[Skip to Content]
Sign In
Individual Sign In
Create an Account
Institutional Sign In
OpenAthens Shibboleth
[Skip to Content Landing]
Download PDF
Table 1. 
Demographic Characteristics of 617 Patients Undergoing Pancreatic Resection
Demographic Characteristics of 617 Patients Undergoing Pancreatic Resection
Table 2. 
Pathological Diagnoses in 617 Pancreatic Resections
Pathological Diagnoses in 617 Pancreatic Resections
Table 3. 
Intraoperative Findings in 581 Patients Undergoing Pancreatic Resection*
Intraoperative Findings in 581 Patients Undergoing Pancreatic Resection*
Table 4. 
Causes of the 10 Cases of Hospital Mortality in 617 Consecutive Patients Undergoing Pancreatic Resection
Causes of the 10 Cases of Hospital Mortality in 617 Consecutive Patients Undergoing Pancreatic Resection
Table 5. 
Surgical Morbidity in 617 Patients Undergoing Pancreatic Resection
Surgical Morbidity in 617 Patients Undergoing Pancreatic Resection
Table 6. 
Systemic Morbidity in 617 Patients Undergoing Pancreatic Resection
Systemic Morbidity in 617 Patients Undergoing Pancreatic Resection
1.
Gordon  TABowman  HMTielsch  JMBass  EBBurleyson  GPCameron  JL Statewide regionalization of pancreaticoduodenectomy and its effect on in-hospital mortality. Ann Surg. 1998;22871- 78
PubMedArticle
2.
Gouma  DJvan Geenen  RCvan Gulik  TM  et al.  Rates of complications and death after pancreaticoduodenectomy: risk factors and the impact of hospital volume. Ann Surg. 2000;232786- 795
PubMedArticle
3.
Neoptolemos  JPRussell  RCGBramhall  STheis  B Low mortality following resection for pancreatic and periampullary tumours in 1026 patients: UK survey of specialist pancreatic units: UK Pancreatic Cancer Group. Br J Surg. 1997;841370- 1376
PubMedArticle
4.
Birkmeyer  JDSiewers  AEFinlayson  EF  et al.  Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2002;3461128- 1137
PubMedArticle
5.
Balcom  JHRattner  DWWarshaw  ALChang  YFernandez-del Castillo  C Ten-year experience with 733 pancreatic resections: changing indications, older patients, and decreasing length of hospitalization. Arch Surg. 2001;136391- 398
PubMedArticle
6.
Büchler  MWFriess  HWagner  MKulli  CWagener  VZ'graggen  K Pancreatic fistula after pancreatic head resection: analysis of 331 consecutive patients. Br J Surg. 2000;87883- 889
PubMedArticle
7.
Trede  MSaeger  HDSchwall  GRumstadt  B Resection of pancreatic cancer: surgical achievements. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 1998;383121- 128
PubMedArticle
8.
Yeo  CJCameron  JLSohn  TA  et al.  Six hundred fifty consecutive pancreaticoduodenectomies in the 1990s: pathology, complications, and outcomes. Ann Surg. 1997;226248- 257
PubMedArticle
9.
Beger  HGBüchler  MWFriess  H Chirurgische ergebnisse und indikation zu adjuvanten massnahmen beim pankreascarcinom [in German]. Chirurg. 1994;65246- 252
PubMed
10.
Trede  MSchwall  GSaeger  HD Survival after pancreatoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 1990;211447- 458
PubMedArticle
11.
Bramhall  SRAllum  WHJones  AGAllwood  ACummins  CNeoptolemos  JP Treatment and survival in 13 560 patients with pancreatic cancer, and incidence of the disease, in the West Midlands: an epidemological study. Br J Surg. 1995;82111- 115
PubMedArticle
12.
Büchler  MFriess  HKlempa  I  et al.  The role of octreotide in the prevention of postoperative complications following pancreatic resection. Am J Surg. 1992;163125- 131
PubMedArticle
13.
Friess  HBeger  HGSulkowski  U  et al.  Randomized controlled multicentre study of the prevention of complications by octreotide in patients undergoing surgery for chronic pancreatitis. Br J Surg. 1995;821270- 1273
PubMedArticle
14.
Wagner  MZ'Graggen  KVagianos  CE  et al.  Pylorus-preserving total pancreatectomy: early and late results. Dig Surg. 2001;18188- 195
PubMedArticle
15.
Seiler  CAWagner  MSadowski  CKulli  CBüchler  MW Randomized prospective trial on pylorus preserving versus classic duodenopancreatectomy (Whipple): first clinical results. J Gastrointest Surg. 2000;4443- 452
PubMedArticle
16.
Andren-Sandberg  AWagner  MTihanyi  TLofgren  PFriess  H Technical aspects of left-sided pancreatic resection for cancer. Dig Surg. 1999;16305- 312
PubMedArticle
17.
Büchler  MWFriess  HMüller  MWWheatley  AMBeger  HU Randomized trial of duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection versus pylorus-preserving Whipple in chronic pancreatitis. Am J Surg. 1995;16965- 70
PubMedArticle
18.
Z'graggen  KUhl  WFriess  HBüchler  MW How to do a safe pancreatic anastomosis. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 2002;9733- 737
PubMedArticle
19.
Birkmeyer  JDFinlayson  SRTosteson  ANSharp  SMWarshaw  ALFisher  ES Effect of hospital volume on in-hospital mortality with pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surgery. 1999;125250- 256
PubMedArticle
20.
Birkmeyer  JDWarshaw  ALFinlayson  SRGrove  MRTosteson  AN Relationship between hospital volume and late survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surgery. 1999;126178- 183
PubMedArticle
21.
