Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Analysis of clinical trials evaluating complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy: A new era of pancreatic surgery

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Surgery Today Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Pancreatic fistula and delayed gastric emptying (DGE) are the major postoperative complications of pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Pancreatic fistula is life-threatening and DGE, while not life-threatening, prolongs the hospital stay, increasing costs and compromising quality of life. To establish the current consensus of pancreatic fistula and DGE after PD, we analyzed the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) designed to prevent these postoperative complications. Five RCTs comparing PD with pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PpPD) performed for periampullary tumors showed that the two procedures were equally effective with respect to morbidity, mortality, and survival. We reviewed 15 RCTs, 2 prospective nonrandomized studies, and 2 meta-analyses of operative techniques and postoperative management designed to prevent pancreatic fistula. The results of the RCTs designed to prevent pancreatic fistula recommended duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy or one-layer end-to-side pancreaticojejunostomy, equally. We also reviewed five RCTs of operative techniques and postoperative management designed to prevent DGE, which revealed that the antecolic route for duodenojejunostomy significantly reduced the incidence of DGE. Further RCTs to study innovative approaches to prevent postoperative complications after PD are warranted.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yeo CJ, Cameron JL, Sohn TA, Sohn TA, Lillemoe KD, Pitt HA, et al. Six hundred fifty consecutive pancreaticoduodenectomy in the 1990s: pathology, complications, and outcomes. Ann Surg 1997;226:248–257.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bűchler MW, Wagner M, Schmied BM, Uhl W, Friess H, Z’graggen K. Changes in morbidity after pancreatic resection. Toward the end of completion pancreatectomy. Arch Surg 2003;138:1310–1314.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Balcom JH, Rattner DW, Warshaw AL, Chang Y, Castillo CF. Ten-year experience with 733 pancreatic resections. Changing indications, older patients, and decreasing length of hospitalization. Arch Surg 2001;136:391–398.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Tani M, Onishi H, Kinosita H, Kawai M, Ueno M, Hama T, et al. The evaluation of duct-to mucosal pancreaticojejunostomy in pancreaticoduodenectomy. World J Surg 2005;29:76–79.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Tani M, Kawai M, Terasawa H, Ueno M, Hama T, Ina S, et al. Complication with reconstruction procedure in pylorus-preserving pancreaticojejunostomy. World J Surg 2005;29:881–884.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kamoda Y, Fujino Y, Matsumoto I, Shinzeki M, Sakai T, Kuroda Y. Usefulness of performing a pancreaticojejunostomy with an internal stent after a pancreatoduodenectomy. Surg Today 2008;38:524–528.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Yeo CJ, Cameron JL, Lillemoe KD, Sohn TA, Campbell KA, Sauter PK, et al. Pancreaticoduodenectomy with or without distal gastrectomy and extended retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy for periampullary adenocarcinoma, part 2. Randomized controlled trial evaluating survival, morbidity, and mortality. Ann Surg 2002;236:355–368.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. van Berge Henegouwen MI, De Wit LT, Van Gulik TM, Obertop H, Gouma DJ. Incidence, risk factors, and treatment of pancreatic leakage after pancreaticoduodenectomy: drainage versus resection of the pancreatic remnant. J Am Coll Surg 1997;185:18–24.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wada K, Traverso LW. Pancreatic anastomotic leak after the Whipple procedure is reduced using the surgical microscope. Surgery 2006;139:735–742.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Poon RT, Fan ST, Lo CM, Ng KK, Yuen WK, Yeung C, et al. External drainage of pancreatic duct with a stent to reduce leakage rate of pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a prospective randomized trial. Ann Surg 2007;246:425–433; discussion 433–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Adam U, Makowiec F, Riediger H, Schareck WD, Benz S, Hopt UT. Risk factors for complications after pancreatic head resection. Am J Surg 2004;187:201–208.