Ítem
Embargo

Evaluación de escalas de predicción de fistula pancreática postoperatoria basado en resonancia magnética: estudio de prueba diagnóstica

Mostrar el registro sencillo de la publicación
dc.contributor.advisorRamírez Giraldo, Camilo
dc.contributor.advisorSabogal Olarte, Juan Carlos
dc.contributor.gruplacMéderi
dc.creatorArbelaez Osuna, Katherine Viviana
dc.creatorRamírez Giraldo, Camilo
dc.creatorConde Monroy, Danny
dc.creatorUpegui Jiménez, Daniel
dc.creatorSantodomingo, Lorena
dc.creator.degreeEspecialista en Cirugía General
dc.creator.degreeLevelMaestría
dc.creator.degreetypeFull time
dc.date.accessioned2023-07-31T15:39:08Z
dc.date.available2023-07-31T15:39:08Z
dc.date.created2023-07-27
dc.date.embargoEndinfo:eu-repo/date/embargoEnd/2025-07-31
dc.descriptionLa fístula pancreática posoperatoria (POPF) es una de las complicaciones más temidas y frecuentes tras las pancreatoduodenectomías. Este trabajo tiene como objetivo evaluar el rendimiento de las diferentes escalas para predecir POPF, en donde la escala de Birmingham fue la escala con mayor rendimiento predictivo de POPF, es una escala sencilla con únicamente dos variables las cuales se pueden obtener en el preoperatorio con ayuda de la MRI.
dc.description.abstractPostoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is one of the most feared and frequent complications after pancreaticoduodenectomies. This work aims to evaluate the performance of the different scales to predict POPF, where the Birmingham scale was the scale with the highest predictive performance of POPF, it is a simple scale with only two variables which can be obtained in the preoperative period with the help of MRI.
dc.format.extent51
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.48713/10336_40255
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.urosario.edu.co/handle/10336/40255
dc.language.isospa
dc.publisherUniversidad del Rosario
dc.publisher.departmentEscuela de Medicina y Ciencias de la Salud
dc.publisher.programEspecialización en Cirugía General
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International*
dc.rights.accesRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccess
dc.rights.accesoRestringido (Temporalmente bloqueado)
dc.rights.licenciaEL AUTOR, manifiesta que la obra objeto de la presente autorización es original y la realizó sin violar o usurpar derechos de autor de terceros, por lo tanto la obra es de exclusiva autoría y tiene la titularidad sobre la misma. PARGRAFO: En caso de presentarse cualquier reclamación o acción por parte de un tercero en cuanto a los derechos de autor sobre la obra en cuestión, EL AUTOR, asumirá toda la responsabilidad, y saldrá en defensa de los derechos aquí autorizados; para todos los efectos la universidad actúa como un tercero de buena fe. EL AUTOR, autoriza a LA UNIVERSIDAD DEL ROSARIO, para que en los términos establecidos en la Ley 23 de 1982, Ley 44 de 1993, Decisión andina 351 de 1993, Decreto 460 de 1995 y demás normas generales sobre la materia, utilice y use la obra objeto de la presente autorización. -------------------------------------- POLITICA DE TRATAMIENTO DE DATOS PERSONALES. Declaro que autorizo previa y de forma informada el tratamiento de mis datos personales por parte de LA UNIVERSIDAD DEL ROSARIO para fines académicos y en aplicación de convenios con terceros o servicios conexos con actividades propias de la academia, con estricto cumplimiento de los principios de ley. Para el correcto ejercicio de mi derecho de habeas data cuento con la cuenta de correo habeasdata@urosario.edu.co, donde previa identificación podré solicitar la consulta, corrección y supresión de mis datos.spa
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.source.bibliographicCitationMalgras B, Dokmak S, Aussilhou B, Pocard M, Sauvanet A. Management of postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Visc Surg [Internet]. 2023;160(1):39–51. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2023.01.002
dc.source.bibliographicCitationSøreide K, Healey AJ, Mole DJ, Parks RW. Pre-, peri- and post-operative factors for the development of pancreatic fistula after pancreatic surgery. Hpb. 2019;21(12):1621–31. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpb.2019.06.004
