Yıl: 2021 Cilt: 53 Sayı: 3 Sayfa Aralığı: 192 - 196 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.5152/eurasianjmed.2021.20194 İndeks Tarihi: 03-01-2022

Comparison of Two Pancreatic Anastomosis Techniques in terms of Postoperative Complications After Pancreaticoduodenectomy

Öz:
Objective: In this retrospective study, we compared the postoperative complications by using both the Clavien–Dindo classification and the Revised 2016 International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) classification methods after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Materials and Methods: The data of patients were retrospectively reviewed. Pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) and pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) were performed on 41 and 40 patients, respectively. The patients were assigned into two groups for anastomosis types and compared with each other according to postoperative complications. The postoperative follow-up period of the patients was limited to 90 days. Results: No significant difference was detected between the two groups in terms of gender (P = .581) and age (P = .809). According to the Clavien–Dindo classification system, grade 1 complication rates were 29.3% and 35.0% in PJ and PG groups, respectively. Also, grade 2 complication rates were 34.1% and 32.5% in PJ and PG groups, respectively. Besides, grade 3B complication rates were 9.8% and 17.5% in PJ and PG groups, respectively. No grade 3A, grade 4A, and grade 4B complications were detected in both groups. But, grade 5 complications rates were 2.4% and 5.0% in PJ and PG groups, respectively. Based on the ISGPS classification system, the pancreatic fistulas were classified. The biochemical leak rates were calculated as 26.8% and 37.5% in PJ and PG groups, respectively. The rates were 14.6% and 10% in PJ and PG groups, respectively, for grade B complications. Also, grade C complication rates were 9.75% and 12.5% in PJ and PG groups, respectively. No statistically significant differences were detected between the two groups for postoperative complications. Conclusion: The evidence from this retrospective study suggests that there is no difference between the two types of pancreatic anastomosis techniques (PJ or PG) in terms of the rate of postoperative complications.
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • 1. Topal B, Fieuws S, Aerts R, et al. Pancreaticojejunostomy versus pancreaticogastrostomy reconstruction after pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic or periampullary tumours: A multicentre randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(7):655-662. [Crossref]
  • 2. Ho C-K, Kleeff J, Friess H, Büchler MW. Complications of pancreatic surgery. HPB (Oxford) 2005;7(2):99-108. [Crossref]
  • 3. Pratt WB, Maithel SK, Vanounou T, Huang ZS, Callery MP, Vollmer CM. Clinical and economic validation of the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula (ISGPF) classification scheme. Ann Surg. 2007;245(3):443-451. [Crossref]
  • 4. Topal B, Aerts R, Hendrickx T, Fieuws S, Penninckx F. Determinants of complications in pancreaticoduodenectomy. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2007;33(4):488-492. [Crossref]
  • 5. Kawaida H, Kono H, Hosomura N, et al. Surgical techniques and postoperative management to prevent postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreatic surgery. World J Gastroenterol. 2019;25(28):3722-3737. [Crossref]
  • 6. Kwon J, Shin SH, Lee S, et al. The effect of fibrinogen/thrombin-coated collagen patch (TachoSil®) application in pancreaticojejunostomy for prevention of pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy: A randomized clinical trial. World J Surg. 2019;43(12):3128-3137. [Crossref]
  • 7. Shen Y, Jin W. Reconstruction by pancreaticogastrostomy versus pancreaticojejunostomy following pancreaticoduodenectomy:Ameta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2012;2012:1-7. [Crossref]
  • 8. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications. Ann Surg. 2004;240 (2):205-213. [Crossref]
  • 9. Crippa S, Cirocchi R, Randolph J, et al. Pancreaticojejunostomy is comparable to pancreaticogastrostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Langenbeck’s Arch Surg. 2016;401 (4):427-437. Available from: http://link.springer. com/10.1007/s00423-016-1418-z
  • 10. Fatih O, Adil B, Cengiz A, et al. No mortality or pancreatic fistula after full-thickness suture Pancreaticogastrostomy in 39 patients who underwent Pancreaticoduodenectomy. Int Surg. 2015;100(2):275-280. [Crossref]
  • 11. Walt AJ. Commentary. In: Ivatury RR, Gayten GG, editors. Textbook of penetrating trauma. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins; 1996.641-642.