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kawai M, Tani M, Terasawa H, Ina S, Hirono S, Nishioka R, et al. Early removal of prophylactic drains reduces the risk of intraabdominal infections in patients with pancreatic head resection: prospective study for 104 consecutive patients. Ann Surg 2006;244:1–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Choi SH, Moon HJ, Heo JS, Joh JW, Kim YI. Delayed hemorrhage after pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Am Coll Surg 2004;199:186–191.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Rumstadt B, Schwab M, Korth P, Samman M, Trede M. Hemorrhage after pancreatoduodenectomy. Ann Surg 1998;227:236–241.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bottger TC, Junginger T. Factors influencing morbidity and mortality after pancreaticoduodenectomy: critical analysis of 221 resections. World J Surg 1999;23:164–172.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Castro SMM, Kuhlmann KFD, Busch ORC, Delden OM, Lameris JS, Gulik TM, et al. Delayed massive hemorrhage after pancreatic and biliary surgery. Embolization or surgery? Ann Surg 2005;241:85–91.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cullen JJ, Sarr MG, Ilstrup DM. Pancreatic anastomotic leak after pancreaticoduodenectomy; incidence, significance, and management. Am J Surg 1994;168:295–298.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Fujii Y, Shimada H, Endo I, Yoshida K, Matsuo K, Takeda K, et al. Management of massive arterial hemorrhage after pancreatobiliary surgery: Does embolotherapy contribute to successful outcome? J Gastrointest Surg 2007;11:432–438.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Horstmann O, Markus PM, Ghadimi MB, Becker H. Pylorus preservation has no impact on delayed gastric emptying after pancreatic head resection. Pancreas 2004;28:69–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Zerbi A, Balzano G, Patuzzo R, Calori G, Braga M, Di Carlo V. Comparison between pylorus-preserving and Whipple pancreatoduodenectomy. Br J Surg 1995;82:975–979.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Martignoni ME, Friess H, Sell F, Ricken L, Shrikhande S, Kulli C, et al. Enteral nutrition prolongs delayed gastric emptying in patients after Whipple resection. Am J Surg 2000;180:18–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Nguyen TC, Sohn TA, Cameron JL, Lillemoe KD, Campbell KA, Coleman J, et al. Standard vs radical pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary adenocarcinoma: a prospective, randomized trial evaluating quality of life in pancreaticoduodenectomy survivors. J Gastrointest Surg 2003;7:1–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kausch W. Das Carnimom der Papilla duodeni und seine radikale Entfernung. Beitr Klin Chir 1912;78:439–486.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Whipple AO, Parsons W, Mullins CR. Treatment of carcinoma of the ampulla of Vater. Ann Surg 1935;102:763–779.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Watson K. Carcinoma of the ampulla of Vater. Successful radical resection. Br J Surg 1944;31:368–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Traverso LW, Longmire WJ. Preservation of the pylorus in pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1978;146:959–962.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lin PW, Lin YJ. Prospective randomized comparison between pylorus preserving and standard pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg 1999;86:603–607.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Seiler CA, Wagner M, Sadowski C, Kulli C, Bűchler MW. Randomized prospective trial of pylorus-preserving vs classic duodenopancreatectomy (Whipple procedure): initial clinical results. J Gastrointest Surg 2000;4:443–452.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Tran KTC, Smeenk HG, van Eijck CHJ, Kazemier G, Hop WC, Greve JWG, et al. Pylorus preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy versus standard Whipple procedure. A prospective, randomized, multicenter analysis of 170 patients with pancreatic and periampullary tumors. Ann Surg 2004;240:738–745.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Seiler CA, Wagner M, Bachmann CA, Schmied RB, Friess UH, Bchler MW. Randomized clinical trial of pylorus-preserving duodenopancreatectomy versus classical Whipple resection-long term results. Br J Surg 2005;92:547–556.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Lin PW, Shan YS, Lin YJ, Hung CJ. Pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic head cancer: PPPD versus Whipple procedure. Hepatogastroenterology 2005;52:1601–1604.