PURPOSE: To compare the postoperative results of various preservative surgery (PS) techniques with those of two types of pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). METHODS: The subjects of this study were 65 patients treated surgically for chronic pancreatitis, or benign or borderline tumors. We defined PS as any of the following: duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection (DPPHR), uncinatectomy (UC), and cystic tumor enucleation (EN). The two types of PD were Whipple pancreatoduodenectomy (WPD) and pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy (PPPD). RESULTS: Benign lesions were treated with PD in 41 patients and PS in 24 patients. Whipple pancreatoduodenectomy was performed in 17 patients, PPPD in 24, DPPHR in 20, EN in 3, and UC in 1. The main indication for surgery was chronic pancreatitis (66%). Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) was seen in 41% of patients in the PD group but none in the PS group (P = 0.04). However, there were no differences between the two groups in the incidence of pancreatic fistulas or other complications. Reoperation was required in five of the PD patients, but none of the PS patients. CONCLUSION: Surgical techniques for preserving pancreatic tissue are effective for carefully selected patients with benign pancreatic disorders.
PURPOSE: To compare the postoperative results of various preservative surgery (PS) techniques with those of two types of pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). METHODS: The subjects of this study were 65 patients treated surgically for chronic pancreatitis, or benign or borderline tumors. We defined PS as any of the following: duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection (DPPHR), uncinatectomy (UC), and cystic tumor enucleation (EN). The two types of PD were Whipple pancreatoduodenectomy (WPD) and pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy (PPPD). RESULTS:Benign lesions were treated with PD in 41 patients and PS in 24 patients. Whipple pancreatoduodenectomy was performed in 17 patients, PPPD in 24, DPPHR in 20, EN in 3, and UC in 1. The main indication for surgery was chronic pancreatitis (66%). Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) was seen in 41% of patients in the PD group but none in the PS group (P = 0.04). However, there were no differences between the two groups in the incidence of pancreatic fistulas or other complications. Reoperation was required in five of the PDpatients, but none of the PSpatients. CONCLUSION: Surgical techniques for preserving pancreatic tissue are effective for carefully selected patients with benign pancreatic disorders.
Authors: M Siech; K Tripp; B Schmidt-Rohlfing; T Mattfeldt; U Widmaier; F Gansauge; J Görich; H G Beger Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 1998-03 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: M J Cooper; R C Williamson; I S Benjamin; D C Carter; A Cuschieri; I P Linehan; R C Russell; H B Torrance Journal: Br J Surg Date: 1987-10 Impact factor: 6.939
Authors: Fernando Rotellar; Fernando Pardo; Alberto Benito; Pablo Martí-Cruchaga; Gabriel Zozaya; Javier A Cienfuegos Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2011-05-26 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Vivian Resende; Paulo Hermane Rabelo Azevedo; Leonardo do Prado Lima; André Rossetti Portela; Marcelo Dias Sanches; Moisés Salgado Pedrosa Journal: Int J Surg Case Rep Date: 2014-07-10