Equipamiento. Experiencia. Estándares de calidadFast-track en cirugía pancreática

  1. MJ Castro Santiago 1
  2. JL Fernández Serrano 2
  3. F Docobo Durántez 3
  4. A Valverde Martínez 1
  5. MD Casado Maestre 1
  6. E Sancho Maraver 1
  7. T Gómez Sánchez 1
  8. MÁ Mayo Osorio 1
  9. JM Pacheco García 1
  1. 1 Servicio de Cirugía General. Hospital Universitario Puerta del Mar. Cádiz.
  2. 2 Servicio de Cirugía General. Hospital Universitario Virgen de la Victoria. Málaga.
  3. 3 Servicio de Cirugía General. Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío. Sevilla.
Show affiliations +
Journal:
Cirugía Andaluza

ISSN: 2695-3811,  1130-3212

Year of publication: 2019

Volume: 30

Issue: 2

Pages: 170-176

Type: Article

DOI: 10.37351/2019302.2 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: Cirugía Andaluza

Abstract

Introduction: pancreatic adenocarcinoma is the fourth cause of mortality in Spain and the United States, with surgical resection being the only treatment that increases survival. It is always a challenge for the surgeon due to the technical difficulty of the procedure, and although mortality has been reduced in recent years, surgical complications are still quite high. Introduction: pancreatic adenocarcinoma is the fourth cause of mortality in Spain and the United States, with surgical resection being the only treatment that increases survival. It is always a challenge for the surgeon due to the technical difficulty of the procedure, and although mortality has been reduced in recent years, surgical complications are still quite high. Methods: the research process was carried out based on a systematic search based on clinical guidelines, consensus conferences, reviews and national and international publications on pancreatic oncological surgery carried out in the last decade. Results: the need to establish a Multidisciplinary Team for decision making has been determined. The need to overcome a learning curve in this type of surgery so demanding to reduce morbidity and mortality. The importance of establishing quality standards to assess the quality of the treatment provided, standardize the work methodology to be able to measure results and be able to compare these with other groups and specialized units and the importance of establishing improvement recovery protocols for a fast and early improvement of patients undergoing pancreatic surgery. Conclusion: pancreatic oncological resection is an intervention of great technical complexity and with a high incidence of postoperative complications, so the need for decision making of expert teams, identification of quality standards and the need to apply common protocols are elements of great importance to reduce variability in surgical practice, improve results and obtain maximum optimization of available resources.

Bibliographic References

  • Cameron JL, et al. Two thousand consecutive pancreatoduodenectomies. J. Am. Coll Surg 2015; 220 (4): 530-6.
  • Royal College of Pathology. Standard and datasets for reporting cancers. Available at: . Accessed. April 2009.
  • Bassi C, et al. Identifying key outcome metrics in pancreatic surgery and how to optimally achieve them. HPB 2017, 19.178-181.
  • Yamada S, et al. Evaluation and proposol of novel resectability criteria for pancreatic cáncer established by the Japan Pancreas Society. Volume 162, Number 4.
  • Alexkis N, et al. Standerds of Surgery for pancreatic cáncer. British Journal of Surgery 2004; 91 (11): 1410-27.
  • Tanaka M, et al. International consensus guidelines 2012 for the managemnet of IPMN and MCN of the páncreas. Pancreatology 2012 May-June, 12(3):183-97.
  • The European Study group on cystic tumours of the Pancreas. BMJ 2018;67:789-804.
  • Martin RF, et al. The evidence for technical considerations in pancreatic resections for malignancy. Surg Clin N. Am 90(2010):265-285.
  • Fang Y, et al. Preoperative biliary drainage for obstructive jandice. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 9. Art No: CD005444.
  • Mazen E, et al. A tale of two techniques Preoperative Biliary Drainage and Routine Surgical drainage with Pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surg Clin N. Am 98(2018) 49-35.
  • Scneufele F, et al. Preoperative biliary stenting versus operation first in jaundiced patients due to malignant lesions in the pancreatic head: A meta-analysis of current literatura. Surgery 2017;161:939-50.
  • Versteijne E, et al. Meta-analysis comparing upfront surgery with neoadjuvant treatment in paitents with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cáncer. Published online in wiley online Library (). .
  • Gemenetzis, Georgios MD, Groot Vicent, et al. Survival in locally Avanced Pancreatic Cancer After Neodajuvant Therapy and Surgical Resection. Annals of Surgery. March 28, 2018.
  • Gilloland ATM, Villafane-Ferrial N, et al. Nutritional and Metabolic Derangements in Pancreatic Cancer and Pancreatic Resection Nutrients. 2017 Mar 7; 9(3).
  • Hans G, Beger MD, et al. New onset of Diabetes and Pancreatic Exocrine Insufficiency After Pancreaticoduodenectomy for benign and Malignant tumours. Asystematic Review and Meta-analysis of Long-term results. Annals of Surgery. Volumen 267, Number 2, February 2018.
  • Royal College of Patology. Standard and data sets for reporting cancers. Avaible at: . Accessed April 2009.
  • Stijn van Roessel MD, Gyulnara G, et al. Pathological Mragin clearance and Survival after Pancreaticoduodenectomy in a us and European Pancreatic Center. Ann Surg Oncol (2018) 25:1760-1767.
  • Jean Robert Delpero MD, Florence Jenve, et al. Prognostic value of Resection Margin Involvement after Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Ductal Adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg 2017;266:787-796.
  • Lutz MP, et al. 3rd St. Gallen EORTC Gastrointestinal Cancer Conference: Consensus recommendations on controversial issues in the priamry treatment of pancreatic cáncer. European Journal of Cancer 79 (2017) 41-49.
  • Katz, et al. Standardization of Surgical and Pathologic Variables in needed in Multicenter Trials of Adjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer: Results from the ACOSOGZ5031 Trial. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011 February; 18(2):337-344.
  • Kennedy, et al. Surgical experience and the practice of pancreatoduodenectomy. Surgery. Volumen 162, Number 4; 812-822.
  • Ahola R, et al. Effect of centralization on long-term survival after resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. BJS 207;104:1532-1538.
  • Levan T, et al. Pancreaticoduodenectomy: minimizing the learnig curve. J Vis Surg 2018;4:64.
  • Bilimoria KY, et al. Assessment of Pancreatic Cancer Care in the United States Base don Formally Developed Quality Indicators. JNCI Vol.101, iSSUE 12. June 16.2009.
  • Sabater L, et al. Outcome quality Standards in Pancreatic Oncologic Surgery. Ann Surg Oncol (2014) 21:1138-1146.
  • Sabater L, et al. Estándares de calidad en la cirugía oncológica pancreática en España. Cir Esp 2018:96(6):342-351.
  • Johua G, et al. Enhanced Recovery Pathways in Pancreatic Surgery. Surg Clin N Am 96(2016) 1301-1312.
  • Robert S, et al. Perioperative Management of Patients Undergoing Pancreatic Resection: Implementation of a Care Plan in a tertiary-care Center. Journal of Surgical Oncology 2013; 107:51-57.
  • Xuali Bai, et al. The implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs following pancreatic surgery in on academic medical center of China. Pancreatology 16(2016):665-670.
Data source: Dialnet