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Diener MK, Knaebel HP, Heukaufer C, Antes G, Bűchler MW, Seiler CM. A systematic review and meta-analysis of pyloruspreserving versus classical pancreaticoduodenectomy for surgical treatment of periampullary and pancreatic carcinoma. Ann Surg 2007;245:187–200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Bassi C, Dervenis C, Butturini G, Fingerhut A, Yeo C, Izbicki J, et al. Postoperative pancreatic fistula: An international study group (ISGPF) definition. Surgery 2005;138:8–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Pessaux P, Msika S, Atalla D, Hay JM, Flamant Y. Risk factors for postoperative infectious complications in noncolorectal abdominal surgery. A multivariate analysis based on a prospec tive multicenter study of 4718 patients. Arch Surg 2003;138:314–324.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Bűchler MW, Friess H, Wagner M, Kulli C, Wagener V, Z’Graggen K. Pancreatic fistula after pancreatic head resection. Br J Surg 2000;87:883–889.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Waugh JM, Clagett OT. Resection of the duodenum and head of the pancreas for carcinoma. An analysis of thirty cases. Surgery 1946;20:224–232.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Yeo C, Cameron J, Maher M, Sauter PK, Zahurak ML, Talamini MA, et al. A prospective randomized trial of pancreaticogastrostomy versus pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg 1995;222:580–588.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Takano S, Ito Y, Watanabe Y, Yokoyama T, Kubota N, Iwai S. pancreaticojejunostomy versus pancreaticogastrostomy in reconstruction following pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg 2000;87:423–427.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Duffas JP, Suc B, Msika S, Fourtanier G, Muscari F, Hay JM, et al. French association for research in surgery; a controlled randomized multicenter trial of pancreatogastrostomy or pancreatojejunostomy after pancreatoduodenectomy. Am J Surg 2005;189:720–729.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Bassi C, Falconi M, Molinari E, Salvia R, Butturini G, Sartori N, et al. Reconstruction by pancreaticojejunostomy versus pancreaticogastrostomy following pancreatectomy. Results of a comparative study. Ann Surg 2005;242:767–773.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. McKay A, Mackenzie S, Sutherland FR, Bathe OF, Doig C, Dort J, et al. Meta-analysis of pancreaticojejunostomy versus pancreaticogastrostomy reconstruction after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg 2006;93:929–936.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Bassi C, Falconi M, Molinari E, Mantovani W, Butturini G, Gumbs AA, et al. Duct-to-mucosa versus end-to-side pancreaticojejunostomy reconstruction after pancreaticoduodenectomy; results of a prospective randomized trial. Surgery 2003;134:766–771.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Chou FF, Sheen-Chen SM, Chen YS, Chen MC, Chen CL. Prospective morbidity and mortality of pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary cancer. Eur J Surg 1996;162:477–481.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Tran K, Van Eijck C, Di Carlo V, Carlo VD, Hop WCJ, Zerbi A, et al. Occlusion of the pancreatic duct versus pancreaticojejunostomy; a prospective randomized trial. Ann Surg 2002;236:422–428.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Lillemoe KD, Cameron JL, Kim MP, Kampbell KA, Sauter PK, Coleman JA. Does fibrin glue sealant decrease the rate of pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy? Results of a prospective randomized trial. J Gastrointest Surg 2004;8:766–772.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Roder JD, Stein HJ, Böttcher KA, Busch R, Heidecke CD, Siewert JR. Stented versus nonstented pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreatoduodenectomy: a prospective study. Ann Surg 1999;229:41–48.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Winter JM, Cameron JL, Campbell KA, Chang DC, Riall TS, Schulick RD, et al. Does pancreatic duct stenting decrease the rate of pancreatic fistula following pancreaticoduodenectomy? Results of a prospective randomized trial. J Gastrointest Surg 2006;10:1280–1290.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Gouillat C, Chipponi J, Baulieux J, Partensky C, Saric J, Gayet B. Randomized controlled multicentre trial of somatostatin infusion after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg 2001;88:1456–1462.