dc.source.bibliographicCitationPande R, Halle-Smith JM, Phelan L, Thorne T, Panikkar M, Hodson J, et al. External validation of postoperative pancreatic fistula prediction scores in pancreatoduodenectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hpb. 2022;24(3):287–98.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationEshmuminov D, Schneider MA, Tschuor C, Raptis DA, Kambakamba P, Muller X, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of postoperative pancreatic fistula rates using the updated 2016 International Study Group Pancreatic Fistula definition in patients undergoing pancreatic resection with soft and hard pancreatic texture. Hpb. 2018;20(11):992–1003.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationHong TH, Choi J Il, Park MY, Rha SE, Lee YJ, You YK, et al. Pancreatic hardness: Correlation of surgeon’s palpation, durometer measurement and preoperative magnetic resonance imaging features. World J Gastroenterol. 2017;23(11):2044–51
dc.source.bibliographicCitationMarchegiani G, Ballarin R, Malleo G, Andrianello S, Allegrini V, Pulvirenti A, et al. Quantitative Assessment of Pancreatic Texture Using a Durometer: A New Tool to Predict the Risk of Developing a Postoperative Fistula. World J Surg. 2017;41(11):2876–83
dc.source.bibliographicCitationBelyaev O, Rosenkranz S, Munding J, Herzog T, Chromik AM, Tannapfel A, et al. Quantitative assessment and determinants of suture-holding capacity of human pancreas. J Surg Res [Internet]. 2013;184(2):807–12. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2013.04.017
dc.source.bibliographicCitationBossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Bruns DE, Glasziou PP, Irwig L, et al. STARD 2015: An updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies1. Radiology. 2015;277(3):826–32.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationTabchouri N, Bouquot M, Hermand H, Benoit O, Loiseau JC, Dokmak S, et al. A Novel Pancreatic Fistula Risk Score Including Preoperative Radiation Therapy in Pancreatic Cancer Patients. J Gastrointest Surg. 2021;25(4):991–1000.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationYamamoto Y, Sakamoto Y, Nara S, Esaki M, Shimada K, Kosuge T. A preoperative predictive scoring system for postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. World J Surg. 2011;35(12):2747–55.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationRoberts KJ, Hodson J, Mehrzad H, Marudanayagam R, Sutcliffe RP, Muiesan P, et al. A preoperative predictive score of pancreatic fistula following pancreatoduodenectomy. Hpb. 2014;16(7):620–8
dc.source.bibliographicCitationCallery MP, Pratt WB, Kent TS, Chaikof EL, Vollmer CM. A prospectively validated clinical risk score accurately predicts pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. J Am Coll Surg [Internet]. 2013;216(1):1–14. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2012.09.002
dc.source.bibliographicCitationKantor O, Talamonti MS, Pitt HA, Vollmer CM, Riall TS, Hall BL, et al. Using the NSQIP Pancreatic Demonstration Project to Derive a Modified Fistula Risk Score for Preoperative Risk Stratification in Patients Undergoing Pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Am Coll Surg [Internet]. 2017;224(5):816–25. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2017.01.054
dc.source.bibliographicCitationMungroop TH, Van Rijssen LB, Van Klaveren D, Smits FJ, Van Woerden V, Linnemann RJ, et al. Alternative Fistula Risk Score for Pancreatoduodenectomy (a-FRS): Design and International External Validation. Ann Surg. 2019;269(5):937–43.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationMungroop TH, Klompmaker S, Wellner UF, Steyerberg EW, Coratti A, D’Hondt M, et al. Updated Alternative Fistula Risk Score (ua-FRS) to Include Minimally Invasive Pancreatoduodenectomy: Pan-European Validation. Ann Surg. 2021;273(2):334–40.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationWatanabe H, Kanematsu M, Tanaka K, Osada S, Tomita H, Hara A, et al. Fibrosis and postoperative fistula of the pancreas: Correlation with mr imaging findings-preliminary results. Radiology. 2014;270(3):791–9
dc.source.bibliographicCitationBassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C, Sarr M, Abu Hilal M, Adham M, et al. The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 Years After. Surg (United States) [Internet]. 2017;161(3):584–91. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2016.11.014
dc.source.bibliographicCitationPulvirenti A, Ramera M, Bassi C. Modifications in the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definition of postoperative pancreatic fistula. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017;2(DEC).
