黃濤,楊美文,張雷達(dá)
(陸軍軍醫(yī)大學(xué)附屬西南醫(yī)院 肝膽外科,重慶 400038)
胰十二指腸切除手術(shù)(pancreaticoduodenectomy,PD)為治療胰頭部、Vater壺腹周?chē)紣盒阅[瘤的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)手術(shù)方式[1]。該手術(shù)自1945年由Whipple[2]第一次報(bào)道以來(lái),通過(guò)不斷改進(jìn)手術(shù)技藝、加強(qiáng)圍手術(shù)期管理,目前術(shù)后病死率已降至5%以下[3],但是以術(shù)后胰瘺(postoperative pancreatic fistula,POPF)為主的并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率卻依然高達(dá)40%~50%[1,4],導(dǎo)致患者住院時(shí)間與醫(yī)療費(fèi)用均明顯增加[5]。近幾年來(lái)有研究發(fā)現(xiàn)PD術(shù)后第1天腹腔引流液淀粉酶水平(drain fluid amylase on postoperative day 1,DFA1)能較準(zhǔn)確預(yù)測(cè)術(shù)后胰瘺發(fā)生[6-8],對(duì)于胰瘺低風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的患者,可采取術(shù)后早期拔除腹腔引流管、早期下床活動(dòng)、早期進(jìn)食等快速康復(fù)措施,以降低術(shù)后并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率,促進(jìn)患者快速康復(fù)[9-10]。但目前國(guó)際上DFA1預(yù)測(cè)界值始終爭(zhēng)議較大,從90 U/L到5 000 U/L均有報(bào)道[6-8,11-12],且國(guó)內(nèi)相關(guān)數(shù)據(jù)較少。因此,本研究回顧性分析了西南醫(yī)院肝膽外科2013年1月—2015年10月收治并符合標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的PD手術(shù)患者的臨床資料,試圖通過(guò)統(tǒng)計(jì)分析計(jì)算出能夠準(zhǔn)確預(yù)測(cè)PD術(shù)后早期胰瘺發(fā)生的DFA1截?cái)嘀担瑸榛颊咝g(shù)后實(shí)施快速康復(fù)提供指導(dǎo)與幫助。
患者納入標(biāo)準(zhǔn):⑴ 因胰頭部、Vater壺腹周?chē)紣盒阅[瘤行PD手術(shù)的患者,手術(shù)方式包括保留幽門(mén)胰十二指腸切除術(shù)(pylorus preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy,PPPD)和經(jīng)典Whipple手術(shù);⑵ KPS評(píng)分>50分[13],能耐受麻醉和手術(shù)的患者。患者排除標(biāo)準(zhǔn):⑴ 既往有上腹部手術(shù)史(經(jīng)腹腔鏡膽囊切除術(shù)除外)患者;⑵ 術(shù)前合并嚴(yán)重心血管、呼吸系統(tǒng)等疾病的患者;⑶ 術(shù)前影像學(xué)檢查或術(shù)中探查腫瘤有遠(yuǎn)處轉(zhuǎn)移的患者;⑷ 術(shù)中聯(lián)合其它臟器切除的患者;⑸ 手術(shù)在腹腔鏡或機(jī)器人輔助下實(shí)施的患者。
本研究共回顧分析PD手術(shù)患者430例,男284例,女146例;年齡14~80歲,中位年齡58歲。術(shù)前合并糖尿病患者57例,高血壓患者63例,有吸煙史患者1 7 9例。術(shù)后病理檢查結(jié)果示:胰腺癌患者163例(37.9%),慢性胰腺炎患者65例(15.1%),膽總管腺癌患者38例(8.8%),十二指腸乳頭部腺癌患者61例(14.2%),Vater壺腹部腺癌患者43例(10.0%),其它良惡性腫瘤患者60例(13.9%)。