  • 12. Aroori S, Puneet P, Bramhall SR, et al. Outcomes comparing a pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) and a pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) after a pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). HPB (Oxford). 2011;13(10):723-731. [Crossref]
  • 13. Perivoliotis K, Sioka E, Tatsioni A, Stefanidis I, Zintzaras E, Zacharoulis D. Pancreatogastrostomy versus pancreatojejunostomy: An up-todatemeta- analysis of RCTs. Int J Surg Oncol. 2017;2017:7526494.
  • 14. Bassi C, Falconi M, Molinari E, et al. Reconstruction by Pancreaticojejunostomy versus pancreaticogastrostomy following pancreatectomy: Results of a comparative study. Ann Surg. 2005;242(6):767-771. [Crossref]
  • 15. Amico EC, Alves JR, João SA, et al. Complicações após pancreatectomias: Estudo prospectivo após as novas classificações GIEDFP e GIECP. ABCD Arq Bras Cir Dig (São Paulo). 2013;26(3):213-218. [Crossref]
  • 16. Chaparro CM, Suchdev PS. Anemia epidemiology, pathophysiology, and etiology in low- and middle-income countries. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2019;1450(1):15-31.
  • 17. Rungsakulkij N, Mingphruedhi S, Tangtawee P, et al. Risk factors for pancreatic fistula following pancreaticoduodenectomy: A retrospective study in a Thai tertiary center. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2017;9(12):270-280. [Crossref]
  • 18. Yeo CJ, Cameron JL, Lillemoe KD, et al. Does prophylactic octreotide decrease the rates of pancreatic fistula and other complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy? Results of a prospective randomized placebo-controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2000;232(3):419-429. [Crossref]
  • 19. Oussoultzoglou E, Bachellier P, Bigourdan J-M, Weber J-C, Nakano H, Jaeck D. Pancreaticogastrostomy decreased relaparotomy caused by pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy compared with pancreaticojejunostomy. Arch Surg. 2004;139(3):327. [Crossref]
  • 20. McKay A, Mackenzie S, Sutherland FR, et al. Meta-analysis of Pancreaticojejunostomy versus pancreaticogastrostomy reconstruction after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg. 2006;93 (8):929-936. [Crossref]
  • 21. Schlitt HJ, Schmidt U, Simunec D, et al. Morbidity and mortality associated with pancreatogastrostomy and pancreatojejunostomy following partial pancreatoduodenectomy. Br J Surg. 2002;89 (10):1245-1251. [Crossref]
  • 22. Shukla PJ. The challenges of improving survival following pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg. 2011;254 (2): 385-386. [Crossref]
APA KOC S, Dirican A, CENGİZ A, soyer v, Yologlu S, Yilmaz S (2021). Comparison of Two Pancreatic Anastomosis Techniques in terms of Postoperative Complications After Pancreaticoduodenectomy. , 192 - 196. 10.5152/eurasianjmed.2021.20194
Chicago KOC SULEYMAN,Dirican Abuzer,CENGİZ ARA,soyer vural,Yologlu Saim,Yilmaz Sezai Comparison of Two Pancreatic Anastomosis Techniques in terms of Postoperative Complications After Pancreaticoduodenectomy. (2021): 192 - 196. 10.5152/eurasianjmed.2021.20194
