Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023
Failure of peritoneal lavage to prevent operative site infection and peritoneal tumor recurrence in pancreatic surgery.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ishihara Mai, Nakamura Akihiro, Takahashi Yuki, Minegishi Yuzo, Matsuo Kenichi, Tanaka Kuniya
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Although intraoperative peritoneal lavage often is performed routinely with the aim of reducing peritoneal contamination, evidence of lavage benefit in elective pancreatic surgery is limited.
METHODS: We retrospectively classified patients who had undergone pancreatic surgery to groups given or not given peritoneal lavage, then comparing clinical results. This saline lavage was performed at the end of the operation. The primary endpoint was rate of surgical site infection. Frequency of peritoneal recurrence also was evaluated.
RESULTS: Among all 104 patients in the study, incidence of infectious complications in the lavage group (n = 65) was significantly higher than in the non-lavage group (n = 39; 35% vs. 15%, P = 0.041), while incidences of postoperative complications overall and surgical site infection did not differ between lavage (80% and 26%) and non-lavage groups (67% and 10%, P = 0.162 and 0.076, respectively). Among 63 patients undergoing pancratoduodenectomy, frequencies of positive bacterial cultures of drainage fluids on postoperative days 1 and 3 were greater in the non-lavage group (P < 0.001 and P = 0.012), but surgical site infection was significantly more frequent in the lavage group (P = 0.043). Among patients with pancreatic and biliary cancers, lavage did not affect frequency of peritoneal recurrence.
CONCLUSION: Intraoperative lavage did not prevent surgical site infection or peritoneal recurrence of pancreatobiliary cancer.
METHODS: We retrospectively classified patients who had undergone pancreatic surgery to groups given or not given peritoneal lavage, then comparing clinical results. This saline lavage was performed at the end of the operation. The primary endpoint was rate of surgical site infection. Frequency of peritoneal recurrence also was evaluated.
RESULTS: Among all 104 patients in the study, incidence of infectious complications in the lavage group (n = 65) was significantly higher than in the non-lavage group (n = 39; 35% vs. 15%, P = 0.041), while incidences of postoperative complications overall and surgical site infection did not differ between lavage (80% and 26%) and non-lavage groups (67% and 10%, P = 0.162 and 0.076, respectively). Among 63 patients undergoing pancratoduodenectomy, frequencies of positive bacterial cultures of drainage fluids on postoperative days 1 and 3 were greater in the non-lavage group (P < 0.001 and P = 0.012), but surgical site infection was significantly more frequent in the lavage group (P = 0.043). Among patients with pancreatic and biliary cancers, lavage did not affect frequency of peritoneal recurrence.
CONCLUSION: Intraoperative lavage did not prevent surgical site infection or peritoneal recurrence of pancreatobiliary cancer.