所有患者術(shù)前全面檢驗(yàn)、檢查,包括上腹部CT血管造影或磁共振血管成像,60歲以上或既往有呼吸系統(tǒng)疾病患者予以動(dòng)脈血?dú)夥治黾胺喂δ軝z查,以全面評(píng)估病情、制定手術(shù)方案。手術(shù)均由我科具有副高級(jí)職稱(chēng)以上的醫(yī)師主刀施行,結(jié)合術(shù)前影像學(xué)檢查及術(shù)中情況選擇行經(jīng)典Whipple手術(shù)或保留幽門(mén)胰十二指腸切除術(shù),消化道重建均采用Child方式,殘端胰腺吻合均采用胰腺導(dǎo)管對(duì)空腸黏膜端側(cè)吻合,并放置胰管內(nèi)支架行胰液引流,其中2例患者因殘余胰腺明顯萎縮、外分泌功能基本喪失而縫閉胰腺殘端。術(shù)中記錄手術(shù)時(shí)間、出血量及紅細(xì)胞等血制品輸入量,殘端胰腺質(zhì)地由主刀醫(yī)師觸診判斷,測(cè)量主胰管直徑,手術(shù)結(jié)束前于胰腸吻合旁和Winslow孔分別放置1根硅膠引流管從腹壁引出,切除腫瘤標(biāo)本均送病理切片檢查。術(shù)后予以24 h生命體征監(jiān)護(hù)、呼吸道和腹腔引流管護(hù)理、抗生素預(yù)防感染和生長(zhǎng)抑素類(lèi)似物抑制胰腺外分泌等治療方案;監(jiān)測(cè)血常規(guī)、電解質(zhì)、肝腎功能以及術(shù)后第1、3、5天腹腔引流液與血清淀粉酶水平,其中腹腔引流液淀粉酶取當(dāng)日2根引流管最高值。記錄胰腸吻合旁、Winslow孔引流管拔除時(shí)間,2根引流管全部拔除時(shí)間記為腹腔引流管拔除時(shí)間。
⑴ 術(shù)后胰瘺:參考國(guó)際胰瘺研究組織關(guān)于術(shù)后胰瘺的定義:PD術(shù)后第3天或以后,任何可計(jì)量的腹腔引流液中淀粉酶含量高于正常血清淀粉酶上限值的3倍,稱(chēng)為術(shù)后胰瘺,并根據(jù)嚴(yán)重程度分為A、B、C 3級(jí)[14]。本研究中進(jìn)一步將PD術(shù)后5 d內(nèi)發(fā)生的胰瘺稱(chēng)為術(shù)后早期胰瘺(early POPF)。⑵ 術(shù)后出血:分為腹腔內(nèi)出血與消化道出血,患者血紅蛋白濃度下降>3 g/dL,須行容量復(fù)蘇并輸注2個(gè)單位以上紅細(xì)胞補(bǔ)充血容量,嚴(yán)重時(shí)甚至須采用血管栓塞或手術(shù)止血等方法予以治療[15-17]。⑶ 術(shù)后膽汁漏:術(shù)后第3天或以后腹腔引流液中膽紅素濃度高于血清膽紅素濃度上限值的3倍,或者因?yàn)楦骨荒懼?、膽汁性腹膜炎須行穿刺引流、手術(shù)治療等情況[18]。⑷ 腹腔膿腫:經(jīng)超聲或CT證實(shí)的腹腔積液,且微生物培養(yǎng)陽(yáng)性,伴有持續(xù)發(fā)熱及血清白細(xì)胞升高[19]。⑸ 腹腔感染:有臨床體征,腹腔引流液微生物培養(yǎng)陽(yáng)性,但未形成膿腫[19]。⑹ 胃排空延遲:術(shù)后7 d后仍未能恢復(fù)進(jìn)食,且需要延長(zhǎng)鼻胃管留置時(shí)間[20]。⑺ 肺部感染:發(fā)熱伴血白細(xì)胞升高,有肺部X光片、CT掃描等影像學(xué)依據(jù)或痰液微生物培養(yǎng)呈陽(yáng)性結(jié)果,須予以抗生素治療[21]。
應(yīng)用SPSS 17.0統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)軟件對(duì)數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行處理分析。計(jì)數(shù)資料以例數(shù)(百分比)[n(%)]表示,采用χ2檢驗(yàn)進(jìn)行比較,計(jì)量資料以中位數(shù)(范圍)[M(范圍)]表示,不符合正態(tài)分布采用非參數(shù)Mann-Whitney U檢驗(yàn)進(jìn)行比較,多因素分析采用二元Logistic回歸模型,術(shù)后早期胰瘺的預(yù)測(cè)應(yīng)用受試者操作特性曲線(receiver operating characteristic curve,ROC)進(jìn)行分析。P<0.05為差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
