TY - JOUR
T1 - Can trainees safely perform pancreatoenteric anastomosis?
T2 - A systematic review, meta-analysis, and risk-adjusted analysis of postoperative pancreatic fistula
AU - PARANOIA Study Group. Electronic address: https://www.twitter.com/paranoia_group
AU - Pande, Rupaly
AU - Halle-Smith, James M
AU - Thorne, Thomas
AU - Hiddema, Lydia
AU - Hodson, James
AU - Roberts, Keith J
AU - Arshad, Ali
AU - Connor, Saxon
AU - Conlon, Kevin C P
AU - Dickson, Euan J
AU - Giovinazzo, Francesco
AU - Harrison, Ewen
AU - de Liguori Carino, Nicola
AU - Hore, Todd
AU - Knight, Stephen R
AU - Loveday, Benjamin
AU - Magill, Laura
AU - Mirza, Darius
AU - Pandanaboyana, Sanjay
AU - Perry, Rita J
AU - Pinkney, Thomas
AU - Siriwardena, Ajith K
AU - Satoi, Sohei
AU - Skipworth, James
AU - Stättner, Stefan
AU - Sutcliffe, Robert P
AU - Tingstedt, Bobby
N1 - Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2022/7
Y1 - 2022/7
N2 - Background: The complexity of pancreaticoduodenectomy and fear of morbidity, particularly postoperative pancreatic fistula, can be a barrier to surgical trainees gaining operative experience. This meta-analysis sought to compare the postoperative pancreatic fistula rate after pancreatoenteric anastomosis by trainees or established surgeons. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, with differences in postoperative pancreatic fistula rates after pancreatoenteric anastomosis between trainee-led versus consultant/attending surgeons pooled using meta-analysis. Variation in rates of postoperative pancreatic fistula was further explored using risk-adjusted outcomes using published risk scores and cumulative sum control chart analysis in a retrospective cohort. Results: Across 14 cohorts included in the meta-analysis, trainees tended toward a lower but nonsignificant rate of all postoperative pancreatic fistula (odds ratio: 0.77, P =.45) and clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (odds ratio: 0.69, P =.37). However, there was evidence of case selection, with trainees being less likely to operate on patients with a pancreatic duct width <3 mm (odds ratio: 0.45, P =.05). Similarly, analysis of a retrospective cohort (N = 756 cases) found patients operated by trainees to have significantly lower predicted all postoperative pancreatic fistula (median: 20 vs 26%, P <.001) and clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (7 vs 9%, P =.020) rates than consultant/attending surgeons, based on preoperative risk scores. After adjusting for this on multivariable analysis, the risks of all postoperative pancreatic fistula (odds ratio: 1.18, P =.604) and clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (odds ratio: 0.85, P =.693) remained similar after pancreatoenteric anastomosis by trainees or consultant/attending surgeons. Conclusion: Pancreatoenteric anastomosis, when performed by trainees, is associated with acceptable outcomes. There is evidence of case selection among patients undergoing surgery by trainees; hence, risk adjustment provides a critical tool for the objective evaluation of performance.
AB - Background: The complexity of pancreaticoduodenectomy and fear of morbidity, particularly postoperative pancreatic fistula, can be a barrier to surgical trainees gaining operative experience. This meta-analysis sought to compare the postoperative pancreatic fistula rate after pancreatoenteric anastomosis by trainees or established surgeons. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, with differences in postoperative pancreatic fistula rates after pancreatoenteric anastomosis between trainee-led versus consultant/attending surgeons pooled using meta-analysis. Variation in rates of postoperative pancreatic fistula was further explored using risk-adjusted outcomes using published risk scores and cumulative sum control chart analysis in a retrospective cohort. Results: Across 14 cohorts included in the meta-analysis, trainees tended toward a lower but nonsignificant rate of all postoperative pancreatic fistula (odds ratio: 0.77, P =.45) and clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (odds ratio: 0.69, P =.37). However, there was evidence of case selection, with trainees being less likely to operate on patients with a pancreatic duct width <3 mm (odds ratio: 0.45, P =.05). Similarly, analysis of a retrospective cohort (N = 756 cases) found patients operated by trainees to have significantly lower predicted all postoperative pancreatic fistula (median: 20 vs 26%, P <.001) and clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (7 vs 9%, P =.020) rates than consultant/attending surgeons, based on preoperative risk scores. After adjusting for this on multivariable analysis, the risks of all postoperative pancreatic fistula (odds ratio: 1.18, P =.604) and clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (odds ratio: 0.85, P =.693) remained similar after pancreatoenteric anastomosis by trainees or consultant/attending surgeons. Conclusion: Pancreatoenteric anastomosis, when performed by trainees, is associated with acceptable outcomes. There is evidence of case selection among patients undergoing surgery by trainees; hence, risk adjustment provides a critical tool for the objective evaluation of performance.
KW - Anastomosis, Surgical/adverse effects
KW - Humans
KW - Pancreatic Fistula/epidemiology
KW - Pancreaticoduodenectomy/adverse effects
KW - Postoperative Complications/epidemiology
KW - Retrospective Studies
KW - Risk Adjustment
KW - Surgeons/education
U2 - 10.1016/j.surg.2021.12.033
DO - 10.1016/j.surg.2021.12.033
M3 - Review article
C2 - 35221107
SN - 0039-6060
VL - 172
SP - 319
EP - 328
JO - Surgery
JF - Surgery
IS - 1
ER -