Improvement of Delayed Gastric Emptying in Pylorus-Preserving Pancreaticoduodenectomy

Abstract

Antecolic reconstruction for duodenojejunostomy during PpPD decreases postoperative morbidity and length of hospital stay by decreasing DGE. Our data suggest that PpPD with antecolic duodenojejunostomy is a safer operation.

Pancreatoduodenectomy - Preventing Complications

“…The route of reconstruction, antecolic or retrocolic also has an impact on the incidence of DGE. The performance of an antecolic duodenojejunostomy has been associated with a reduction in the incidence of DGE which has been shown in randomized and nonrandomized studies [94,[101][102][103][104]. Antecolic reconstruction when compared to retrocolic, DGE occurred in 10 % versus 22 % [105].…”

Prevention of gastrostasis after pancreaticoduodenal resection: new technique of gastroenterostomy

“…There are much more factors on reconstructive stage effecting on incidence of gastrostasis. It is true for ante-and retrocolic duodenojejunostomy [27,43] or gastrojejunostomy [31] as well as for ante-or retromesenteric passage of intestinal loop for anastomosis. The level of stomach resection also influences oh incidence of this complications [18].…”

“…Факторов, связанных с рекон-структивным этапом и влияющих на частоту гастро-стаза, на порядок больше. Это касается впереди-или позадиободочного формирования дуоденоеюноана-стомоза [27,43] или гастроеюноанастомоза [31], а также впереди-или позадимезентериального прове-дения петли тонкой кишки для формирования ана-стомоза. Уровень резекции желудка также влияет на частоту этого осложнения [18].…”

“…По данным рандомизированного контроли-руемого исследования [43], впередиободочный ва-риант обеспечивает меньшую частоту осложнений и гастростаза (5% против 50%). Аналогичные резуль-таты ранее были получены I. Kurosaki и соавт.…”

“…According to randomized controlled investiga- [43], antecolic gastrojejunostomy decreases incidence of complications and gastrostasis (5% vs. 50%). Similar results were obtained earlier by I.Kurosaki and colleagues (8% vs. 74%), M.Sugiyama and colleagues (8% vs. 72%) [41], O.Horstmann and colleagues (12% vs. 25%) [10].…”