Journals / Turkish Journal of Surgery / 2019 / Cilt: 35 - Sayı: 2

Postoperative hemorrhage complications following the Whipple procedure

Whipple ameliyatı sonrasında karşılaşılan kanama problemi

Pages
136–141
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In this study, the data and resultsregarding postoperative hemorrhage complications from our clinic were evaluated.Material and Methods: The files of 185 patients who had undergone Whipple operation in our hospital in the last five years were evaluated retrospectively, and the causes of hemorrhage were attempted to be determined.Results: It was found that 6 out of the 13 (7%) patients who had hemorrhage died.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Although the Whipple operation is an essential surgical technique, its high morbidity (30% to 60%) and mortality (5%) are problems to beaddressed.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The incidence of postoperative hemorrhage has been reported between 5% and 16% in the literature.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In this study, the data and resultsregarding postoperative hemorrhage complications from our clinic were evaluated.Material and Methods: The files of 185 patients who had undergone Whipple operation in our hospital in the last five years were evaluated retrospectively, and the causes of hemorrhage were attempted to be determined.Results: It was found that 6 out of the 13 (7%) patients who had hemorrhage died.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: Although the Whipple operation is an essential surgical technique, its high morbidity (30% to 60%) and mortality (5%) are problems to beaddressed. The incidence of postoperative hemorrhage has been reported between 5% and 16% in the literature. In this study, the data and resultsregarding postoperative hemorrhage complications from our clinic were evaluated.Material and Methods: The files of 185 patients who had undergone Whipple operation in our hospital in the last five years were evaluated retrospectively, and the causes of hemorrhage were attempted to be determined.Results: It was found that 6 out of the 13 (7%) patients who had hemorrhage died. In six of there 13 cases, hemorrhage occurred due to fistulas fromthe portal vein, gastroduodenal artery, and pancreatic arteries at variable periods. Two cases were found to have developed disseminated intravascularcoagulation as a result of sepsis. Early intervention was performed in two cases who bled from the meso veins and in one case who bled from the portalvein. Laparotomy and hemostasis were performed in a patient who bled from the gastric anastomosis line. In a patient who had been taking low molecular weight heparin, bleeding from the drains and nasogastric tube stopped following the cessation of the drug.Conclusion: Preventive procedures such as connection of the vascular structures, use of vascular sealants, omental patching during surgery, andreducing the risk of complications by using somatostatin analogs were performed to prevent hemorrhages after Whipple operations. In addition tostandard methods, angiography and embolization have emerged as effective methods in the diagnosis and treatment of hemorrhages. Furthermore,determination and elimination of independent risk factors, such as jaundice, affecting fistula formation and bleeding in the perioperative period, isimportant for prevention.20. Tian Y, Ma H, Peng Y, Li G, Yang H. Preventive effect of omental flap inpancreaticoduodenectomy against postoperative complications: ameta-analysis. Hepatogastroenterology 2015; 62: 187-9.21. Tien YW, Lee PH, Yang CY, Ho MC, Chiu YF. Risk factors of massivebleeding related to pancreatic leak after pancreaticoduodenectomy.J Am Coll Surg 2005; 201: 554-9.22. Ramia JM, de la Plaza R, Adel F, Ramiro C, Arteaga V, Garcia-Parreo J.Wrapping in pancreatic surgery: a systematic review. ANZ J Surg 2014;84: 921-4.23. Turrini O, Delpero JR. Omental flap for vessel coverage during pancreaticoduodenectomy: a modified technique (Article in French withenglish abstract). J Chir (Paris) 2009; 146: 545-8.24. Braga M, Capretti G, Pecorelli N, Balzano G, Doglioni C, Ariotti R, et al. Aprognostic score to predict major complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg 2011; 254: 707-8.25. Balcom JH IV, Rattner DW, Warshaw AL, Chang Y, Fernandez-del Castillo C. Ten-year experience with 733 pancreatic resections. Arch Surg2001; 136: 391-8.26. Choi SH, Moon HJ, Heo JS, Joh JW, Kim

