POPF derives from the pancreatic stump, which follows pancreatic resection and the pancreatoenteric anastomosis following pancreaticoduodenectomy. Since 1978 sealants have been used in pancreatic surgery to prevent pancreatic fistula after resection of the pancreatic head and tail or for the management of trauma and the treatment of low-output pancreatic fistula. Different types of fibrin sealants have been evaluated for their potential to reduce the occurrence of POPF. A systematic search of the electronic literature was performed using PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases to obtain access to all publications, especially clinical trials, randomised controlled trials, and systematic reviews concerning fibrin sealants pancreatic surgery. Searching for “fibrin sealants pancreas,” we found a total of 73 results on Pubmed, 61 on Scopus, and 14 on Cochrane Library (148 total results). Eighteen studies were found on literature, following the criteria already described, concerning the use of fibrin sealants in pancreatic surgery. All articles described were published in the period between 1989 and 2019. Most of these were single centre studies. A total of 1032 patients were enrolled in this review. In the studies, sealants were used to reinforce pancreatic anastomoses and for the occlusion of the main pancreatic duct. CR-POPF is a fearful complication of pancreatic surgery; among the possible solutions to reduce the risk of onset, sealants were used on the pancreatic stump; today the sealants should be considered such as an option to reduce the CR-POPF, but the routine use in clinical practice has to be validated.

Background. More than 50% of operable GEA relapse after curative-intent resection. We aimed at externally validating a nomogram to enable a more accurate estimate of individualized risk in resected GEA. Methods. Medical records of a training cohort (TC) and a validation cohort (VC) of patients undergoing radical surgery for c/uT2-T4 and/or node-positive GEA were retrieved, and potentially interesting variables were collected. Cox proportional hazards in univariate and multivariate regressions were used to assess the effects of the prognostic factors on OS. A graphical nomogram was constructed using R software’s package Regression Modeling Strategies (ver. 5.0-1). The performance of the prognostic model was evaluated and validated. Results. The TC and VC consisted of 185 and 151 patients. ECOG:PS > 0 (p < 0.001), angioinvasion (p < 0.001), log (Neutrophil/Lymphocyte ratio) (p < 0.001), and nodal status (p = 0.016) were independent prognostic values in the TC. They were used for the construction of a nomogram estimating 3- and 5-year OS. The discriminatory ability of the model was evaluated with the c-Harrell index. A 3-tier scoring system was developed through a linear predictor grouped by 25 and 75 percentiles, strengthening the model’s good discrimination (p < 0.001). A calibration plot demonstrated a concordance between the predicted and actual survival in the TC and VC. A decision curve analysis was plotted that depicted the nomogram’s clinical utility. Conclusions. We externally validated a prognostic nomogram to predict OS in a joint independent cohort of resectable GEA; the NOMOGAST could represent a valuable tool in assisting decision-making. This tool incorporates readily available and inexpensive patient and disease characteristics as well as immune-inflammatory determinants. It is accurate, generalizable, and clinically effectivex.