共納入430例患者,術(shù)后發(fā)生早期胰瘺116例(26.9%),其中后期分別發(fā)展為A級(jí)胰瘺68例(58.6%),B級(jí)胰瘺41例(35.3%),C級(jí)胰瘺7例(6.1%)。未發(fā)生早期胰瘺的314例患者中,除外術(shù)后5 d內(nèi)出現(xiàn)膽汁漏、腹腔引流血性液體、腹腔引流液渾濁以及術(shù)后第3天以后腹腔引流液量≥500 mL/d和超聲確定胰周積液>5 cm的患者,剩余305例患者中,98例術(shù)后5 d內(nèi)(術(shù)后3~5 d)拔除腹腔引流管(早期拔除組),207例術(shù)后5 d后(術(shù)后6~20 d)拔除腹腔引流管(延遲拔除組)。兩組患者在基線資料比較,無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(表1-2)。術(shù)后5 d內(nèi)拔除腹腔引流管不會(huì)增加術(shù)后腹腔穿刺引流、二次手術(shù)以及院內(nèi)死亡的概率(均P>0.05),反而降低了術(shù)后胰瘺、腹腔感染以及總并發(fā)癥發(fā)生率,且術(shù)后住院時(shí)間也明顯縮短(均P<0.05)(表3)。
將圍手術(shù)期相關(guān)指標(biāo)對(duì)PD術(shù)后早期胰瘺作單因素分析,結(jié)果顯示:BMI、手術(shù)時(shí)間、殘余胰腺質(zhì)地、胰管直徑、是否胰腺病變以及DFA1、術(shù)后第1天血清淀粉酶水平(serum amylase on postoperative day 1,SA1)、DFA1與SA1比值、D F A1與S A1差值為術(shù)后早期胰瘺的影響因素(表4-5);將上述影響因素代入非條件二元Logistic回歸模型分析,得出DFA1、SA1為PD術(shù)后早期胰瘺的獨(dú)立影響因素(表6)。
分別利用DFA1、SA1對(duì)PD術(shù)后早期胰瘺發(fā)生作ROC曲線圖,得出曲線下面積(area under curve,AUC)分別為0.916和0.745(圖1),并計(jì)算Youden指數(shù)確定DFA1、SA1預(yù)測(cè)PD術(shù)后早期胰瘺發(fā)生的截?cái)嘀捣謩e為494.75 IU/L、96.35 IU/L(表7)。
表1 早期拔管組與延遲拔除組患者基線資料(計(jì)數(shù)資料)比較[n(%)]Table 1 Comparison of baseline data (enumeration data) between early tube removal group and delayed tube removal group [n (%)]
表2 早期拔管組與延遲拔除組患者基線資料(計(jì)量資料)比較[M(范圍)]Table 2 Comparison of baseline data (measurement data) between early tube removal group and delayed tube removal group [M(range)]
表3 早期拔管組與延遲拔除組患者術(shù)后并發(fā)癥比較Table 3 Comparison of postoperative complications between early tube removal group and delayed tube removal group
表4 PD術(shù)后早期胰瘺發(fā)生的單因素分析(計(jì)數(shù)資料)Table 4 Univariate analysis of early POPF following PD (enumeration data)
表5 PD術(shù)后早期胰瘺發(fā)生的單因素分析結(jié)果(計(jì)量資料)Table 5 Univariate analysis of early POPF following PD (measurement data)
