Pancreatic remnant fate

• Autorzy: Hac S. , Pienkowska J. , Madejewska I. , Laski D. , Kostro J. , Mroczkowski P. , Studniarek M. , Sledzinski Z.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

There is eternal discussion on the best surgical method of pancreatoduodenectomy and reconstruction method. Several different methods of pancreatic stump anastomosis exist. The most popular argument taken into account in the discussion is the frequency of early postoperative complications. Relatively fewer papers analyse the late functional outcome of pancreatic surgery and the method of anastomosis employed. Authors presented short series of 12 patients after pancreatic surgery with analysis of pancreatic remnant morphology and function. Pancreatic remnant volume, pancreatic duct distension and stool elastase-1 test were analysed. There was no correlation of pancreatic exo- or endocrine insufficiency with the volume of pancreatic remnant or the kind of surgery or anastomosis performed. (Folia Morphol 2015; 74, 1: 56–60)

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Folia Morphologica
• Rocznik: 2015
• Tom: 74
• Numer: 1
• Opis fizyczny: p.56-60,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Hac S.

• Department of General Endocrine and Transplant Surgery, Medical University of Gdansk, Dębinki 7, 80-952 Gdansk, Poland

autor

Pienkowska J.

• Department of Radiology Medical University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland

autor

Madejewska I.

• Department of General Endocrine and Transplant Surgery, Medical University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland

autor

Laski D.

• Department of General Endocrine and Transplant Surgery, Medical University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland

autor

Kostro J.

• Department of General Endocrine and Transplant Surgery, Medical University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland

autor

Mroczkowski P.

• Department of Visceral and Vascular Surgery, University of Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany

autor

Studniarek M.

• Department of Radiology Medical University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland

autor

Sledzinski Z.

• Department of General Endocrine and Transplant Surgery, Medical University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland