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Shan YS, Sy ED, Lin PW. Role of somatostatin in the prevention of pancreatic stump-related morbidity following elective pancreaticoduodenectomy in high-risk patients and elimination of surgeon-related factors: prospective, randomized, controlled trial. World J Surg 2003;27:709–714.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Lowy A, Lee J, Pisters P, Davidson BS, Fenoglio CJ, Stanford P, et al. Prospective randomized trial of octreotide to prevent pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy for malignant disease. Ann Surg 1997;226:632–641.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Yeo CJ, Cameron JL, Lillemoe KD, Sauter PK, Coleman J, Sohn TA, et al. Does prophylactic octreotide decrease the rates of pancreatic fistula and other complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy? Results of a prospective randomized placebocontrolled trial. Ann Surg 2000;232:419–429.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Sarr MG. The potent somatostatin analogue vapreotide does not decrease pancreas-specific complications after elective pancreatectomy: a prospective, multicenter, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. J Am Coll Surg 2003;196:556–5564.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Suc B, Msika S, Piccinini M, Fourtanier G, Hay JM, Flamant Y, et al. Octreotide in the prevention of intra-abdominal complications following elective pancreatic resection: a prospective, multicenter randomized controlled trial. Arch Surg 2004;139:288–294.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Conor S, Alexakis N, Garden OJ, Leandros E, Bramis J, Wigmore SJ. Meta-analysis of the value of somatostatin and its analogues in reducing complications associated with pancreatic surgery. Br J Surg 2005;92:1059–1067.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Miedema BW, Sarr MG, van Heerden JA, Nagorney DM, McIlrath DC, Ilstrup D. Complications following pancreaticoduodenectomy: current management. Ann Surg 1992;127:945–949.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Riediger H, Makowiec F, Schareck WD, Hopt UT, Adam U. Delayed gastric emptying after pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy is strongly related to other postoperative complications. J Gastrointest Surg 2003;7:758–765.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Sugiyama M, Abe N, Ueki H, Masaki T, Mori T, Atomi Y. A new reconstruction method for preventing delayed gastric emptying after pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy. Am J Surg 2004;187:743–746.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Tani M, Terasawa H, Kawai M, Ina S, Hirono S, Uchiyama K, et al. Improvement of delayed gastric emptying in pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy: results of a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Ann Surg 2006;243:316–320.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Yeo CJ, Barry MK, Sauter PK, Sostre S, Lillemoe KD, Pitt HA, et al. Erythromycin accelerates gastric emptying following pancreaticoduodenectomy: a prospective, randomized placebocontrolled trial. Ann Surg 1993;218:229–238.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Ohwada S, Satoh Y, Kawate S, Yamada T, Kawamura O, Koyama T, et al. Low-dose erythromycin reduces delayed gastric emptying and improves gastric motility after Billroth I pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg 2001;234:668–674.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. van Berge Henegouwen MI, Akkermans LM, van Gulik TM, Masclee AA, Moojen TM, Obertop H, et al. Prospective, randomized trial on the effect of cyclic versus continuous enteral nutrition on postoperative gastric function after pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy. Ann Surg 1997;226:677–685.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Second Department of Surgery, Wakayama Medical University, School of Medicine, 811-1 Kimiidera, Wakayama, 641-8510, Japan

    Manabu Kawai & Hiroki Yamaue

Authors
  1. Manabu Kawai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hiroki Yamaue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kawai, M., Yamaue, H. Analysis of clinical trials evaluating complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy: A new era of pancreatic surgery. Surg Today 40, 1011–1017 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-009-4245-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-009-4245-9

Key words

Search

Navigation