表6 PD術(shù)后早期胰瘺發(fā)生的多因素Logistic回歸分析結(jié)果Table 6 Results of multivariate logistic regression analysis for early POPF following PD
圖1 預(yù)測(cè)PD術(shù)后早期胰瘺發(fā)生ROC曲線 A:DFA1(AUC=0.916,P<0.001,95% CI=88.7%~94.6%);B:SA1(AUC=0.745,P<0.001,95% CI=67.3%~81.8%)Figure 1 ROC curves of prediction of early POPF after PD A: DFA1 (AUC=0.916, P<0.001, 95% CI=88.7%–94.6%); B: SA1 (AUC=0.745,P<0.001, 95% CI=67.3%–81.8%)
表7 DFA1與SA1預(yù)測(cè)PD術(shù)后早期胰瘺發(fā)生的截?cái)嘀礣able 7 Cut-off values of DFA1 and SA1 for predicting early POPF after PD
胰瘺為PD術(shù)后最常見(jiàn)、也最嚴(yán)重的并發(fā)癥,文獻(xiàn)[11,22]報(bào)道發(fā)生率從2%~46%不等,且發(fā)生后容易引起腹腔出血、腹腔膿腫、器官功能衰竭等一系列問(wèn)題,威脅患者生命[21-23]。多年來(lái)外科醫(yī)生嘗試采取多種措施來(lái)減少術(shù)后胰瘺的發(fā)生,包括預(yù)防性使用奧曲肽等生長(zhǎng)抑素類(lèi)似物[24-26],嘗試胰胃吻合或胰腺空腸套入式吻合等手術(shù)方式[27-28],以及術(shù)中放置胰管內(nèi)支架行胰液引流[29-30]等,但均收效甚微。后來(lái)Kawai等[19]和Bassi等[31]在研究中發(fā)現(xiàn),術(shù)后早期拔除腹腔引流管能夠顯著降低術(shù)后胰瘺、腹腔感染以及肺部感染等并發(fā)癥的發(fā)生率。在本次研究中我們也進(jìn)行了驗(yàn)證分析,結(jié)果得出,對(duì)于PD術(shù)后無(wú)早期胰瘺發(fā)生的患者,腹腔引流管術(shù)后5 d內(nèi)拔除相對(duì)5 d以后拔除顯著降低了術(shù)后胰瘺和腹腔感染的發(fā)生幾率,且不會(huì)增加術(shù)后腹腔穿刺引流和二次手術(shù)的概率,在此基礎(chǔ)上,筆者繼續(xù)對(duì)PD術(shù)后早期胰瘺發(fā)生的影響因素進(jìn)行分析,得出DFA1、SA1為術(shù)后早期胰瘺的獨(dú)立影響因素,并利用它們進(jìn)一步對(duì)早期胰瘺進(jìn)行預(yù)測(cè),最終確定對(duì)于DFA1<494.75 IU/L的患者(敏感度、特異度、陽(yáng)性預(yù)測(cè)值、陰性預(yù)測(cè)值分別為91.7%、80.8%、62.7%、96.5%),可于PD術(shù)后第3天安全拔除腹腔引流管,并可對(duì)患者實(shí)施快速康復(fù)策略。
PD術(shù)后早期拔除腹腔引流管減少了術(shù)后胰瘺等并發(fā)癥的發(fā)生,筆者分析可能有以下幾方面的原因。一是術(shù)后使用負(fù)壓吸引雖能有效引流腹腔內(nèi)積液、積血,但若長(zhǎng)時(shí)間留置其強(qiáng)大的負(fù)壓吸引力也能侵蝕、破壞鄰近組織特別是吻合口,影響其愈合;二是腹腔引流管無(wú)形之中可能成為了細(xì)菌進(jìn)入腹腔的通道,增加了吻合口周?chē)腥镜膸茁?;三是術(shù)后胰瘺與腹腔感染這兩個(gè)因素可能相互促進(jìn),胰瘺能激活人體免疫系統(tǒng),導(dǎo)致全身炎癥反應(yīng)發(fā)生,這一過(guò)程可能會(huì)引起腸道細(xì)菌移位,造成腹腔感染,而細(xì)菌含有的磷脂酶和脂多糖反過(guò)來(lái)也能激活漏出的胰液[32],促進(jìn)胰瘺的進(jìn)一步發(fā)展,從而造成惡性循環(huán),影響患者術(shù)后康復(fù)。
