Literature DB >> 7794068

Optimal management of the pancreatic remnant after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

S G Marcus1, H Cohen, J H Ranson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The authors evaluated methods of operative management of the pancreatic remnant after pancreaticoduodenectomy. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Despite reductions in mortality after pancreaticoduodenectomy, leakage from the pancreatic remnant still may cause significant morbidity. Patients with small, unobstructed pancreatic ducts or soft, friable pancreata are at particularly high risk. Although numerous surgical techniques have been described to avoid such complications, no single method is suitable for all patients.
METHODS: The authors retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 114 consecutive patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy. Sixty-nine patients were men (61%) and 45 were women (39%), with median age 66 years. Underlying disease was malignant in 87 (76%) and benign in 27 (24%). Patients were divided into groups based on risk for postoperative pancreatic fistula and on the operative management of the pancreatic remnant. Sixty-eight patients underwent end-to-side pancreaticojejunostomy, 13 of whom were high risk (group 1A) and 55 of whom were low risk (group 1B). Thirty-seven patients, all high risk, had either pancreatic duct closure by oversewing (N = 19, group 2) or end-to-end pancreaticojejunal invagination (N = 18, group 3). Nine patients underwent total pancreatectomy (group 4). Morbidity related to prolonged pancreatic drainage (PPD) of greater than 20 days was determined.
RESULTS: Overall incidence of PPD was 17% and caused the only death. Patients considered high risk for postoperative pancreatic fistula had a 36% incidence of PPD compared with 2% in patients considered low risk (p < 0.0001). Prolonged pancreatic drainage frequency related to the method of pancreatic remnant management was as follows: group 1A, 15%; group 1B, 2%; group 2, 79%; and group 3, 6% (p < 0.001 for group 2 vs. other groups). No serious sequelae followed PPD in 15 patients (79%); however, 4 patients required reoperation for pseudocyst or abscess drainage; one in group 1A (who died) and three in group 2. Multivariate analysis revealed that operative technique (oversewing of the pancreatic duct) and male sex were significant factors predisposing a patient to the development of PPD.
CONCLUSION: After pancreaticoduodenectomy, pancreatic remnant management by end-to-side pancreaticojejunostomy appeared safe in low-risk patients. In high-risk patients, end-to-end pancreaticojejunal invagination was the safest option. Morbidity was greatest after pancreatic duct closure without anastomosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7794068      PMCID: PMC1234686          DOI: 10.1097/00000658-199506000-00003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  31 in total

1.  Ligation versus implantation of the pancreatic duct after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  H S Goldsmith; B C Ghosh; A G Huvos
Journal:  Surg Gynecol Obstet       Date:  1971-01

2.  Twenty-two year experience with periampullary carcinoma at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center.

Authors:  J A Williams; A Cubilla; B J Maclean; J G Fortner
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1979-11       Impact factor: 2.565

3.  Cancer of the pancreas. Palliative operation, Whipple procedure, or total pancreatectomy?

Authors:  J R Brooks; J M Culebras
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1976-04       Impact factor: 2.565

4.  Pancreatic fistula complicating pancreatectomy for malignant disease.

Authors:  D N Papachristou; J G Fortner
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1981-04       Impact factor: 6.939

5.  Pancreaticoduodenal resection. Surgical experience and evaluation of risk factors in 103 patients.

Authors:  J P Lerut; P R Gianello; J B Otte; P J Kestens
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1984-04       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  Improved hospital morbidity, mortality, and survival after the Whipple procedure.

Authors:  D W Crist; J V Sitzmann; J L Cameron
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1987-09       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  The complications of pancreatectomy.

Authors:  M Trede; G Schwall
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1988-01       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Decreased morbidity and mortality after pancreatoduodenectomy.

Authors:  P A Grace; H A Pitt; R K Tompkins; L DenBesten; W P Longmire
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1986-01       Impact factor: 2.565

9.  Considerations that lower pancreatoduodenectomy mortality.

Authors:  J W Braasch; B N Gray
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1977-04       Impact factor: 2.565

10.  Pancreatic anastomotic leak after pancreaticoduodenectomy: incidence, significance, and management.

Authors:  J J Cullen; M G Sarr; D M Ilstrup
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 2.565

View more
  78 in total

Review 1.  Pancreatic surgery: evolution and current tailored approach.

Authors:  Mario Zovak; Dubravka Mužina Mišić; Goran Glavčić
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 7.293

2.  A comparison of pancreaticogastrostomy and pancreaticojejunostomy following pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Gerard V Aranha; Pamela Hodul; Eugene Golts; Daniel Oh; Jack Pickleman; Steven Creech
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2003 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.452

3.  Binding pancreaticojejunostomy: 150 consecutive cases without leakage.

Authors:  Shu You Peng; Yi Ping Mou; Yin Bin Liu; Ying Su; Cheng Hong Peng; Xiu Jun Cai; Yu Lian Wu; Lin Hua Zhou
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 4.  Duct-to-Mucosa Versus Invagination Pancreaticojejunostomy Following Pancreaticoduodenectomy: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Jie Hua; Zhigang He; Daohai Qian; Hongbo Meng; Bo Zhou; Zhenshun Song
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2015-08-12       Impact factor: 3.452

5.  Does pancreatic duct stenting decrease the rate of pancreatic fistula following pancreaticoduodenectomy? Results of a prospective randomized trial.

Authors:  Jordan M Winter; John L Cameron; Kurtis A Campbell; David C Chang; Taylor S Riall; Richard D Schulick; Michael A Choti; JoAnn Coleman; Mary B Hodgin; Patricia K Sauter; Christopher J Sonnenday; Christopher L Wolfgang; Michael R Marohn; Charles J Yeo
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 3.452

6.  Can isolated pancreaticojejunostomy reduce pancreas fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction?

Authors:  Hasan Erdem; Süleyman Çetinkünar; Mehmet Aziret; Enver Reyhan; Alper Sözütek; Selim Sözen; Oktay İrkorucu
Journal:  Ulus Cerrahi Derg       Date:  2016-12-01

7.  Pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a comparison between the two pancreaticojejunostomy methods for approximating the pancreatic parenchyma to the jejunal seromuscular layer: interrupted vs continuous stitches.

Authors:  Seung-Eun Lee; Sung-Hoon Yang; Jin-Young Jang; Sun-Whe Kim
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2007-10-28       Impact factor: 5.742

8.  Effect of end-to-end invagination pancreaticojejunostomy with circle discontinuous U suture in pancreatic surgery.

Authors:  Xuewen Zhang; Wei Xuan; Tao Jiang; Degang Ji; Yongsheng Yang; Dan Zhang; Yingjun Xie; Zihui Meng; Jisheng Zhao
Journal:  Front Med China       Date:  2007-02-01

9.  Pancreatic anastomotic leakage after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Risk factors, clinical predictors, and management (single center experience).

Authors:  Ayman El Nakeeb; Tarek Salah; Ahmad Sultan; Mohamed El Hemaly; Waleed Askr; Helmy Ezzat; Emad Hamdy; Ehab Atef; Ehab El Hanafy; Ahmed El-Geidie; Mohamed Abdel Wahab; Talaat Abdallah
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 3.352

10.  Experimental study on operative methods of pancreaticojejunostomy with reference to anastomotic patency and postoperative pancreatic exocrine function.

Authors:  Ming-Dong Bai; Liang-Qun Rong; Lian-Chen Wang; Hai Xu; Rui-Fang Fan; Pei Wang; Xiao-Peng Chen; Liu-Bin Shi; Shu-You Peng
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-01-21       Impact factor: 5.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.