Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024
Pancreaticoduodenectomy with pancreaticogastrostomy and an external pancreatic stent in risky patients: a propensity score-matched analysis.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Abdelwahab Mohamed, El Nakeeb Ayman, Shehta Ahmed, Hamed Hosam, Elsabbagh Ahmed M, Attia Mohamed, El-Wahab Reham Abd, Allah Talaat Abd, Ali Mahmoud Abdelwahab
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: There is an ongoing debate about the most appropriate method for reconstructing the pancreas after a pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). This study assessed the impact of pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) with an external pancreatic stent on postoperative outcomes following PD in high-risk patients.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study involves a propensity score-matched analysis of high-risk patients who underwent PD with PG reconstruction. The primary outcome measure was the occurrence of Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula (POPF). Secondary outcomes included operative time, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, re-exploration rate, as well as postoperative morbidity and mortality rates.
RESULTS: The study included 78 patients; 26 patients underwent PD with Pancreatogastrostomy (PG) and an external pancreatic stent, while 52 underwent PG without a pancreatic stent. Blood loss and operative time did not significantly differ between the two groups. The overall postoperative morbidity was higher in the group without a stent than in the stented group (34.6% vs. 15.4%, P = 0.06). No patient in the pancreatic stent group developed a clinically relevant POPF; however, in the non-stented group of PG, 17.3% developed POPF. There were no cases of hospital mortality in the stented group. However, in the non-stented group, two hospital mortality happened (one case was due to the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) secondary to POPF grade C, and the other was due to pulmonary embolism.
CONCLUSION: PG with an external pancreatic stent results in fewer clinically relevant pancreatic fistulas, a decrease in postoperative morbidities, and a non-existent mortality rate in high-risk patients.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study involves a propensity score-matched analysis of high-risk patients who underwent PD with PG reconstruction. The primary outcome measure was the occurrence of Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula (POPF). Secondary outcomes included operative time, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, re-exploration rate, as well as postoperative morbidity and mortality rates.
RESULTS: The study included 78 patients; 26 patients underwent PD with Pancreatogastrostomy (PG) and an external pancreatic stent, while 52 underwent PG without a pancreatic stent. Blood loss and operative time did not significantly differ between the two groups. The overall postoperative morbidity was higher in the group without a stent than in the stented group (34.6% vs. 15.4%, P = 0.06). No patient in the pancreatic stent group developed a clinically relevant POPF; however, in the non-stented group of PG, 17.3% developed POPF. There were no cases of hospital mortality in the stented group. However, in the non-stented group, two hospital mortality happened (one case was due to the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) secondary to POPF grade C, and the other was due to pulmonary embolism.
CONCLUSION: PG with an external pancreatic stent results in fewer clinically relevant pancreatic fistulas, a decrease in postoperative morbidities, and a non-existent mortality rate in high-risk patients.