P-P44 Clinical outcomes of consecutive patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy over the last decade at a high volume tertiary pancreatic surgery unit

Background Distal pancreatectomy (DP) enables resection of lesions in the body and tail of the pancreas. Over the past decade, the Laparoscopic approach has become frequently employed. There remains scarce outcome data available following laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy over a long time period from high volume centres. Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains the main source of morbidity and mortality after DP. The causes of POPF are multifactorial and poorly understood. The optimal method of pancreatic stump closure is still debated with variation in clinical practice. Methods All patients that underwent distal pancreatectomy at a UK tertiary pancreatic surgery centre between January 2011 and January 2021 were identified and clinical outcomes examined. Patients undergoing completion pancreatectomies were excluded. Clinical, pathological and surgical data for the included patients was retrospectively collected from the electronic patient record. Clinically significant POPF was defined as Grade B or C as per the ISGPF guidelines. For stapled stump closure, the Compression Index (CI) was calculated using closed staple height (mm) divided by the pancreatic thickness (mm). High and low CI was defined around the median. Results 233 patients (n = 90 open and n = 143 laparoscopic) were included in the final analysis. The laparoscopic approach was associated with comparable morbidity and significantly lower blood loss, shorter operative time and shorter length of stay. There were no significant differences in age, sex, final histology, closure technique, or ASA Score of 3 or more amongst patients with clinically relevant POPF (CR-POPF). The POPF group had a significantly higher BMI, drain duration and readmission rate. CI data was available for 78 cases (range 0.04-0.21). There was no significant difference in low vs high CI for patients with CR-POPF. Conclusions Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is associated with favourable clinical outcomes in this series. Stapled vs sutured closure of the pancreatic stump offered equivocal outcomes with relation to POPF. POPF continues to have a significant impact on a clinical recovery as evident from longer drain duration and high readmission rates. Further research is required to try to establish methods for reducing the incidence of POPF after distal pancreatectomy.

Method for appendix stump closure during laparoscopic appendectomy (literature review)

Currently, the laparoscopic appendectomy is the preferred method for treatment of acute appendicitis. Laparoscopic approach resulted in a decrease of postoperative morbidity (especially for reducing the frequency of surgical site infection), allows to faster postoperative recovery of patients. The method of closure of the appendix stump is the main step of laparoscopic appendectomy. The risk of intra-abdominal complications is considered high during this step. Therefore, it is important to choose the safest method of closure of the appendix stump among the number of available options. The four prominent management options are endoloops, staplers, endoclips and inversion of appendix stump with intracorporal sutures. This literature review presents the advantages and disadvantages of these methods. The results of randomized studies and meta-analysis comparing the methods are also presented. It is shown that there is no evidence pointing to any of the existing methods to be a safer option. It is suggested that factors such as anatomy features, cost efficiency and personal experience of the surgeon using these methods are considered to determine the choice.

A randomized clinical trial of technical modifications of appendix stump closure during laparoscopic appendectomy for uncomplicated acute appendicitis

Background Closure of the appendix stump presents the most critical part of laparoscopic appendectomy. The aim of the present study was to compare the medical outcomes and cost analysis of laparoscopic appendectomy with respect to the different methods of stump closure. Methods This was a prospective randomized clinical trial conducted in a single institution (University Hospital Ostrava) within a 2-year study period. All included patients were randomized into one of three trial arms (endoloop, hem-o-lok clips or endostapler). Results In total, 180 patients (60 patients in each arm) were enrolled into the study. The mean length of hospital stay (3.6 ± 1.7 days) was comparable in all study arms. The shortest operative time was noted in the hem-o-lok subgroup of patients (37.9 ± 12.5 min). Superficial surgical site infection was detected in 4.4% of study patients; deep surgical site infection was noted in 1.7% of the patients. The frequency of surgical site infections was comparable in all study arms (p = 0.7173). The mean direct costs of laparoscopic appendectomy were significantly the lowest in the hem-o-lok subgroup of patients. Laparoscopic appendectomy is not a profit-making procedure in our institution (mean profit of made from the study patients was—104.3 ± 579.2 Euro). Closure of the appendix stump by means of endostapler presents the most expensive and the highest loss-incurring technique (p = 0.0072). Conclusions The present study indicates that all technical modifications of appendix stump closure are comparable with regards to postoperative complications. The stapler technique is significantly the most expensive. We concluded that hem-o-lok clips have the potential for becoming the preferred method of securing the appendix base during laparoscopic appendectomy. Trial registration NCT03750032 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

