Severity of Pancreatic Leak in Relation to Gut Restoration After Pancreaticoduodenectomy: The Role of the Roux-en-Y Configuration.
Roux-en-Y
pancreatic fistula
pancreaticoduodenectomy
whipple
Journal
Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches
ISSN: 2691-3593
Titre abrégé: Ann Surg Open
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101769928
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2022
Jun 2022
Historique:
received:
06
09
2021
accepted:
04
04
2022
medline:
16
5
2022
pubmed:
16
5
2022
entrez:
21
8
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Pancreatic leak after pancreaticoduodenectomy and gut restoration via a single jejunal loop remains the crucial predictor of patients' outcome. Our reasoning that active pancreatic enzymes may be more disruptive to the pancreatojejunostomy prompted us to explore a Roux-en-Y configuration for the gut restoration, anticipating diversion of bile salts away from the pancreatic stump. Our study aims at comparing two techniques regarding the severity of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) and patients' outcome. The files of 415 pancreaticoduodenectomy patients were retrospectively reviewed. Based on gut restoration, the patients were divided into: cohort A (n = 105), with gut restoration via a single jejunal loop, cohort B (n = 140) via a Roux-en-Y technique assigning the draining of pancreatic stump to the short limb and gastrojejunostomy and bile (hepaticojejunostomy) flow to long limb, and cohort C (n = 170) granting the short limb to the gastric and pancreatic anastomosis, whereas hepaticojejunostomy was performed to the long limp. The POPF-related morbidity and mortality were analyzed. Overall POPF in cohort A versus cohorts B and C was 19% versus 12.1% and 9.4%, respectively ( Roux-en-Y configuration showed lower incidence and severity of POPF. Irrespective of technical skill, creating a gastrojejunostomy close to pancreatojejunostomy renders the pancreatic enzymes less active by leaping the bile salts away from the pancreatic duct and providing a lower pH.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Pancreatic leak after pancreaticoduodenectomy and gut restoration via a single jejunal loop remains the crucial predictor of patients' outcome. Our reasoning that active pancreatic enzymes may be more disruptive to the pancreatojejunostomy prompted us to explore a Roux-en-Y configuration for the gut restoration, anticipating diversion of bile salts away from the pancreatic stump. Our study aims at comparing two techniques regarding the severity of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) and patients' outcome.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
The files of 415 pancreaticoduodenectomy patients were retrospectively reviewed. Based on gut restoration, the patients were divided into: cohort A (n = 105), with gut restoration via a single jejunal loop, cohort B (n = 140) via a Roux-en-Y technique assigning the draining of pancreatic stump to the short limb and gastrojejunostomy and bile (hepaticojejunostomy) flow to long limb, and cohort C (n = 170) granting the short limb to the gastric and pancreatic anastomosis, whereas hepaticojejunostomy was performed to the long limp. The POPF-related morbidity and mortality were analyzed.
Results
UNASSIGNED
Overall POPF in cohort A versus cohorts B and C was 19% versus 12.1% and 9.4%, respectively (
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
Roux-en-Y configuration showed lower incidence and severity of POPF. Irrespective of technical skill, creating a gastrojejunostomy close to pancreatojejunostomy renders the pancreatic enzymes less active by leaping the bile salts away from the pancreatic duct and providing a lower pH.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37601609
doi: 10.1097/AS9.0000000000000161
pmc: PMC10431257
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e161Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.
Références
Am J Surg. 2018 Apr;215(4):636-642
pubmed: 28958654
Dtsch Z Verdau Stoffwechselkr. 1988;48(3-4):190-3
pubmed: 3234304
Surgery. 2017 Mar;161(3):584-591
pubmed: 28040257
Surgery. 2021 Dec;170(6):1799-1806
pubmed: 34373107
Int J Surg. 2014;12(7):706-11
pubmed: 24851718
J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2017 Apr;24(4):226-234
pubmed: 28103418
Pancreas. 2017 Sep;46(8):1064-1068
pubmed: 28787334
World J Gastroenterol. 2017 Oct 14;23(38):7025-7036
pubmed: 29097875
J Am Coll Surg. 2017 Oct;225(4):498-507
pubmed: 28687510
J Gastrointest Surg. 2019 Sep;23(9):1817-1824
pubmed: 30478529
Int J Surg. 2016 Dec;36(Pt A):240-247
pubmed: 27826046
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2007 May;33(4):488-92
pubmed: 17145159
Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2002 Fall;3(3):245-9
pubmed: 12542925
Int J Surg. 2017 Aug;44:287-294
pubmed: 28688966
Medicine (Baltimore). 2017 May;96(19):e6858
pubmed: 28489778
Trials. 2016 Aug 17;17(1):407
pubmed: 27530630
J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2017 May;24(5):243-251
pubmed: 28196308
Hepatogastroenterology. 2002 Mar-Apr;49(44):553-5
pubmed: 11995494
Surgery. 2017 Oct;162(4):792-801
pubmed: 28676333
Surgery. 2007 Nov;142(5):761-8
pubmed: 17981197
Chin Clin Oncol. 2017 Dec;6(6):64
pubmed: 29156887
Hepatogastroenterology. 2014 Oct;61(135):2091-5
pubmed: 25713915
Int J Surg. 2016 Dec;36(Pt A):18-24
pubmed: 27768898
HPB (Oxford). 2016 Nov;18(11):893-899
pubmed: 27624516
Br J Surg. 2017 Oct;104(11):1558-1567
pubmed: 28815556
Am J Surg. 2002 Jan;183(1):42-52
pubmed: 11869701
Abdom Radiol (NY). 2017 Aug;42(8):2054-2068
pubmed: 28493073
Am J Surg. 2016 Apr;211(4):810-9
pubmed: 26792273
Ann Surg. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-13
pubmed: 15273542
HPB (Oxford). 2011 Jun;13(6):377-84
pubmed: 21609369
Int J Surg. 2017 Mar;39:176-181
pubmed: 28132917
Int J Surg Oncol. 2017;2017:7526494
pubmed: 28798875
World J Gastrointest Surg. 2017 Mar 27;9(3):73-81
pubmed: 28396720
HPB (Oxford). 2018 Nov;20(11):992-1003
pubmed: 29807807