Özet

Giriş ve Amaç: Whipple ameliyatları, halen vazgeçilmez bir ameliyat tekniği olmasının yanında, yüksek morbiditesi (%30-60) ve mortalitesi (%5) ile cerrahinin çözüm bekleyen önemli sorunlarından biri olmaya devam etmektedir. Postoperatif hemoraji ise literatürde %5-16 sıklıkta görülmektedir. Bu çalışmada ameliyat sonrası karşılaşılan kanama problemleriyle ilgili olarak kliniğimiz verileri ve sonuçları irdelenmiştir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Son beş yılda, hastanemizde Whipple ameliyatı yapılan 185 hastamızın dosyaları retrospektif olarak değerlendirilerek kanama nedenleri ortaya konulmaya çalışılmıştır. Bulgular: Toplam 13 (%7) hastada kanama nedeniyle işlem yapıldığı, bunlardan altısının eksitus olduğu saptandı. Olgulardan altısında fistüle bağlı olarak değişen süreler içerisinde portal ven, gastroduodenal arter ve pankreas arterlerinden kanadığı saptandı. Sepsis sonucu iki olguda dissemine intravasküler koagülasyona bağlı kanamaların geliştiği saptandı. İki olguda mezo venlerinden, bir olguda ise portal venden gelişen kanamaya erken dönemde müdahale edilmiştir. Mide anastomoz hattından kanama gelişen bir hastamızda laparotomi ve hemostaz yapıldı. Profilaktik düşük molekül ağırlıklı heparin verilmekte olan bir hastamızda dren ve nazogastrik sondalardan olan kanamanın ilacın kesilmesini takiben durduğu saptandı. Sonuç: Whipple ameliyatı sonrasında görülen kanamaların durdurulması amacıyla çeşitli koruyucu işlemler uygulanmaktadır. Sonuç olarak, bilinen yöntemlerin yanında, anjiyografi ve embolizasyon kanamaların tanı ve tedavisinde oldukça etkili bir yöntem olarak ortaya çıkmaktadır. Ayrıca, kanama ve fistül oluşumuna etkili sarılık gibi bağımsız risk faktörlerinin peroperatif dönemde belirlenmesi ve giderilmesi korunma için önemlidir.

🔖

Cite This Article

DİL, O. N., Acar, T., Gür, E. Ö., Çelik, S. C., Haciyanlı, M., Cengiz, F., Özşay, O., Cin, N. (2022). Postoperative hemorrhage complications following the Whipple procedure. Turkish Journal of Surgery, Cilt: 35 - Sayı: 2, 136–141. https://ajindex.com/articles/614325

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Roulin D, Cerantola Y, Demartines N, Schäfer M. Systematic review of delayed postoperative hemorrhage after pancreatic resection. J Gastrointest Surg 2011; 15: 1055-62
  2. Yekebas EF, Wolfram L, Cateldegirmen G, Habermann CR, Bogoevski D, Koenig AM, et al. Postpancreatectomy hemorrhage; diagnosis and treatment. An analysis in 1669 consecutive pancreatic resections. Ann Surg 2007; 246: 269-80
  3. Gurusamy KS, Koti R, Fusai G, Davidson BR. Somatostatin analogues for pancreatic surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 13: 6:CD008370
  4. Bassi C, Dervenis C, Butturini G, Fingerhut A, Yeo C, Izbicki J, et al. Postoperative pancreatic fistula: An international study group (ISGPF) definition. Surgery 2005; 138: 8-13
  5. Wente MN, Veit JA, Bassi C, Dervenis C, Fingerhut A, Gouma DJ, et al. Postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH): an International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definition. Surgery 2007; 142: 20-5
  6. Grützman R, Rückert F, Hippe-Davies N, Distler M, Saeger HD. Evaluation of the international study group of pancreatic surgery definition of post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage in a high volüme center. Surgery 2012; 151: 612-20
  7. Balachandran P, Sikora S, Raghavendra RV, Kumar A, Saxena R, Kappor VK. Haemorrhagic complications of pancreaticoduodecnectomy. ANZ J Surg 2004; 74: 945-50
  8. Darnis B, Lebeau R, Chopin-Laly X, Adham M. Postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH): predictors and management from a prospective database. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2013; 398: 441-8. 9. de Castro S, Kuhlmann KFD, Busch ORC, Van Delden OM, Lameris JS, Van Gulik TM, et all. Delayed massive hemorrhage after pancreatic and biliary surgery: embolization or surgery? Ann Surg 2005; 241: 85-91
  9. Eckardt AJ, Klein F, Adler A, Veltzke-Schlieker W, Warnick P, Bahra M, et al. Management and outcomes of haemorrhage after pancreatogastrostomy versus pancreatojejunostomy. Br J Surg 2011; 98: 1599-607
  10. Jin K, Zhou H, Zhang J, Wang W, Sun Y, Ruan C, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of somatostatin analogues in the prevention of postoperative complication after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Dig Surg 2015; 32: 196-207
  11. Tani M, Kawai M, Hirono S, Hatori T, Imaizunmi T, Nakao A, et al. Use of omentum or falciform ligament does not decrease complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy: Nationwide survey of the Japanese Society of Pancreatic Surgery. Surgery 2012; 151: 183-91
  12. Muscari F, Suc B, Kirzin S, Hay JM, Fountainer G, Fingerhut A, et al. Risk factors for mortality