dc.source.bibliographicCitationHu BY, Wan T, Zhang WZ, Dong JH. Risk factors for postoperative pancreatic fistula: Analysis of 539 successive cases of pancreaticoduodenectomy. World J Gastroenterol. 2016;22(34):7797–805
dc.source.bibliographicCitationKamarajah SK, Bundred JR, Lin A, Halle-Smith J, Pande R, Sutcliffe R, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of factors associated with post-operative pancreatic fistula following pancreatoduodenectomy. ANZ J Surg. 2021;91(5):810–21.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationTajima Y, Kawabata Y, Hirahara N. Preoperative imaging evaluation of pancreatic pathologies for the objective prediction of pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surg Today. 2018;48(2):140–50
dc.source.bibliographicCitationGaujoux S, Cortes A, Couvelard A, Noullet S, Clavel L, Rebours V, et al. Fatty pancreas and increased body mass index are risk factors of pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surgery. 2010;148(1):15–23.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationBelyaev O, Munding J, Herzog T, Suelberg D, Tannapfel A, Schmidt WE, et al. Histomorphological features of the pancreatic remnant as independent risk factors for postoperative pancreatic fistula: A matched-pairs analysis. Pancreatology. 2011;11(5):516–24
dc.source.bibliographicCitationShubert CR, Wagie AE, Farnell MB, Nagorney DM, Que FG, Reid Lombardo K, et al. Clinical Risk Score to Predict Pancreatic Fistula after Pancreatoduodenectomy: Independent External Validation for Open and Laparoscopic Approaches. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;221(3):689–98
dc.source.bibliographicCitationRyu Y, Shin SH, Park DJ, Kim N, Heo JS, Choi DW, et al. Validation of original and alternative fistula risk scores in postoperative pancreatic fistula. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2019;26(8):354–9
dc.source.bibliographicCitationLattimore CM, Kane WJ, Turrentine FE, Zaydfudim VM. The impact of obesity and severe obesity on postoperative outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy. Surg (United States) [Internet]. 2021;170(5):1538–45. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2021.04.028
dc.source.bibliographicCitationArmellini F, Zamboni M, Robbi R, Todesco T, Rigo L, Bergamo-Andreis I, et al. Total and intra-abdominal fat measurements by ultrasound and computerized tomography. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 1993;17(4):209–14.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationMathur A, Pitt HA, Marine M, Saxena R, Schmidt CM, Howard TJ, et al. Fatty pancreas: A factor in postoperative pancreatic fistula. Ann Surg. 2007;246(6):1058–64
dc.source.bibliographicCitationChen CB, McCall NS, Pucci MJ, Leiby B, Dabbish N, Winter JM, et al. The Combination of Pancreas Texture and Postoperative Serum Amylase in Predicting Pancreatic Fistula Risk. Am Surg. 2018;84(6):889–96.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationAdachi E, Harimoto N, Yamashita Y-I, Sakaguchi Y, Toh Y, Okamura T, et al. Pancreatic leakage test in pancreaticoduodenectomy: relation to degree of pancreatic fibrosis, pancreatic amylase level and pancreatic fistula. Fukuoka Igaku Zasshi. 2013;104(12):490–8
dc.source.bibliographicCitationMaqueda González R, Di Martino M, Galán González I, Rodríguez Carnero P, Martín-Pérez E. Development of a prediction model of pancreatic fistula after duodenopancreatectomy and soft pancreas by assessing the preoperative image. Langenbeck’s Arch Surg. 2022;2363–72.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationHuang CT, Lin CK, Lee TH, Liang YJ. Pancreatic fibrosis and chronic pancreatitis: Mini-review of non-histologic diagnosis for clinical applications. Diagnostics. 2020;10(2).
