Brauer David G, Nywening Timothy M, Jaques David P, Doyle M B Majella, Chapman William C, Fields Ryan C, Hawkins William G
Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO.
Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO; Department of Surgical Services, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, Saint Louis, MO.
J Am Coll Surg. 2016 Dec;223(6):774-783.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.09.004. Epub 2016 Oct 26.
Operative site drainage (OSD) after elective hepatectomy remains widely used despite data suggesting limited benefit. Multi-institutional, quality-driven databases and analytic techniques offer a unique source from which the utility of OSD can be assessed.
Elective hepatectomies from the 2014 American College of Surgeons (ACS) NSQIP Targeted Hepatectomy Database were propensity score matched on the use of OSD using preoperative and intraoperative variables. The influence of OSD on the diagnosis of postoperative bile leaks, rates of subsequent intervention, and other outcomes within 30 days were assessed using paired testing.
Operative site drainage was used in 42.2% of 2,583 eligible hepatectomies. There were 1,868 cases matched, with 7.2% experiencing a post-hepatectomy bile leak. The incidence of bile leak initially requiring intervention was no different between the OSD and no OSD groups (n = 32 vs n = 24, p = 0.278), and OSD was associated with a greater number of drainage procedures to manage post-hepatectomy bile leak (n = 27 in the OSD group, n = 13 in the no OSD group, p = 0.034, relative risk [RR] 2.1 [95% CI 1.1 to 4.0]). The OSD group had a greater mean length of stay (+0.8 days, p = 0.004) and more 30-day readmissions (p < 0.001, RR 1.6 [95% CI 1.2 to 2.1]). On multivariate analysis, post-hepatectomy bile leak and receipt of additional drainage procedures were stronger predictors of increased length of stay and readmissions than OSD.
In a propensity score matched cohort, OSD did not improve the rate of diagnosis of major bile leaks and was associated with increased interventions, greater length of stay, and more 30-day readmissions. These data suggest that routine OSD after elective hepatectomy may not be helpful in capturing clinically relevant bile leaks and has additional consequences.
尽管数据表明选择性肝切除术后手术部位引流(OSD)的益处有限,但仍被广泛使用。多机构、质量驱动的数据库和分析技术提供了一个独特的来源,可据此评估OSD的效用。
利用2014年美国外科医师学会(ACS)NSQIP靶向肝切除数据库中的选择性肝切除术,根据术前和术中变量对OSD的使用情况进行倾向评分匹配。使用配对检验评估OSD对术后胆漏诊断、后续干预率及30天内其他结局的影响。
在2583例符合条件的肝切除术中,42.2%使用了手术部位引流。共匹配1868例病例,7.2%发生肝切除术后胆漏。OSD组和非OSD组中最初需要干预的胆漏发生率无差异(分别为32例和24例,p = 0.278),且OSD与处理肝切除术后胆漏的引流操作次数更多相关(OSD组27例,非OSD组13例,p = 0.034,相对风险[RR] 2.1 [95%可信区间1.1至4.0])。OSD组的平均住院时间更长(+0.8天,p = 0.004),30天再入院率更高(p < 0.001,RR 1.6 [95%可信区间1.2至2.1])。多因素分析显示,肝切除术后胆漏和接受额外引流操作比OSD更能预测住院时间延长和再入院率增加。
在倾向评分匹配队列中,OSD并未提高主要胆漏的诊断率,且与干预增加、住院时间延长和30天再入院率增加相关。这些数据表明,选择性肝切除术后常规OSD可能无助于发现临床相关胆漏,且会带来其他后果。