Literature DB >> 7840383

Current experience with pancreatogastrostomy.

G R Mason1, R J Freeark.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The reconstruction technique for the pancreatic remnant remaining after pancreatoduodenectomy has most frequently been pancreatojejunostomy. Although the mortality rate has been reduced to rather low levels in many centers, the leakage rate from this anastomosis remains high, in the range of 10% or greater. An alternative reconstruction, pancreatogastrostomy, has been known for almost 50 years and has been performed on small numbers of patients. The leakage rate for this anastomosis is less than 1% in literature reports in more than 200 patients. The purpose of this report was to add to the previously reported experience with this technique and to compare it with standard reconstruction as performed in a major American medical center by experienced surgeons.
METHODS: The medical records of all patients operated on at the Loyola University Medical Center and the Edward Hines, Jr., Veteran's Affairs Hospital from August 1986 to May 1993, with a procedure code relating to the pancreas, were reviewed.
RESULTS: A total of 58 Whipple procedures were identified, including 34 pancreatogastrostomies, 23 pancreatojejunostomies and 1 stapled pancreatic stump. No leaks in any pancreatogastrostomies were observed in the 38 patients so treated, whereas 4 leaks and 2 deaths related to the anastomosis occurred in the group of 23 patients with pancreatojejunostomies. The average length of stay was 14.2 days for the pancreatojejunostomy group and 15.5 days for the pancreatogastrostomy group, excluding duration data from those who died or experienced leakage. There was no significant difference in the length of stay between pancreatojejunostomy and pancreactogastrostomy; there was a statistically significant lengthening of stay for those patients whose anastomosis leaked versus those whose did not leak. The 10 patients having a pylorus-sparing operation had an average postoperative stay of 16 days, including both types of reconstruction.
CONCLUSIONS: The gradual adoption of this procedure at a major medical center has led to the abandonment of pancreatojejunostomy as a reconstruction technique for the pancreatic remnant remaining after pancreatoduodenectomy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7840383     DOI: 10.1016/S0002-9610(99)80140-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Surg        ISSN: 0002-9610            Impact factor:   2.565


  14 in total

Review 1.  Techniques for prevention of pancreatic leak after pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Hans F Schoellhammer; Yuman Fong; Singh Gagandeep
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 7.293

2.  Striving for a better operative outcome: 101 pancreaticoduodenectomies.

Authors:  A W C Kow; S P Chan; A Earnest; C Y Chan; K Lim; S Y Chong; K H Lim; C K Ho; S P Chew; K H Liau
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 3.647

3.  Pancreatogastrostomy after pancreatoduodenectomy: a safe, feasible reconstruction method?

Authors:  Jens Standop; Marcus Overhaus; Nico Schaefer; Dorothee Decker; Martin Wolff; Andreas Hirner; Andreas Tuerler
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 3.352

4.  Outcomes comparing a pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) and a pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) after a pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD).

Authors:  Somaiah Aroori; Puneet Puneet; Simon R Bramhall; Paolo Muiesan; A David Mayer; Darius F Mirza; John C Buckels; John Isaac
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 3.647

5.  Does prophylactic octreotide decrease the rates of pancreatic fistula and other complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy? Results of a prospective randomized placebo-controlled trial.

Authors:  C J Yeo; J L Cameron; K D Lillemoe; P K Sauter; J Coleman; T A Sohn; K A Campbell; M A Choti
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 6.  [Technical aspects of pancreatoenteric anastomosis].

Authors:  A M Chromik; D Sülberg; O Belyaev; W Uhl
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 0.955

7.  In search of the best reconstructive technique after pancreaticoduodenectomy: pancreaticojejunostomy versus pancreaticogastrostomy.

Authors:  Jan Grendar; Jean-François Ouellet; Francis R Sutherland; Oliver F Bathe; Chad G Ball; Elijah Dixon
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 2.089

Review 8.  Predictive factors for pancreatic fistula following pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Matthew T McMillan; Charles M Vollmer
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2014-06-25       Impact factor: 3.445

9.  A prospective randomized trial of pancreaticogastrostomy versus pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Authors:  C J Yeo; J L Cameron; M M Maher; P K Sauter; M L Zahurak; M A Talamini; K D Lillemoe; H A Pitt
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 10.  The challenge of pancreatic anastomosis.

Authors:  Axel Kleespies; Markus Albertsmeier; Firas Obeidat; Hendrik Seeliger; Karl-Walter Jauch; Christiane J Bruns
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2008-04-01       Impact factor: 3.445

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.