Literature DB >> 25151555

Optimal management of delayed gastric emptying after pancreatectomy: an analysis of 1,089 patients.

Joal D Beane1, Michael G House2, Akemi Miller1, Attila Nakeeb1, C Max Schmidt1, Nicholas J Zyromski1, Eugene Ceppa1, David V Feliciano1, Henry A Pitt3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine if early recognition and treatment of delayed gastric emptying (DGE) can augment postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing pancreatectomy.
METHODS: The International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery definition of DGE was used to identify patients at Indiana University Hospital who required supplemental nutrition for DGE after pancreatectomy. Outcomes were compared between those without DGE, those with DGE who received supplemental nutrition within 10 days after pancreatectomy (early intervention), and those treated after 10 days (late intervention).
RESULTS: Between 2007 and 2012, the incidence of DGE was 15% (n = 163/1,089), 45% (n = 73) required supplemental nutrition, including 60% (n = 44/73) in the early intervention and 40% (n = 29/73) in the late intervention groups. Postoperative morbidity (62% vs 41%; P < .01), duration of stay (16 vs 7 days; P < .01), and readmissions (41% vs 17%; P < .01) were greater among those with DGE. The early intervention group resumed a regular diet sooner (day 24 vs 36; P = .05) and were readmitted less often (25% vs 65%; P < .01) than those in the late intervention group. Treatment-related complications occurred in 14% of patients.
CONCLUSION: Patients with DGE can be managed with acceptable treatment-related morbidity. Outcomes are best when supplemental nutrition is started within 10 days of operation.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25151555     DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2014.06.024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surgery        ISSN: 0039-6060            Impact factor:   3.982


  6 in total

Review 1.  [Treatment of postoperative impairment of gastrointestinal motility, cholangitis and pancreatitis].

Authors:  T Schulze; C-D Heidecke
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 0.955

Review 2.  A Multidisciplinary Approach to Pancreas Cancer in 2016: A Review.

Authors:  Evan L Fogel; Safi Shahda; Kumar Sandrasegaran; John DeWitt; Jeffrey J Easler; David M Agarwal; Mackenzie Eagleson; Nicholas J Zyromski; Michael G House; Susannah Ellsworth; Ihab El Hajj; Bert H O'Neil; Attila Nakeeb; Stuart Sherman
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-01-31       Impact factor: 10.864

3.  Preoperative Nomogram Predicts Non-home Discharge in Patients Undergoing Pancreatoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Katelyn F Flick; C Max Schmidt; Cameron L Colgate; Michele T Yip-Schneider; Chris M Sublette; Thomas K Maatman; Mazhar Soufi; Eugene P Ceppa; Michael G House; Nicholas J Zyromski; Attila Nakeeb
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2020-06-24       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  Risk factors for delayed gastric emptying following distal pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Tim R Glowka; Martin von Websky; Dimitrios Pantelis; Steffen Manekeller; Jens Standop; Jörg C Kalff; Nico Schäfer
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2016-01-27       Impact factor: 3.445

5.  Delayed gastric emptying following pancreatoduodenectomy with alimentary reconstruction according to Roux-en-Y or Billroth-II.

Authors:  Tim R Glowka; Markus Webler; Hanno Matthaei; Nico Schäfer; Volker Schmitz; Jörg C Kalff; Jens Standop; Steffen Manekeller
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2017-03-20       Impact factor: 2.102

6.  The Systemic Inflammation-Based Prognostic Score Predicts Postoperative Complications in Patients Undergoing Pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Guangzhen Qu; Dong Wang; Weiyu Xu; Kai Wu; Wei Guo
Journal:  Int J Gen Med       Date:  2021-03-09
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.