head resections by dynamic magnetic resonance imaging (dMRI). J. Gastrointest. Surg. 2009; 13: 735-744. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-008-0765-7
19.Kim T., Murakami T., Takamura M., Hori M., Takahashi S., Nakamori S., Sakon M., Tanji Y., Wakasa K., Nakamura H. Pancreatic mass due to chronic pancreatitis: correlation of CT and MR imaging features with pathologic findings. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2001; 177: 367-371. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.177.2.1770367
20.Lee S.E., Jang J.Y., Lim C.S., Kang M.J., Kim S.H., Kim M.A., Kim S.W. Measurement of pancreatic fat by magnetic resonance imaging: predicting the occurrence of pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. Ann. Surg. 2010; 251: 932-936. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181d65483
21.Tajima Y., Matsuzaki S., Furui J., Isomoto I., Hayashi K., Kanematsu T. Use of the time-signal intensity curve from dynamic magnetic resonance imaging to evaluate remnant pancreatic fibrosis after pancreaticojejunostomy in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br. J. Surg. 2004; 91: 595-600. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.4461
22.Hashimoto Y., Sclabas G.M., Takahashi N., Kirihara Y., Smyrk T. C., Huebner M., Farnell M.B. Dual-phase computed tomography for assessment of pancreatic fibrosis and anastomotic failure risk following pancreatoduodenectomy. J. Gastrointest. Surg. 2011; 15: 2193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-011-1687-3
23.Kang J.H., Park J.S., Yu J.S., Chung J.J., Kim J.H., Cho E.S., Yoon D.S. Prediction of pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy by preoperative dynamic CT and fecal elastase-1 levels. PloS one. 2017; 12 (5): e0177052. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177052
24.Petrova E., Lapshyn H., Bausch D., D''Haese J., Werner J., Klier T., Nussler N.,Gaedcke C.J., Ghadimi M., Uh W., Belyaev O., Kantor O., Bake M., Keck T., Wellner U.F. Risk stratification for postoperative pancreatic fistula using the pancreatic surgery registry StuDoQ| Pancreas of the German Society for General and Visceral Surgery. Pancreatology. 2019; 19 (1): 17-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pan.2018.11.008
25.Qin H., Luo L., Zhu Z., Huang J. Pancreaticogastrostomy has advantages over pancreaticojejunostomy on pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. A metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. Int. J. Surg. 2016; 36: 18-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.10.020
26.Tani M., Kawai M., Hirono S., Hatori T., Imaizumi T., Nakao A., Egawa S., Asano T., Nagakawa T., Yamaue H. Use of omentum or falciform ligament does not decrease complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy: nationwide survey of the Japanese Society of Pancreatic Surgery. Surgery. 2012; 151: 183-191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2011.07.023
27.Moriya T., Clark C.J., Kirihara Y., Kendrick M.L., Reid Lombardo K.M., Que F.G., FarnellM.B. Stenting and the rate of pancreatic fistula following pancreatico duodenectomy. Arch. Surg. 2012; 147: 35-40. https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.2011.850
28.Ma L.W., Dominguez-Rosado I., Gennarelli R.L., Bach P.B., Gonen M., D’Angelica M.I., DeMatteo R.P., Kingham T.P., Brennan M.F., Jarnagin W.R., Allen P.J. The Cost of Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula Versus the Cost of Pasireotide: Results from a Prospective Randomized Trial. Ann. Surg. 2016; 265: 11-16. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001892
29.Nahm C. B., Lui I., Naidoo C. S., Roseverne L., Alzaabi S., Maher R., Mann G.,Blome S., Gill A. J., Samra J. S., Mittal, A. Density and enhancement of the pancreatic tail on computer tomography predicts acinar score and pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. HPB. 2019; 21 (5): 604-611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpb.2018.09.014
30.Maehira H., Iida H., Mori H., Kitamura N., Miyake T., Shimizu T., Tani M. Computed Tomography Enhancement Pattern of the Pancreatic Parenchyma Predicts Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula After Pancreatico duodenectomy. Pancreas. 2019; 48 (2): 209-215. https://doi.org/10.1097/MPA.0000000000001229

Pancreatic fistula in proximal pancreas resection: correlation of computed tomography and morphological predictors

Purpose: identification of the possibilities of computer tomography with contrast enhancement in evaluated of the degree of fibrosis and number of acinar structures in the pancreatic parenchyma at the preoperative period to predict the development of postoperative complications. Material and methods. In the department of abdominal surgery in 2016-2019, 196 pancreatoduodenal resections were performed. Retrospectively selected group of patients (49). Patients were divided into 2 groups according with the postoperative period. The postoperative period was uncomplicated in 41 (84%) cases. Clinically significant pancreatic fistula was in 8 (16%) cases. According to preoperative computed tomography with contrast enhancement, we evaluated: the structure of the pancreas; the density of the pancreas in the native phase of the scan (HU), parenchyma accumulation coefficient; parenchyma accumulation coefficient in the venous phase; parenchyma accumulation coefficient in the excretory phase; coefficient of relative washout of contrast enhancement of parenchyma. According histological we evaluated the number of fibrosis and acinar, fat cells in the section pancreas. Results. “Soft” structure of the pancreas (r = 0.747, p = 0.000), parenchyma accumulation coefficient (r = 0.631, p = 0.000), the density of the pancreas in the native phase of the scan (r = 0.568, p = 0.000) positively correlated with complicated postoperative period and the number of acinar cells. Parenchyma accumulation coefficient in the excretory phase (r = 0.562, p = 0.000) positively correlated with the fibrosis pancreas and in the negatively correlated with the complicated postoperative period. The risk of developing pancreatic fistula is 3 times higher with values parenchyma accumulation coefficient greater than 1, sensitivity 75%, specificity 73%. The risk of developing pancreatic fistula is 3 times higher with values parenchyma accumulation coefficient in the excretory phase less than 0.45, sensitivity 75%, specificity 63%. Conclusions. Computed tomography with contrast enhancement allows the structure pancreas, the number of fibrosis and acinar cell sat the preoperative period to pick out the high-risk patient group to the development of postoperative complications.

Keywords:
компьютерная томография с контрастным усилением, ацинусы, фиброз, послеоперационные осложнения, панкреатический свищ, коэффициент накопления контрастного вещества, коэффициент вымывания контрастного вещества, computed tomography with contrast enhancement, acinar cells, fibrosis, postoperative complications, pancreatic fistula, parenchyma accumulation coefficient, parenchyma accumulation coefficien