本次研究發(fā)現(xiàn),對(duì)于PD術(shù)后無(wú)早期胰瘺發(fā)生的患者,長(zhǎng)期使用腹腔引流明顯增加了術(shù)后胰瘺、腹腔感染等的發(fā)生,且早期拔除腹腔引流管的98例患者中,只有3例(3.1%)發(fā)生了術(shù)后胰瘺。為更準(zhǔn)確預(yù)測(cè)術(shù)后胰瘺,盡量減輕腹腔引流管對(duì)其產(chǎn)生的影響,我們采取對(duì)術(shù)后早期胰瘺的發(fā)生風(fēng)險(xiǎn)進(jìn)行預(yù)測(cè)分析,結(jié)果顯示,DFA1對(duì)術(shù)后早期胰瘺有較好的預(yù)測(cè)價(jià)值(AUC=0.916,P<0.001,95% CI=88.7%~94.6%)。另外,本次研究中術(shù)后第5天這一時(shí)間分界點(diǎn)參考了國(guó)內(nèi)外一些大型胰腺外科中心的胰腺切除術(shù)后標(biāo)準(zhǔn)管理策略,他們將PD術(shù)后第5天作為沒(méi)有出現(xiàn)臨床可疑胰瘺患者的常規(guī)腹腔引流管拔除時(shí)間[31]。
近年來(lái),國(guó)內(nèi)外關(guān)于DFA1預(yù)測(cè)胰腺切除術(shù)后胰瘺發(fā)生的報(bào)道屢見(jiàn)不鮮。Molinari等[6]較早在研究中得出,胰腺切除術(shù)后DFA1≥5 000 U/L是預(yù)測(cè)術(shù)后胰瘺發(fā)生的唯一指標(biāo),后來(lái)Partelli等[33]和Nissen等[34]也在各自的研究中得出了相似的結(jié)論。本研究中,我們也嘗試?yán)肈FA1≥5 000 U/L對(duì)PD術(shù)后胰瘺進(jìn)行預(yù)測(cè)分析,結(jié)果得出其敏感度、特異度、陽(yáng)性預(yù)測(cè)值、陰性預(yù)測(cè)值分別為16.5%、98.1%、81.5%和69.8%,預(yù)測(cè)價(jià)值不高的原因可能在于Molinari和Partelli的研究中不僅包含著PD手術(shù),也包含著胰體尾切除術(shù),而Nissen等[34]的研究中雖只包括PD手術(shù)患者,但病例樣本量卻較少。之后Kawai等[12]回顧分析了1 239例行PD手術(shù)患者的臨床資料,得出DFA1>4 000 IU/L預(yù)測(cè)術(shù)后臨床胰瘺(B、C級(jí)胰瘺)的敏感度、特異度、準(zhǔn)確度分別為62.2%、89.0%、84.8%;Sutcliffe等[7]則在一項(xiàng)前瞻性研究中分析70例行PD手術(shù)患者的臨床資料后得出,DFA1≤350 U/L排除術(shù)后胰瘺的敏感度、特異度、陽(yáng)性預(yù)測(cè)值、陰性預(yù)測(cè)值分別為100%、79%、41%和100%;Israel等[8]則利用前瞻性數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)分析63例記錄有DFA1值患者的臨床資料,總結(jié)出DFA1>100U/L預(yù)測(cè)胰腺切除術(shù)后胰瘺發(fā)生有較高的敏感度和陰性預(yù)測(cè)值(均為96%);Lee等[11]回顧分析數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù)中536例記錄有DFA1的胰腺切除手術(shù)患者病例資料,提出DFA1<90U/L排除術(shù)后胰瘺的陰性預(yù)測(cè)值最高(98.2%)。雖然相關(guān)研究報(bào)道較多,但DFA1預(yù)測(cè)術(shù)后胰瘺發(fā)生的截?cái)嘀悼缍容^大,且多數(shù)研究既包含PD手術(shù),也包含胰體尾切除術(shù),臨床應(yīng)用價(jià)值有限;而本次研究對(duì)象全部為PD手術(shù)患者,并均采用胰腺導(dǎo)管對(duì)空?qǐng)鲳つざ藗?cè)吻合方式重建消化道,所得結(jié)論對(duì)指導(dǎo)患者術(shù)后康復(fù)更有臨床意義。
