AIM: Several techniques have been proposed for reconstructing pancreatico-digestive continuity, which the first goal is reducing the rate of pancreatic leakage after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Only a limited number studies have been carried out. Our objective is to compare the results of pancreaticojejunostomy versus pancreaticogastrostomy following pancreaticoduodenectomy. METHODS: This is a retrospective and comparative study about 80 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy. These patients were divided into two groups: pancreaticojejunostomy (group PJ) and pancreaticogastrostomy (group PG). RESULTS: The PJ group included 39 patients, while 41 patients were included in the PG group. There were no differences between the two groups concerning: patients' demographics, risk factors, indication, mean duration of surgery, texture of pancreatic tissue, need for intraoperative blood transfusion and postoperative prophylactic octreotide. Overall, the mortality postoperative rate was 7.5% (N.=6), the incidence of surgical complications was 50% (51.3% in PJ, 48.8% in PG; P=0.823, not significant). Pancreatic fistula was the most frequent complication, occurring in 17.5% of patients (25.6% in PJ and 9.8% in PG; P=0.062, almost significant). 7.7% of patients who underwent PJ and 14.6% of patients who underwent PG required a second surgical intervention (P=0.326, not significant). There were no differences between the two groups PG and PJ concerning: Postoperative hemorrhage (P=0.63), biliary fistula (P=0.09), acute pancreatitis (P=0.95), delayed gastric emptying (P=0.33). The mean postoperative hospitalisation period stay was similar in both groups (P=0.63) CONCLUSION: There were not any significant differences between the two groups in the overall postoperative complication rate, the incidence of postoperative haemorrhage, biliary fistula, acute pancreatitis, and delayed.
AIM: Several techniques have been proposed for reconstructing pancreatico-digestive continuity, which the first goal is reducing the rate of pancreatic leakage after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Only a limited number studies have been carried out. Our objective is to compare the results of pancreaticojejunostomy versus pancreaticogastrostomy following pancreaticoduodenectomy. METHODS: This is a retrospective and comparative study about 80 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy. These patients were divided into two groups: pancreaticojejunostomy (group PJ) and pancreaticogastrostomy (group PG). RESULTS: The PJ group included 39 patients, while 41 patients were included in the PG group. There were no differences between the two groups concerning: patients' demographics, risk factors, indication, mean duration of surgery, texture of pancreatic tissue, need for intraoperative blood transfusion and postoperative prophylactic octreotide. Overall, the mortality postoperative rate was 7.5% (N.=6), the incidence of surgical complications was 50% (51.3% in PJ, 48.8% in PG; P=0.823, not significant). Pancreatic fistula was the most frequent complication, occurring in 17.5% of patients (25.6% in PJ and 9.8% in PG; P=0.062, almost significant). 7.7% of patients who underwent PJ and 14.6% of patients who underwent PG required a second surgical intervention (P=0.326, not significant). There were no differences between the two groups PG and PJ concerning: Postoperative hemorrhage (P=0.63), biliary fistula (P=0.09), acute pancreatitis (P=0.95), delayed gastric emptying (P=0.33). The mean postoperative hospitalisation period stay was similar in both groups (P=0.63) CONCLUSION: There were not any significant differences between the two groups in the overall postoperative complication rate, the incidence of postoperative haemorrhage, biliary fistula, acute pancreatitis, and delayed.
Authors: Irene Epelboym; Irmina Gawlas; James A Lee; Beth Schrope; John A Chabot; John D Allendorf Journal: World J Surg Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Jamie R Robinson; Paula Marincola; Julia Shelton; Nipun B Merchant; Kamran Idrees; Alexander A Parikh Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2015-02-28 Impact factor: 3.647