Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40492489›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2025

Stapler versus scalpel resection followed by handsewn closure of the pancreatic remnant for distal pancreatectomy.

Pascal Probst, Felix J Hüttner, Ulla Klaiber, Phillip Knebel, Alexis Ulrich, Markus W Büchler, Markus K Diener

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Pascal ProbstDepartment of Surgery, Cantonal Hospital Thurgau, Frauenfeld, Switzerland.
Felix J HüttnerDepartment of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, Klinikum Nuremberg, Nuremberg, Germany.
Ulla KlaiberDepartment of General and Visceral Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Phillip KnebelDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Alexis UlrichDepartment of General, Visceral, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, Lukas Hospital Neuss , Neuss, Germany.
Markus W BüchlerBotton-Champalimaus Pancreatic Cancer Center, Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal.
Markus K DienerDepartment of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, Klinikum Nuremberg, Nuremberg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResections of the pancreatic body and tail reaching to the left of the superior mesenteric vein are defined as distal pancreatectomy. Most distal pancreatectomies are elective treatments for chronic pancreatitis, benign or malignant diseases, and they have high morbidity rates of up to 40%. Pancreatic fistula formation is the main source of postoperative morbidity, and is associated with numerous further complications. Researchers have proposed several surgical resection and closure techniques of the pancreatic remnant in an attempt to reduce these complications. The two most common techniques are scalpel resection followed by handsewn closure of the pancreatic remnant and stapler resection and closure.

objectivesTo assess the effects of stapler resection and closure compared to scalpel resection followed by handsewn closure of the pancreatic remnant in people undergoing distal pancreatectomy. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase from database inception to October 2023, and the ISGPS Evidence Map of Pancreatic Surgery to 9 April 2025. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing stapler versus scalpel resection followed by handsewn closure of the pancreatic remnant for open distal pancreatectomy (irrespective of language or publication status). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and performed data extraction. Our outcomes of interest were postoperative mortality and morbidity, especially postoperative pancreatic fistula. Taking into account the clinical heterogeneity between trials (e.g. different endpoint definitions), we analysed data using a random-effects model in RevMan, calculating risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. MAIN

resultsIn three trials, a total of 515 participants underwent distal pancreatic resection and were randomised to closure of the pancreatic remnant either with stapler (n = 259) or scalpel resection followed by handsewn closure (n = 256). One study was a single-centre pilot RCT, and two studies were multicentre RCTs. The single-centre pilot RCT evaluated 69 participants in five intervention arms (stapler, handsewn, fibrin glue, mesh, and pancreaticojejunostomy), although we only assessed the stapler and handsewn closure groups (14 and 15 participants, respectively). The two multicentre RCTs had two interventional arms: stapler (n = 177 and 68) and handsewn closure (n = 175 and 66). Stapler may have similar effects on postoperative mortality compared to scalpel resection followed by handsewn closure, although the CI is wide (4 deaths per 1000 compared with 8 per 1000; RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.40; 3 RCTs; 515 participants; low-certainty evidence). Stapler likely results in little to no difference in postoperative pancreatic fistula according to the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definition compared to scalpel resection followed by handsewn closure (26% versus 29%; RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.47; 2 RCTs; 486 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Stapler likely results in little to no difference in overall postoperative morbidity compared to scalpel resection followed by handsewn closure (63% versus 59%; RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.30; 2 RCTs; 486 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of evidence for all outcomes by one level due to potential selection bias alone or in combination with performance and detection bias, and for postoperative mortality by a further level for imprecision. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThe evidence is mainly based on the results of two multicentre RCTs. There is no ongoing RCT on this topic. We did not find evidence to indicate that either stapler or scalpel resection followed by handsewn closure of the pancreatic remnant for distal pancreatectomy is superior in terms of postoperative pancreatic fistula, overall postoperative mortality, or operation time. Currently, the choice of closure is left to the preference of the individual surgeon and the anatomical characteristics of the patient. Future trials stratifying for pancreatic texture (soft versus hard) could add valuable information to inform surgical approaches when considering different pancreatic textures. Future trials assessing novel methods of stump closure should compare them either with stapler or handsewn closure as a control group to ensure comparability of results.

Indexed as

PancreatectomySurgical StaplersSurgical StaplingHumansPancreasPancreatic FistulaPostoperative ComplicationsRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID40492489
PMCPMC12150363

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.