此外,目前有部分研究[35-36]報(bào)道SA1對(duì)PD術(shù)后胰瘺發(fā)生也具有較好的預(yù)測(cè)價(jià)值。受此啟發(fā),我們將DFA1、SA1、兩者比值、兩者差值均納入對(duì)術(shù)后早期胰瘺的預(yù)測(cè)分析中,結(jié)果顯示只有DFA1和SA1為PD術(shù)后早期胰瘺的獨(dú)立影響因素,而其中DFA1預(yù)測(cè)價(jià)值更高(AUC:0.916 vs. 0.745)。最后通過(guò)計(jì)算確定DFA1≥494.75 IU/L為預(yù)測(cè)PD術(shù)后早期胰瘺發(fā)生的唯一條件(敏感度、特異度、陽(yáng)性預(yù)測(cè)值、陰性預(yù)測(cè)值分別為91.7%、80.8%、62.7%、96.5%)。
本次研究為回顧性病例分析研究,論證級(jí)別相對(duì)較低,且個(gè)別患者術(shù)后并未記錄DFA1、SA1等值,使研究結(jié)果受到一定影響,未來(lái)應(yīng)設(shè)計(jì)前瞻性臨床研究對(duì)該結(jié)論予以進(jìn)一步驗(yàn)證,以更準(zhǔn)確地指導(dǎo)臨床應(yīng)用。
綜上所述,對(duì)于PD術(shù)后無(wú)早期胰瘺發(fā)生的患者,術(shù)后5 d內(nèi)拔除腹腔引流管能降低術(shù)后胰瘺和腹腔感染的發(fā)生率;且對(duì)于DFA1<494.75 IU/L的患者,可于術(shù)后3天安全拔除腹腔引流管,并對(duì)患者實(shí)施快速康復(fù)策略。
[1]El Nakeeb A, Salah T, Sultan A, et al. Pancreatic anastomotic leakage after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Risk factors, clinical predictors, and management (single center experience)[J]. World J Surg, 2013, 37(6):1405–1418. doi: 10.1007/s00268–013–1998–5.
[2]Whipple AO. Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Islet Carcinoma: A Five-Year Follow-Up[J]. Ann Surg, 1945, 121(6):847–852.
[3]Schnelldorfer T, Ware AL, Sarr MG, et al. Long-term survival after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: is cure possible?[J]. Ann Surg, 2008, 247(3):456–462. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181613142.
[4]Peng L, Lin S, Li Y, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy[J]. Surg Endosc,2017, 31(8):3085–3097. doi: 10.1007/s00464–016–5371–2.
[5]Chen JY, Feng J, Wang XQ, et al. Risk scoring system and predictor for clinically relevant pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2015,21(19):5926–5933. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i19.5926.
[6]Molinari E, Bassi C, Salvia R, et al. Amylase value in drains after pancreatic resection as predictive factor of postoperative pancreatic fistula: results of a prospective study in 137 patients[J]. Ann Surg,2007, 246(2):281–287.
