OBJECTIVE: To compare the results of postoperative morbidity rate of a new pancreatogastrostomy technique, pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPPD) with gastric partition (PPPD-GP) with the conventional technique of pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ). SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND DATA: Pancreatojejunostomy and pancreatogastrostomy (PG) are the commonly preferred methods of anastomosis after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). All randomized controlled trials failed to show advantage of a particular technique, suggesting that both PJ and PG provide equally results. However, postoperative morbidity remains high. The best technique in pancreatic anastomosis is still debated. METHOD: Described here is a new technique, PPPD-GP; in this technique the gastroepiploic arcade is preserved. Gastric partition was performed using 2 endo-Gia staplers along the greater curvature of the stomach, 3 cm from the border. This gastric segment, 10 to 12 cm in length is placed in close proximity to the cut edge of the pancreatic stump. An end-to-side, duct-to-mucosa anastomosis (with pancreatic duct stent) is constructed. One hundred eight patients undergoing PPPD for benign and malignant diseases of the pancreatic head and the periampullary region were randomized to receive PG (PPPD-GP) or end-to-side PJ (PPPD-PJ). RESULTS: The two treatment groups showed no differences in preoperative parameters and intraoperative factors. The overall postoperative complications were 23% after PPPD-GP and 44% after PPPD-PJ (P < 0.01). The incidence of pancreatic fistula was 4% after PPPD-GP and 18% after PPPD-PJ (P < 0.01). The mean + SD hospital stay was 12 +/- 2 days after PPPD-GP and 16 +/- 3 days after PPPD-PJ. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that PPPD-GP can be performed safely and is associated with less complication than PPPD-PJ. The advantage of this technique over other PG techniques is that the anastomosis is outside the area of the stomach where the contents empty into the jejunum, but pancreatic juice drains directly into the stomach.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the results of postoperative morbidity rate of a new pancreatogastrostomy technique, pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPPD) with gastric partition (PPPD-GP) with the conventional technique of pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ). SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND DATA: Pancreatojejunostomy and pancreatogastrostomy (PG) are the commonly preferred methods of anastomosis after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). All randomized controlled trials failed to show advantage of a particular technique, suggesting that both PJ and PG provide equally results. However, postoperative morbidity remains high. The best technique in pancreatic anastomosis is still debated. METHOD: Described here is a new technique, PPPD-GP; in this technique the gastroepiploic arcade is preserved. Gastric partition was performed using 2 endo-Gia staplers along the greater curvature of the stomach, 3 cm from the border. This gastric segment, 10 to 12 cm in length is placed in close proximity to the cut edge of the pancreatic stump. An end-to-side, duct-to-mucosa anastomosis (with pancreatic duct stent) is constructed. One hundred eight patients undergoing PPPD for benign and malignant diseases of the pancreatic head and the periampullary region were randomized to receive PG (PPPD-GP) or end-to-side PJ (PPPD-PJ). RESULTS: The two treatment groups showed no differences in preoperative parameters and intraoperative factors. The overall postoperative complications were 23% after PPPD-GP and 44% after PPPD-PJ (P < 0.01). The incidence of pancreatic fistula was 4% after PPPD-GP and 18% after PPPD-PJ (P < 0.01). The mean + SD hospital stay was 12 +/- 2 days after PPPD-GP and 16 +/- 3 days after PPPD-PJ. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that PPPD-GP can be performed safely and is associated with less complication than PPPD-PJ. The advantage of this technique over other PG techniques is that the anastomosis is outside the area of the stomach where the contents empty into the jejunum, but pancreatic juice drains directly into the stomach.
Authors: Tobias Keck; Simon Küsters; Ulrich Friedrich Wellner; Ulrich Theodor Hopt; Konrad Wojciech Karcz Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2012-05-31 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: Matthew T McMillan; Giuseppe Malleo; Claudio Bassi; Michael H Sprys; Charles M Vollmer Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2015-09-16 Impact factor: 3.647
Authors: Sergio Alfieri; Giuseppe Quero; Fausto Rosa; Dario Di Miceli; Antonio Pio Tortorelli; Giovanni Battista Doglietto Journal: Updates Surg Date: 2016-09-08