This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Is It Any Better?

Ameet G. Patel, FRCS; Mark T. Toyama, MD; Amy M. Kusske, MD; Pam Alexander, RN; Stanley W. Ashley, MD; Howard A. Reber, MD

Arch Surg. 1995;130(8):838-843.

Abstract
Objective
To compare the short- and long-term morbidity and mortality rates of the standard Whipple pancreatoduodenectomy (SW) and its pylorus-preserving modification (PPW) in patients with malignant periampullary disease.

Design
Retrospective medical record review and quality of life assessment by telephone interview.

Setting
University medical center.

Study Participants
Sixty-seven patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy (52 SW and 15 PPW) from June 1988 to January 1994.

Intervention
The SW and PPW.

Main Outcome Measures
Operative features and short- and long-term complications were analyzed with respect to the type and stage of cancer and the kind of pancreatic resection. Mean follow-up was 32 months (range, 1 to 5 years).

Results
The operative mortality rate for all patients who had a pancreatic resection was 1.5%. The diagnoses in the PPW vs SW groups were pancreatic cancer (four vs 27 patients), ampullary cancer (six vs seven patients), duodenal cancer (zero vs six patients), and bile duct cancer (five vs one patient). Operative mortality rates (0% vs 1.55%) and operative times (2 minutes longer for SW) were similar. Delayed gastric emptying (61% vs 41%) was more common in the PPW group, resulting in a longer hospitalization (24 vs 18 days) and a greater cost in the PPW group (P=.04). In the PPW group, a mean of five lymph nodes was removed compared with 10 in the SW group (P=.04).

Conclusions
The data provided no evidence of any advantage for the PPW in patients with malignant periampullary tumors. We continue to advocate the SW for pancreatic cancer.

(Arch Surg. 1995;130:838-843)

Author Affiliations
From the Department of Surgery, Sepulveda Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Los Angeles, Calif, and the Department of Surgery, University of California, Los Angeles, School of Medicine.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Understanding Clinical Issues in Postoperative Nutrition After Pancreaticoduodenectomy
Zgodzinski et al.
Nutr Clin Pract 2005;20:654-661.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Complications after Pancreatoduodenectomy: Imaging and Imaging-guided Interventional Procedures
Gervais et al.
RadioGraphics 2001;21:673-690.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Ten-Year Experience With 733 Pancreatic Resections: Changing Indications, Older Patients, and Decreasing Length of Hospitalization
Balcom IV et al.
Arch Surg 2001;136:391-398.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Decreasing Length of Stay After Pancreatoduodenectomy
Brooks et al.
Arch Surg 2000;135:823-830.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Safety, Efficacy, and Cost of Pancreaticoduodenal Resection in a Specialized Center Based at a Community Hospital
Cooperman et al.
Arch Surg 1997;132:744-747.
ABSTRACT