[7]Sutcliffe R P, Battula N, Haque A, et al. Utility of drain fluid amylase measurement on the first postoperative day after pancreaticoduodenectomy[J]. World J Surg, 2012, 36(4):879–883.doi: 10.1007/s00268–012–1460–0..
[8]Israel JS, Rettammel RJ, Leverson GE, et al. Does postoperative drain amylase predict pancreatic fistula after pancreatectomy?[J]. J Am Coll Surg, 2014, 218(5):978–987. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.01.048.
[9]Dai J, Jiang Y, Fu D. Reducing postoperative complications and improving clinical outcome: Enhanced recovery after surgery in pancreaticoduodenectomy-Aretrospective cohort study[J]. Int J Surg, 2017, 39:176–181. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.01.089.
[10]Shah OJ, Bangri SA, Singh M, et al. Impact of centralization of pancreaticoduodenectomy coupled with fast track recovery protocol: a comparative study from India[J]. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int, 2016, 15(5):546–552.
[11]Lee CW, Pitt HA, Riall TS, et al. Low drainfluid amylase predicts absence of pancreatic fistula following pancreatectomy[J]. J Gastrointest Surg, 2014, 18(11):1902–1910. doi: 10.1007/s11605–014–2601–6.
[12]Kawai M, Kondo S, Yamaue H, et al. Predictive risk factors for clinically relevant 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]. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2011,18(4):601–608. doi: 10.1007/s00534–011–0373–x.
[13]Tandon P, Reddy K R, O'Leary J G, et al. A Karnofsky performance status-based score predicts death after hospital discharge in patients with cirrhosis [J]. Hepatology, 2017, 65(1):217–224. doi: 10.1002/hep.28900.
[14]Bassi C, Dervenis C, Butturini G, et al. Postoperative pancreatic fistula: an international study group (ISGPF) definition[J]. Surgery,2005, 138(1):8–13.
[15]朱宏達(dá), 馬塵超, 白岳青, 等. 胰十二指腸切除術(shù)后腹腔并發(fā)癥發(fā)生及引流留置時(shí)間預(yù)測(cè)[J]. 肝膽胰外科雜志, 2014, 26(5):372–375.Zhu HD, Ma CC, Bai YQ, et al. Prediction for abdominal complications and drainage indwelling duration after pancreaticoduodenectomy[J]. Journal of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, 2014, 26(5):372–375.
[16]馬炳奇,張順,張斌,等. 胰十二指腸切除術(shù)后胰瘺發(fā)生的相關(guān)性因素分析[J].中國(guó)普通外科雜志,2013,22:(3): 315–319.doi:10.7659/j.issn.1005–6947.2013.03.011.Ma BQ, Zhang S, Zhang B,et al. An analysis of factors responsible for pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy[J]. Chinese Journal of General Surgery,2013,22:(3): 315–319. doi:10.7659/j.issn.1005–6947.2013.03.011.
[17]Wente M N, Veit J A, Bassi C, et al. Postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH): an International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definition[J]. Surgery, 2007, 142(1):20–25.
[18]Koch M, Garden OJ, Padbury R, et al. Bile leakage after hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: a definition and grading of severity by the International Study Group of Liver Surgery[J].Surgery, 2011, 149(5):680–688. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2010.12.002.
[19]Kawai M, Tani M, Terasawa H, et al. Early removal of prophylactic drains reduces the risk of intra-abdominal infections in patients with pancreatic head resection: prospective study for 104 consecutive patients[J]. Ann Surg, 2006, 244(1):1–7.
[20]Wente M N, Bassi C, Dervenis C, et al. Delayed gastric emptying(DGE) after pancreatic surgery: a suggested definition by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS)[J].Surgery, 2007, 142(5):761–768.
[21]Meng G, Xing Q, Yuan Q, et al. Internal compared with external drainage of pancreatic duct during pancreaticoduodenectomy: a retrospective study[J]. Chin J Cancer Res, 2014, 26(3):277–284.doi: 10.3978/j.issn.1000–9604.2014.06.05.
