Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing three techniques for pancreatic remnant closure following distal pancreatectomy

Authors:
Open Access
Publisher website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Established closure techniques for the pancreatic remnant after distal pancreatectomy include stapler, suture and anastomotic closure. However, controversy remains regarding the ideal technique; therefore, the aim of this study was to compare closure techniques and risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). A systematic review was carried out according to PRISMA guidelines for studies published before January 2014 that compared at least two closure techniques for the pancreatic remnant in distal pancreatectomy. A random-effects model was constructed using weighted odds ratios (ORs). Thirty-seven eligible studies matched the inclusion criteria and 5252 patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy were included. The primary outcome measure, the POPF rate, ranged 0 from to 70 per cent. Meta-analysis of the 31 studies comparing stapler versus suture closure showed that the stapler technique had a significantly lower rate of POPF, with a combined OR of 0·77 (95 per cent c.i. 0·61 to 0·98; P = 0·031). Anastomotic closure was associated with a significantly lower POPF rate than suture closure (OR 0·55, 0·31 to 0·98; P = 0·042). Combined stapler and suture closure had significantly lower POPF rates than suture closure alone, but no significant difference compared with stapler closure alone. The use of stapler closure or anastomotic closure for the pancreatic remnant after distal pancreatectomy significantly reduces POPF rates compared with suture closure. The combination of stapler and suture closure shows superiority over suture closure alone.
Funding Information
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (81071775)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (81272659)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (81101621)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (81160311)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (81172064)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (81001068)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (81272425)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (81372353)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (81101870)
  • Key Projects of Science Foundation of Hubei Province (2011CDA030)
  • National Eleventh Five-Year Scientific and Technological Support Projects (2006BAI02A13-402)
  • Projects of Science Foundation of Hubei Province (2012FFB02401)
  • Research Fund of young scholars for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China (20110142120014)

This publication has 67 references indexed in Scilit: