Impact of obesity on perioperative morbidity and mortality after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Department of Surgery, Thomas Jefferson University, Jefferson Pancreas, Biliary and Related Disease Center, Philadelphia, PA 19107, USA.
Journal of the American College of Surgeons (Impact Factor: 4.5). 03/2009; 208(2):210-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2008.10.019
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Obesity has been implicated as a risk factor for perioperative and postoperative complications. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of obesity on morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD).
Between January 2000 and July 2007, 262 patients underwent PD at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, of whom 240 had complete data, including body mass index (BMI; calculated as kg/m(2)) for analysis. Data on BMI, preoperative parameters, operative details, and postoperative course were collected. Patients were categorized as obese (BMI >or= 30), overweight (BMI >or= 25 and < 30), or normal weight (BMI < 25). Complications were graded according to previously published scales. Other end points included length of postoperative hospital stay, blood loss, and operative duration. Analyses were performed using univariate and multivariable models.
There were 103 (42.9%) normal-weight, 71 (29.6%) overweight, and 66 (27.5%) obese patients. There were 5 perioperative deaths (2.1%), with no differences across BMI categories. A significant difference in median operative duration and blood loss between obese and normal-weight patients was identified (439 versus 362.5 minutes, p = 0.0004; 650 versus 500 mL, p = 0.0139). In addition, median length of stay was significantly longer for BMI (9.5 versus 8 days, p = 0.095). Although there were no significant differences in superficial wound infections, obese patients did have an increased rate of serious complications compared with normal-weight patients (24.2% versus 13.6%, respectively; p = 0.10).
Obese patients undergoing PD have a substantially increased blood loss and longer operative time but do not have a substantially increased length of postoperative hospital stay or rate of serious complications. These findings should be considered when assessing patients for operation and when counseling patients about operative risk, but they do not preclude obese individuals from undergoing definitive pancreatic operations.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The objective was to determine the liver volumetric recovering capacity and postoperative course after major hepatectomy in obese patients through a case-matched study. In literature, the impact of obesity on liver recovering has been analyzed only indirectly in terms of morbimortality but never through volumetric assessment. Between 2005 and 2011, 42 patients with body mass index (BMI) 30 or higher (Ob group) underwent major hepatectomy and were matched with 42 patients with BMI 25 or lower (NonOb group) on the magnitude of resection (number of resected segments ±1, remnant liver volume to total liver volume, RLV/TLV, ±5%). The RLV was measured on computed tomographic slices preoperatively and postoperatively at 1 month (RLV-1M) for all patients and within 3 to 12 months in 42 paired patients (median = 6 months, RLV-6M). Considering hepatomegaly in Ob group, RLV was also normalized to body weight (RLVBWR). The liver volumetric gain was expressed as a relative increase [(RLV-1M - RLV)/RLV] or increase in RLVBWR. The Ob and NonOb groups were comparable regarding clinicopathological data, except for arterial hypertension (48% vs 19%; P = 0.005), mean steatosis (24% vs 10%; P = 0.03), and fibrosis incidence (33% vs 10%; P = 0.008). Ob group showed longer operative time and higher blood losses. There were no intergroup differences in liver failure (both 7.1%) and 90-day morbimortality. Despite comparable RLV/TLV (38.1% vs 37.7%; P = 0.13), the relative liver volumetric gain at 1 month was significantly lower in Ob group (+93% vs +115%; P = 0.002), as well as RLVBWR increase (+0.59% vs +0.79%; P < 0.001). The RLV-1M represented 66.2% of initial TLV in Ob group compared with 73.8% (P = 0.005) in NonOb group. This delay in relative volumetric gain persisted at 6 months (+105.4% vs +137.6%; P = 0.009), the RLV-6M representing 71.2% vs 82.4% of initial TLV (P = 0.014). In a methodologically robust trial in the first cohort reported up to date, the regenerative response in obese patients was comparatively slower based on their initial TLV or body weight.
    Annals of surgery 08/2013; · 7.90 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To prospectively evaluate the additional value of geriatric assessment (GA) for predicting surgical outcomes in a cohort of older patients undergoing a pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for pancreatic tumors. Older patients are less often referred for possible PD. Standard preoperative assessments may underestimate the likelihood of significant adverse outcomes. The prospective utility of validated GA has not been studied in this group. PD-eligible patients were enrolled in a prospective outcome study. Standard preoperative assessments were recorded. Elements of validated GA were also measured, including components of Fried's model of frailty, the Vulnerable Elders Survey (VES-13), and the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB). All postoperative adverse events were recorded, systematically reviewed, and graded using the Clavien-Dindo system by a surgeon blinded to the GA results. Multivariate regression analyses were conducted. Seventy-six older patients underwent a PD. Significant unrecognized vulnerability was identified at the baseline: Fried's "exhaustion" (37.3%), SPPB <10 (28.5%), and VES-13 >3 (15.4%). Within 30 days of PD, 46% experienced a severe complication (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III). In regression analyses controlling for age, the body mass index, the American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and comorbidity burden, Fried's "exhaustion" predicted major complications [odds ratio (OR) = 4.06; P = 0.01], longer hospital stays (β = 0.27; P = 0.02), and surgical intensive care unit admissions (OR = 4.30; P = 0.01). Both SPPB (OR = 0.61; P = 0.04) and older age predicted discharge to a rehabilitation facility (OR = 1.1; P < 0.05) and age correlated with a lower likelihood of hospital readmission (OR = 0.94; P = 0.02). Controlling for standard preoperative assessments, worse scores on GA prospectively and independently predicted important adverse outcomes. Geriatric assessment may help identify older patients at high risk for complications from PD.
    Annals of surgery 10/2013; · 7.90 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is the main cause of fatal complications after pancreatoduodenectomy. There is still no universally accepted technique for pancreaticoenterostomy, especially in patients with soft pancreas. Between July 2008 and June 2013, 240 patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy were enrolled in this single-institution matched historical control study. To approximate the pancreatic parenchyma to the jejunal seromuscular layer, 120 patients underwent anastomosis using the Kakita method (three or four interrupted penetrating sutures) and 120 underwent anastomosis using the modified Blumgart anastomosis (m-BA) method (one to three transpancreatic/jejunal seromuscular sutures to completely cover the pancreatic stump with jejunal serosa). The rate of clinically relevant POPF formation was significantly lower in the m-BA group than that in the Kakita group (2.5 vs 36 %; p < 0.001). The duration of drain placement and the length of postoperative hospital stay were significantly shorter in the m-BA group. Multivariate analysis showed that m-BA was an independent predictor of non-formation of POPF (hazard ratio, 0.02; 95 % confidence interval, 0.01-0.08; p < 0.001). The m-BA method is safe and simple and improves postoperative outcomes. We suggest that the m-BA is suitable for use as a standard method of pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreatoduodenectomy.
    Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 04/2014; · 2.36 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 22, 2014