Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2009
Is blind pancreaticoduodenectomy justified for patients with ampullary neoplasms?
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tien Yu-Wen, Yeh Chi-Chuan, Wang Shi-Po, Hu Rey-Heng, Lee Po-Huang
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Many specialists justify pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for pancreatic head neoplasms with suspected but unproven malignance (blind-PD). Our aim in this study was to determine whether blind-PD is also justified for ampullary neoplasms.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of all patients with presumed resectable ampullary neoplasms treated at the National Taiwan University Hospital from 1998 to 2008.
RESULTS: Of the 84 patients without a preoperative tissue diagnosis of malignance, 64 had blind-PD and 20 had ampullectomy (AMP) with intraoperative frozen section. Patients with jaundice, gastrointestinal bleeding, imaging findings showing tumor invasion, and larger tumor size were significantly more frequently treated by blind-PD. Final pathological diagnosis was benign in ten of 64 blind-PD-treated patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Our data support a selective use of blind-PD because (1) a significant portion (65%) of benign ampullary neoplasms can be safely and effectively treated by AMP, (2) blind-PD does not treat ampullary cancer at earlier stage, and (3) blind-PD is associated with significantly more complications and significantly longer hospital stay than AMP. However, blind-PD is strongly recommended for patients with large ampullary neoplasms (>3 cm in diameter), with jaundice, or with malignant endoscopic appearance.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of all patients with presumed resectable ampullary neoplasms treated at the National Taiwan University Hospital from 1998 to 2008.
RESULTS: Of the 84 patients without a preoperative tissue diagnosis of malignance, 64 had blind-PD and 20 had ampullectomy (AMP) with intraoperative frozen section. Patients with jaundice, gastrointestinal bleeding, imaging findings showing tumor invasion, and larger tumor size were significantly more frequently treated by blind-PD. Final pathological diagnosis was benign in ten of 64 blind-PD-treated patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Our data support a selective use of blind-PD because (1) a significant portion (65%) of benign ampullary neoplasms can be safely and effectively treated by AMP, (2) blind-PD does not treat ampullary cancer at earlier stage, and (3) blind-PD is associated with significantly more complications and significantly longer hospital stay than AMP. However, blind-PD is strongly recommended for patients with large ampullary neoplasms (>3 cm in diameter), with jaundice, or with malignant endoscopic appearance.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AgedAmpulla of VaterBiopsy, NeedleCholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic RetrogradeCohort StudiesDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHospital MortalityHumansImmunohistochemistryMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm InvasivenessNeoplasm StagingPancreatic NeoplasmsPancreaticoduodenectomyPostoperative ComplicationsPreoperative CareProbabilityRegistriesRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentSphincterotomy, EndoscopicStatistics, NonparametricSurvival Rate