No abstract

Surgery and endoscopy for benign biliary strictures have similar long-term success rates. Indications for surgery are complete transections, failed previous repairs, and failures of endoscopic therapy. All other patients are candidates for endoscopic stenting as the initial treatment.

Of 176 patients with carcinoma of the pancreatic head region 156 underwent standard pancreatoduodenectomy (group 2) and 20 with macroscopic suspicion of invasion of the portal vein or superior mesenteric vein (SMV) underwent pancreatoduodenectomy with partial resection of the portal vein or SMV (group 1). In 16 patients in group 1 end-to-end anastomosis was used for reconstruction of the vein. The morbidity rate in groups 1 and 2 was similar (55 versus 63 per cent). The hospital mortality rate was 15 per cent in group 1 and 7 per cent in group 2 (P = 0.22). Histological examination confirmed tumour invasion of the portal vein or SMV in ten patients in group 1. Invasion of the portal vein or SMV was significantly more frequent in patients with pancreatic cancer than in those with distal bile duct or ampullary carcinoma. Of the 20 patients in group 1 only three underwent curative resection with tumour-free margins. The median survival time after resection of the portal vein or SMV was 8 months; the 2-year survival rate was 19 per cent. Comparison of survival in group 1 with survival in subgroups of patients undergoing standard pancreatoduodenectomy, matched for all histological parameters, showed no significant difference. It is concluded that partial resection of the portal vein or SMV in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy who are suspected of having tumour invasion of the portal vein or SMV does not improve either the rate of curative resection or survival.

The barostat is considered the gold standard for evaluation of proximal gastric motility especially for the accommodation response to a meal. The procedure is invasive because it involves the introduction of an intragastric catheter and bag and is not always well tolerated. Moreover, the barostat bag itself may influence motility. Nowadays magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is able to measure several aspects of gastric motility noninvasively. To evaluate whether the accommodation response of the stomach, observed with the barostat, is present during MRI and whether the barostat interferes with gastric physiology, gastric accommodation, motility, and emptying were studied twice in 14 healthy subjects with MRI using three-dimensional volume scans and two-dimensional dynamic scans once in the presence of a barostat bag and once when the barostat bag was not present. Fasting and postprandial intragastric volumes were significantly higher in the experiment with barostat vs. without barostat (fasting: 350 +/- 132 ml vs. 37 +/- 21 ml, P < 0.0001; postprandial: 852 +/- 126 ml vs. 361 +/- 62 ml, P < 0.0001). No significant differences were found in gastric emptying (88 +/- 41 vs. 97 +/- 40 ml/h, not significant) and contraction frequency between both experiments. The accommodation response observed in the presence of the barostat bag was not observed in the absence of the barostat bag. In conclusion, the presence of an intragastric barostat bag does not interfere with gastric emptying or motility, but the accommodation response measured with the barostat in situ is not observed without the barostat bag in situ. Gastric accommodation is a nonphysiological barostat-induced phenomenon.