dc.source.bibliographicCitationYoon JH, Lee JM, Lee KB, Kim S-W, Kang MJ, Jang J-Y, et al. Pancreatic Steatosis and Fibrosis : Quantitative Assessment. Radiology [Internet]. 2016;000(0):1–11. Disponible en: http://pubs.rsna.org/doi/10.1148/radiol.2015142254
dc.source.bibliographicCitationMuraoka N, Uematsu H, Kimura H, Imamura Y, Fujiwara Y, Murakami M, et al. Apparent diffusion coefficient in pancreatic cancer: Characterization and histopathological correlations. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008;27(6):1302–8.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationKolbinger FR, Lambrecht J, Leger S, Ittermann T, Speidel S, Weitz J, et al. The image-based preoperative fistula risk score (preFRS) predicts postoperative pancreatic fistula in patients undergoing pancreatic head resection. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):1–11.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationKambakamba P, Mannil M, Herrera PE, Müller PC, Kuemmerli C, Linecker M, et al. The potential of machine learning to predict postoperative pancreatic fistula based on preoperative, non-contrast-enhanced CT: A proof-of-principle study. Surg (United States) [Internet]. 2020;167(2):448–54. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2019.09.019
dc.source.bibliographicCitationSandini M, Malleo G, Gianotti L. Scores for Prediction of Fistula after Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Systematic Review. Dig Surg. 2016;33(5):392–400.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationHong W, Ha H Il, Lee JW, Lee SM, Kim MJ. Measurement of pancreatic fat fraction by CT histogram analysis to predict pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Korean J Radiol. 2019;20(4):599–608.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationLao M, Zhang X, Guo C, Chen W, Zhang Q, Ma T, et al. External validation of alternative fistula risk score (a-FRS) for predicting pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. Hpb [Internet]. 2020;22(1):58–66. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpb.2019.05.007.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationMcAuliffe JC, Parks K, Kumar P, McNeal SF, Morgan DE, Christein JD. Computed tomography attenuation and patient characteristics as predictors of complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Hpb. 2013;15(9):709–15.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationHashimoto Y, Sclabas GM, Takahashi N, Kirihara Y, Smyrk TC, Huebner M, et al. Dual-Phase Computed Tomography for Assessment of Pancreatic Fibrosis and Anastomotic Failure Risk Following Pancreatoduodenectomy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2011;15(12):2193–204.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationLim S, Bae JH, Chun EJ, Kim H, Kim SY, Kim KM, et al. Differences in pancreatic volume, fat content, and fat density measured by multidetector-row computed tomography according to the duration of diabetes. Acta Diabetol. 2014;51(5):739–48.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationHarada N, Yoshizumi T, Maeda T, Kayashima H, Ikegami T, Harimoto N, et al. Preoperative pancreatic stiffness by real-time tissue elastography to predict pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Anticancer Res. 2017;37(4):1909–15.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationSandrasegaran K, Lin C, Akisik FM, Tann M. State-of-the-art pancreatic MRI. Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195(1):42–53.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationTajima Y, Kuroki T, Tsutsumi R, Fukuda K, Kitasato A, Adachi T, et al. Risk Factors for Pancreatic Anastomotic Leakage: The Significance of Preoperative Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Pancreas as a Predictor of Leakage. J Am Coll Surg. 2006;202(5):723–31
dc.source.bibliographicCitationTranchart H, Gaujoux S, Rebours V, Vullierme MP, Dokmak S, Levy P, et al. Preoperative CT scan helps to predict the occurrence of severe pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 2012;256(1):139–45.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationDinter DJ, Aramin N, Weiss C, Singer C, Weisser G, Schoenberg SO, et al. Prediction of anastomotic leakage after pancreatic head resections by Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Imaging (dMRI). J Gastrointest Surg. 2009;13(4):735–44.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationGarcía-Rodríguez M, Estopiñán-Cánovas R, Céspedes-Rodríguez H. Actualidad en fístula pancreática postoperatoria. Arch Med Camagüey. 2019;23(2):279-292
dc.source.bibliographicCitationZhao N, Cui J, Yang Z, Xiong J, Wu H, Wang C et al. Natural history and therapeutic strategies of post-pancreatoduodenectomy abdominal fluid collections. Medicine. 2019;98(22):e15792
dc.source.bibliographicCitationLee S, Jang J, Lim C, Kang M, Kim S, Kim M et al. Measurement of Pancreatic Fat by Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Annals of Surgery. 2010;251(5):932-936.
dc.source.instnameinstname:Universidad del Rosario
dc.source.reponamereponame:Repositorio Institucional EdocUR
dc.subjectPáncreas, fístula pancreática, pancreaticoduodenectomia, escalas de riesgo, predicción preoperatoria, complicaciones
dc.subject.keywordPancreas, pancreatic fistula, pancreaticoduodenectomy, risk scales, preoperative prediction, complications
dc.titleEvaluación de escalas de predicción de fistula pancreática postoperatoria basado en resonancia magnética: estudio de prueba diagnóstica
dc.title.TranslatedTitleEvaluation of postoperative pancreatic fistula prediction scales based on magnetic resonance imaging: A diagnostic test study
dc.typebachelorThesis
dc.type.documentTrabajo de grado
dc.type.hasVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion
dc.type.spaTrabajo de grado
local.department.reportEscuela de Medicina y Ciencias de la Salud
Archivos
Bloque original
Mostrando1 - 1 de 1
Miniatura
Nombre:
Evaluacion_de_escalas_de_predicción-Arbelaez-Osuna-Katherine-Viviana.pdf
Tamaño:
720.91 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Descripción:
Descargar
Colecciones
Especialización en Cirugía General