117 A Systematic Review Comparing Clinical Outcomes Between Hem-O-Lok Clips and Endoloops In Securing the Base of The Appendix During Laparoscopic Appendicectomy

Introduction One of the crucial steps of laparoscopic appendicectomy is to secure the base of appendix. A variety of techniques for stump closure have been described as Endoloops(Vicryl or PDS), Hem-o-lok clips, intracorporeal suturing and endoscopic staplers. Method A detailed literature survey using Pubmed, MEDLINE and EMBASE databases was carried out to extract studies conducted between 1990 and 2020. A total of 14 studies- 3 randomized controlled trials & 11 comparative studies enrolling 2098 (1030 in HL & 1068 in EL group) patients were included in the final analysis comparing Hem-o-lok versus endoloops for closure of appendiceal base. Outcome measures were Operative time, Cost benefit, Post-operative complications, and length of hospital stay. Results The average time of operation was significantly shorter in the HL group (SMD -0.79; 95% CI -1.03 – 0.56; z = 6.61; p < 0.00001). HL was found to be more cost-effective. (SMD -5.00; 95% CI-7.00 – 3.00; z = 4.90; p < 0.00001). However, no statistical difference was found between both the groups when comparing mean postoperative length of hospital stay & post-operative. Conclusions Based on the results of the above study, applying Hem-o-lok clips seems to be a safe, effacious and cost-effective way of securing the base of appendix.

Swine Small Intestine Sealing Performed by Different Vessel Sealing Devices: Ex-Vivo Test

This study aimed to evaluate the sealing quality of swine small intestine using different laparoscopic radiofrequency vessel sealing devices (two 5 mm: RFVS-1 and -2; one 10 mm: RFVS-3) and a harmonic scalpel (HS) compared to golden standard closure technique. The study was divided into two arms. In study arm 1: n = 50 swine intestinal loops (10 per group) were transected with each instrument and the loops in which the devices provided complete sealing, at the gross inspection, were tested for maximum burst pressure (BP) and histological evaluation and compared to an automatic linear stapler. After the BP tests, the devices that achieved significantly lower BP values were excluded from the second arm. The RFVS-1 and -3 provided statistically significant results and were used in study arm 2, to obtain full-thickness biopsies along the antimesenteric border of the loop and were compared with hand-sewn intestinal closure (n = 30; 10 per group). The biopsies were histologically evaluated for thermal injury and diagnostic features, and intestinal loops tested for BP. RFVS-3 achieved comparable results (69.78 ± 4.23 mmHg, interquartile range (IQR) 5.8) to stapler closing technique (71.09 ± 4.22 mmHg, IQR 4.38; p > 0.05), while the RFVS-1 resulted in significantly (p < 0.05) lower BP (45.28 ± 15.23 mmHg, IQR 24.95) but over the physiological range, conversely to RFVS-2 (20.16 ± 7.19 mmHg, IQR 12.02) and HS (not measurable). RFVS-3 resulted not significantly different (p > 0.05) (45.09 ± 8.75 mmHg, IQR 10.48) than Suture (35.71 ± 17.51 mmHg, IQR 23.77); RFVS-1 resulted significantly lower values (23.96 ± 10.63 mmHg, IQR 9.62; p < 0.05). All biopsies were judged diagnostic. Data confirmed that RFVS-1 and -3 devices provided suitable intestinal sealing, with BP pressures over the physiological range. Conversely, the HS and RFVS-2 should not be considered for intestinal sealing. RFVS devices could be employed to obtain small intestine stump closure or full-thickness biopsies. However, further studies should be performed in live animals to assess the role of the healing process.