Bibliografia

• 1. Adam U, Makowiec F, Riediger H, Schareck WD, Benz S, Hopt UT (2004) Risk factors for complications after pancreatic head resection. Am J Surg, 187: 201–208.
• 2. Alexakis N, Halloran C, Raraty M, Ghaneh P, Sutton R, Neoptolemos JP (2004) Current standards of surgery for pancreatic cancer. Br J Surg, 91: 1410–1427.
• 3. Aranha GV, Hodul P, Golts E, Oh D, Pickleman J, Creech S (2003) A comparison of pancreaticogastrostomy and pancreaticojejunostomy following pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Gastrointest Surg, 7: 672–682.
• 4. Bai MD, Rong LQ, Wang LC, Xu H, Fan RF, Wang P, Chen XP, Shi LB, Peng SY (2008) Experimental study on operative methods of pancreaticojejunostomy with reference to anastomotic patency and postoperative pancreatic exocrine function. World J Gastroenterol, 14: 441–447.
• 5. Bassi C, Falconi M, Molinari E, Salvia R, Butturini G, Sartori N, Mantovani W, Pederzoli P (2005) Reconstruction by pancreaticojejunostomy versus pancreaticogastrostomy following pancreatectomy: results of a comparative study. Ann Surg, 242: 767–771.
• 6. Benzoni E, Zompicchiatti A, Saccomano E, Lorenzin D, Baccarani U, Adani G, Noce L, Uzzau A, Cedolini C, Bresadola F, Intini S (2008) Postoperative complications linked to pancreaticoduodenectomy. An analysis of pancreatic stump management. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis, 17: 43–47.
• 7. Buchler MW, Kleeff J, Friess H (2007) Surgical treatment of pancreatic cancer. J Am Coll Surg, 205: S81–S86.
• 8. Desdicioglu K, Malas MA, Evcil EH (2010) Foetal development of the pancreas. Folia Morphol, 69: 216–224.
• 9. Fang WL, Su CH, Shyr YM, Chen TH, Lee RC, Tai LC, Wu CW, Lui WY (2007) Functional and morphological changes in pancreatic remnant after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Pancreas, 35: 361–365.
• 10. Hac S, Peksa R, Dobosz M, Wysocki T, Lampe P, Kusnieez K, Mroczkowski P, Sledzinski Z (2012) Pancreatic anastomosis healing. Open J Pathol, 2: 96–101.
• 11. Henne-Bruns D, Vogel I, Luttges J, Kloppel G, Kremer B (2000) Surgery for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head: staging, complications, and survival after regional versus extended lymphadenectomy. World J Surg, 24: 595–601.
• 12. Howard JM (1999) Development and progress in resective surgery for pancreatic cancer. World J Surg, 23: 901–906.
• 13. Hyodo M, Nagai H (2000) Pancreatogastrostomy (PG) after pancreatoduodenectomy with or without duct-to-mucosa anastomosis for the small pancreatic duct: short- and long-term results. Hepatogastroenterology, 47: 1138–1141.
• 14. Ishii Y, Kohno T, Ito A, Suzuki S, Kohno T, Takayama T, Asai S (2007) Evaluation of pancreatic exocrine secretion using 13C-dipeptide (benzoyl-L-tyrosyl-[1-(13)C]alanine) breath test: focusing on pancreatoduodenectomy cases. Pancreas, 35: 313–319.
• 15. Ishii Y, Kohno T, Ito A, Suzuki S, Kohno T, Takayama T, Asai S (2007) Measurement of extra-pancreatic secretory function by 13C-dipeptide breath test. Transl Res, 149: 298–303.
• 16. Jang JY, Kim SW, Park SJ, Park YH (2002) Comparison of the functional outcome after pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy: pancreatogastrostomy and pancreatojejunostomy. World J Surg, 26: 366–371.
• 17. Kahl S, Malfertheiner P (2004) Exocrine and endocrine pancreatic insufficiency after pancreatic surgery. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol, 18: 947–955.
• 18. Kawarada Y, Das BC, Naganuma T, Isaji S (2001) Surgical treatment of pancreatic cancer. Does extended lymphadenectomy provide a better outcome? J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg, 8: 224–229.
• 19. Kleespies A, Albertsmeier M, Obeidat F, Seeliger H, Jauch KW, Bruns CJ (2008) The challenge of pancreatic anastomosis. Langenbecks Arch Surg, 393: 459–471.
• 20. Konishi M, Ryu M, Kinoshita T, Inoue K (1999) Pathophysiology after pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy: a comparative study of pancreatogastrostomy and pancreatojejunostomy. Hepatogastroenterology, 46: 1181–1186.
• 21. McKay A, Mackenzie S, Sutherland FR, Bathe OF, Doig C, Dort J, Vollmer CMJr, Dixon E (2006) Meta-analysis of pancreaticojejunostomy versus pancreaticogastrostomy reconstruction after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg, 93: 929–936.
• 22. Nakamura H, Murakami Y, Uemura K, Hayashidani Y, Sudo T, Ohge H, Sueda T (2009) Predictive factors for exocrine pancreatic insufficiency after pancreatoduodenectomy with pancreaticogastrostomy. J Gastrointest Surg, 13: 1321–1327.
• 23. Ohtsuka T, Yamaguchi K, Chijiiwa K, Tanaka M (2001) Postoperative pancreatic exocrine function influences body weight maintenance after pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy. Am J Surg, 182: 524–529.
• 24. Pessaux P, Aube C, Lebigot J, Tuech JJ, Regenet N, Kapel N, Caron C, Arnaud JP (2002) Permeability and functionality of pancreaticogastrostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy with dynamic magnetic resonance pancreatography after secretin stimulation. J Am Coll Surg, 194: 454–462.
• 25. Rault A, SaCunha A, Klopfenstein D, Larroude D, Epoy FN, Collet D, Masson B (2005) Pancreaticojejunal anastomosis is preferable to pancreaticogastrostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy for longterm outcomes of pancreatic exocrine function. J Am Coll Surg, 201: 239–244.
• 26. Sho M, Nakajima Y, Kanehiro H, Hisanaga M, Nishio K, Nagao M, Tatekawa Y, Ikeda N, Kanokogi H, Yamada T, Hirohashi S, Hirohashi R, Uchida H, Nakano H (1998) A new evaluation of pancreatic function after pancreatoduodenectomy using secretin magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. Am J Surg, 176: 279–282.
• 27. Tomimaru Y, Takeda Y, Kobayashi S, Tomimaru Y, Takeda Y, Kobayashi S, Marubashi S, Lee CM, Tanemura M, Nagano H, Kitagawa T, Dono K, Umeshita K, Wakasa K, Monden M (2009) Comparison of postoperative morphological changes in remnant pancreas between pancreaticojejunostomy and pancreaticogastrostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Pancreas, 38: 203–207.
• 28. Z’graggen K, Uhl W, Friess H, Buchler MW (2002) How to do a safe pancreatic anastomosis. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg, 9: 733–737.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.5603/FM.2015.0009