MLA KOC SULEYMAN,Dirican Abuzer,CENGİZ ARA,soyer vural,Yologlu Saim,Yilmaz Sezai Comparison of Two Pancreatic Anastomosis Techniques in terms of Postoperative Complications After Pancreaticoduodenectomy. , 2021, ss.192 - 196. 10.5152/eurasianjmed.2021.20194
AMA KOC S,Dirican A,CENGİZ A,soyer v,Yologlu S,Yilmaz S Comparison of Two Pancreatic Anastomosis Techniques in terms of Postoperative Complications After Pancreaticoduodenectomy. . 2021; 192 - 196. 10.5152/eurasianjmed.2021.20194
Vancouver KOC S,Dirican A,CENGİZ A,soyer v,Yologlu S,Yilmaz S Comparison of Two Pancreatic Anastomosis Techniques in terms of Postoperative Complications After Pancreaticoduodenectomy. . 2021; 192 - 196. 10.5152/eurasianjmed.2021.20194
IEEE KOC S,Dirican A,CENGİZ A,soyer v,Yologlu S,Yilmaz S "Comparison of Two Pancreatic Anastomosis Techniques in terms of Postoperative Complications After Pancreaticoduodenectomy." , ss.192 - 196, 2021. 10.5152/eurasianjmed.2021.20194
ISNAD KOC, SULEYMAN vd. "Comparison of Two Pancreatic Anastomosis Techniques in terms of Postoperative Complications After Pancreaticoduodenectomy". (2021), 192-196. https://doi.org/10.5152/eurasianjmed.2021.20194
APA KOC S, Dirican A, CENGİZ A, soyer v, Yologlu S, Yilmaz S (2021). Comparison of Two Pancreatic Anastomosis Techniques in terms of Postoperative Complications After Pancreaticoduodenectomy. Eurasian Journal of Medicine, 53(3), 192 - 196. 10.5152/eurasianjmed.2021.20194
Chicago KOC SULEYMAN,Dirican Abuzer,CENGİZ ARA,soyer vural,Yologlu Saim,Yilmaz Sezai Comparison of Two Pancreatic Anastomosis Techniques in terms of Postoperative Complications After Pancreaticoduodenectomy. Eurasian Journal of Medicine 53, no.3 (2021): 192 - 196. 10.5152/eurasianjmed.2021.20194
MLA KOC SULEYMAN,Dirican Abuzer,CENGİZ ARA,soyer vural,Yologlu Saim,Yilmaz Sezai Comparison of Two Pancreatic Anastomosis Techniques in terms of Postoperative Complications After Pancreaticoduodenectomy. Eurasian Journal of Medicine, vol.53, no.3, 2021, ss.192 - 196. 10.5152/eurasianjmed.2021.20194
AMA KOC S,Dirican A,CENGİZ A,soyer v,Yologlu S,Yilmaz S Comparison of Two Pancreatic Anastomosis Techniques in terms of Postoperative Complications After Pancreaticoduodenectomy. Eurasian Journal of Medicine. 2021; 53(3): 192 - 196. 10.5152/eurasianjmed.2021.20194
Vancouver KOC S,Dirican A,CENGİZ A,soyer v,Yologlu S,Yilmaz S Comparison of Two Pancreatic Anastomosis Techniques in terms of Postoperative Complications After Pancreaticoduodenectomy. Eurasian Journal of Medicine. 2021; 53(3): 192 - 196. 10.5152/eurasianjmed.2021.20194
IEEE KOC S,Dirican A,CENGİZ A,soyer v,Yologlu S,Yilmaz S "Comparison of Two Pancreatic Anastomosis Techniques in terms of Postoperative Complications After Pancreaticoduodenectomy." Eurasian Journal of Medicine, 53, ss.192 - 196, 2021. 10.5152/eurasianjmed.2021.20194
ISNAD KOC, SULEYMAN vd. "Comparison of Two Pancreatic Anastomosis Techniques in terms of Postoperative Complications After Pancreaticoduodenectomy". Eurasian Journal of Medicine 53/3 (2021), 192-196. https://doi.org/10.5152/eurasianjmed.2021.20194