[22]Yang J, Huang Q, Wang C. Postoperative drain amylase predicts pancreatic fistula in pancreatic surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis [J]. Int J Surg, 2015, 22:38–45. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2015.07.007.
[23]Wang YC, Szatmary P, Zhu J Q, et al. Prophylactic intra-peritoneal drain placement following pancreaticoduodenectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2015,21(8):2510–2521. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i8.2510.
[24]Jin K, Zhou H, Zhang J, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of somatostatin analogues in the prevention of postoperative complication after pancreaticoduodenectomy[J]. Dig Surg, 2015,32(3):196–207.
[25]Kurumboor P, Palaniswami K N, Pramil K, et al. Octreotide Does Not Prevent Pancreatic Fistula Following Pancreatoduodenectomy in Patients with Soft Pancreas and Non-dilated Duct: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial[J]. J Gastrointest Surg, 2015,19(11):2038–2044. doi: 10.1007/s11605–015–2925–x.
[26]孔瑞, 胡繼盛, 李樂(lè), 等. 奧曲肽對(duì)胰十二指腸切除術(shù)后胰瘺影響的前瞻性研究[J]. 中華外科雜志, 2016, 54(1):21–24. doi:10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529–5815.2016.01.006.Kong R, Hu JS, Li L, et al. Impact of octreotide on pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a prospective study[J].Chinese Journal of Surgery, 2016, 54(1):21–24. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529–5815.2016.01.006.
[27]El Nakeeb A, El Hemaly M, Askr W, et al. Comparative study between duct to mucosa and invagination pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a prospective randomized study[J].Int J Surg, 2015, 16(Pt A):1–6. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2015.02.002.
[28]Guerrini GP, Soliani P, D'Amico G, et al. Pancreaticojejunostomy Versus Pancreaticogastrostomy After Pancreaticoduodenectomy: An Up-to-date Meta-Analysis[J]. J Invest Surg, 2016, 29(3):175–184.doi: 10.3109/08941939.2015.1093047.
[29]Usuba T, Misawa T, Ito R, et al. Safety of Non-stented Pancreaticojejunostomy in Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Patients with Soft Pancreas[J]. Anticancer Res, 2016, 36(12):6619–6623.
[30]Ke FY, Wu XS, Zhang Y, et al. Comparison of postoperative complications between internal and external pancreatic duct stenting during pancreaticoduodenectomy: a meta-analysis[J]. Chin J Cancer Res, 2015, 27(4):397–407. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.1000–9604.2015.07.04.
[31]Bassi C, Molinari E, Malleo G, et al. Early versus late drain removal after standard pancreatic resections: results of a prospective randomized trial[J]. Ann Surg, 2010, 252(2):207–214. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181e61e88.
[32]Vaccaro MI, Dagrosa MA, Mora MI, et al. The effect of chronic intraperitoneal infusion of bacterial endotoxin on exocrine pancreas function in rats[J]. Int J Pancreatol, 1996, 19(1):49–54.
[33]Partelli S, Tamburrino D, Crippa S, et al. Evaluation of a predictive model for pancreatic fistula based on amylase value in drains after pancreatic resection[J]. Am J Surg, 2014, 208(4):634–639. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2014.03.011.
[34]Nissen NN, Menon VG, Puri V, et al. A simple algorithm for drain management after pancreaticoduodenectomy[J]. Am Surg, 2012,78(10):1143–1146.
[35]Cloyd J M, Kastenberg Z J, Visser B C, et al. Postoperative serum amylase predicts pancreatic fistula formation following pancreaticoduodenectomy[J]. J Gastrointest Surg, 2014, 18(2):348–353. doi: 10.1007/s11605–013–2293–3.
[36]Kühlbrey CM, Samiei N, Sick O, et al. Pancreatitis After Pancreatoduodenectomy Predicts Clinically Relevant Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula[J]. J Gastrointest Surg, 2017, 21(2):330–338. doi:10.1007/s11605–016–3305–x.