A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Study of External Pancreatic Duct Stents in Pancreaticoduodenectomy

Pancreatic cancer, with its associated poor prognosis, is one of the most insidious and lethal cancers globally. Indeed, pancreatic cancer has been listed as the fourth leading cause of cancer-related deaths in developed countries, and it may replace colorectal cancer as the second-leading cause of cancer-related deaths by 2030. Pancreaticoduodenectomy is the standard treatment for periampullary carcinoma, especially pancreatic head tumors. However, the incidence of postoperative complications, especially postoperative pancreatic fistula, remains as high as 25%-50%, which limits the dissemination of pancreaticoduodenectomy.

An external pancreatic duct stent is one of the methods used to prevent pancreatic fistula. A large number of studies, including prospective randomized trials as well as meta-analyses, have shown that external pancreatic duct stents significantly decrease the rate of pancreatic fistula and shorten the length of hospital stay. Paradoxically, several studies have shown that external pancreatic duct stents have no effect and may even increase the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula. In a meta-analysis, Dong et al. observed that the use of an external pancreatic duct stent was associated with a significantly lower incidence of pancreatic fistula in patients at high risk for pancreatic fistula compared with an internal stent, but there was no definitive conclusion because of the low quality of the evidence.

In 2019, Mungroop et al. proposed the Updated Alternative Fistula Risk Score (ua-FRS) according to the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS), which quantitatively validated the risk of pancreatic fistula and assessed the benefits of pancreatic duct stents in patients at different levels of risk. Moreover, ISGPS redefined the classification criteria for pancreatic fistula (Grade A) as a biochemical leak, which had no significant clinical impact on the clinical prognosis. In addition, the position statement by ISGPS indicated that, due to the lack of high-quality evidence, the pancreatic duct stent was not routinely recommended during pancreaticoenteric anastomosis, but external stenting can be considered in high-risk glands. Therefore, it is necessary to systematically re-investigate the safety and effectiveness of external pancreatic duct stents for the prevention and treatment of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) in both high-risk and low-risk patients. This retrospective study was conducted to evaluate the differences between external and internal pancreatic stents using the ua-FRS scoring system, based on the hypothesis that the use of an external stent in high-risk patients could decrease the rates of CR-POPF compared with an internal stent after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Inclusion criteria

• Pancreatoduodenectomy with pancreaticojejunal mucosa anastomosis was performed;

• The patient has no combined organic diseases in the heart, lungs, or kidneys;

• No history of chemotherapy, radiotherapy, upper abdominal surgery, or combined with other tumors; ④ The risk score of the pancreatic fistula of the patient according to the definition of the updated Alternative Fistula Risk Score (ua-FRS). Patients with a ua-FRS score higher than 5% were included in this study.

Exclusion criteria

• Previous history of other tumors or upper abdominal surgery; ② Multiple lesions and distant metastasis;

• Patients with organic diseases of important organs such as the heart, lung, and kidney, who cannot tolerate surgery, or patients who are more than 75 years old or less than 18 years old; ④ Other measures were performed to prevent pancreatic fistula, such as fibrin glue sealing, which may affect the accuracy of this study.