Warshaw  ALRattner  DWFernandez-del Castillo  CZ'Graggen  K Middle segment pancreatectomy: a novel technique for conserving pancreatic tissue. Arch Surg. 1998;133327- 331
PubMedArticle
22.
Beger  HGSchlosser  WFriess  HMBüchler  MW Duodenum-preserving head resection in chronic pancreatitis changes the natural course of the disease: a single-center 26-year experience. Ann Surg. 1999;230512- 519discussion, 519-523
PubMedArticle
23.
Balcolm  JFernandez-Del Castillo  CWarshaw  A Cystic lesions in the pancreas: when to watch, when to resect. Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2000;2152- 158
PubMedArticle
24.
O'Neil  SPickleman  JAranha  GV Pancreaticogastrostomy following pancreaticoduodenectomy: review of 102 consecutive cases. World J Surg. 2001;25567- 571
PubMedArticle
25.
Aranha  GV A technique for pancreaticogastrostomy. Am J Surg. 1998;175328- 329
PubMedArticle
26.
Takao  SShimazu  HMaenohara  SShinchi  HAikou  T Modified pancreaticogastrostomy following pancreaticoduodenectomy. Am J Surg. 1993;165317- 321
PubMedArticle
27.
Yeo  CJCameron  JLMaher  MM  et al.  A prospective randomized trial of pancreaticogastrostomy versus pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 1995;222580- 588discussion, 588-592
PubMedArticle
28.
Roder  JDStein  HJBöttcher  KABusch  RHeidecke  CDSiewert  JR Stented versus nonstented pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreatoduodenectomy: a prospective study. Ann Surg. 1999;22941- 48
PubMedArticle
29.
Pitt  HAGomes  ASLois  JF Does preoperative percutaneous biliary drainage reduce operative risk or increase hospital cost? Ann Surg. 1985;201545- 553
PubMedArticle
30.
McPherson  GABenjamin  ISHodgson  HJBowley  NBAllison  DJBlumgart  LH Pre-operative percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage: the results of a controlled trial. Br J Surg. 1984;71371- 375
PubMedArticle
31.
Hatfield  ARTobias  RTerblanche  J  et al.  Preoperative external biliary drainage in obstructive jaundice: a prospective controlled clinical trial. Lancet. 1982;2896- 899
PubMedArticle
32.
Lai  ECMok  FPFan  ST  et al.  Preoperative endoscopic drainage for malignant obstructive jaundice. Br J Surg. 1994;811195- 1198
PubMedArticle
33.
Pisters  PWHudec  WAHess  KR  et al.  Effect of preoperative biliary decompression on pancreaticoduodenectomy-associated morbidity in 300 consecutive patients. Ann Surg. 2001;23447- 55
PubMedArticle
34.
Sewnath  MEBirjmohun  RSRauws  EAHuibregtse  KObertop  HGouma  DJ The effect of preoperative biliary drainage on postoperative complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Am Coll Surg. 2001;192726- 734
PubMedArticle
35.
Povoski  SPKarpeh  MS  JrConlon  KCBlumgart  LHBrennan  MF Association of preoperative biliary drainage with postoperative outcome following pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 1999;230131- 142
PubMedArticle
36.
Heslin  MJHarrison  LEBrooks  ADHochwald  SNCoit  DGBrennan  MF Is intra-abdominal drainage necessary after pancreaticoduodenectomy? J Gastrointest Surg. 1998;2373- 378
PubMedArticle
37.
Martignoni  MEWagner  MKrahenbühl  LRedaelli  CAFriess  HBüchler  MW Effect of preoperative biliary drainage on surgical outcome after pancreatoduodenectomy. Am J Surg. 2001;18152- 59discussion, 87
PubMedArticle
38.
Cullen  JJSarr  MGIlstrup  DM Pancreatic anastomotic leak after pancreaticoduodenectomy: incidence, significance, and management. Am J Surg. 1994;168295- 298
PubMedArticle
39.
Aston  SJLongmire  WP  Jr Management of the pancreas after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 1974;179322- 327
PubMedArticle
40.
Gilsdorf  RBSpanos  P Factors influencing morbidity and mortality in pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 1973;177332- 337
PubMedArticle
41.
van Berge Henegouwen  MIDe Wit  LTVan Gulik  TMObertop  HGouma  DJ Incidence, risk factors, and treatment of pancreatic leakage after pancreaticoduodenectomy: drainage versus resection of the pancreatic remnant. J Am Coll Surg. 1997;18518- 24
PubMedArticle
42.
Yeh  TSJan  YYJeng  LB  et al.  Pancreaticojejunal anastomotic leak after pancreaticoduodenectomy: multivariate analysis of perioperative risk factors. J Surg Res. 1997;67119- 125
PubMedArticle
43.
Farley  DRSchwall  GTrede  M Completion pancreatectomy for surgical complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg. 1996;83176- 179
PubMedArticle
44.
Smith  CDSarr  MGvan Heerden  JA Completion pancreatectomy following pancreaticoduodenectomy: clinical experience. World J Surg. 1992;16521- 524
PubMedArticle
45.
Yeo  CJBarry  MKSauter  PK  et al.  Erythromycin accelerates gastric emptying after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 1993;218229- 238
PubMedArticle
46.
Müller  MFriess  HBeger  H  et al.  Gastric emptying following pylorus-preserving Whipple and duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection in patients with chronic pancreatitis. Am J Surg. 1997;173257- 263
PubMedArticle
Original Article
December 1, 2003

Changes in Morbidity After Pancreatic ResectionToward the End of Completion Pancreatectomy

Author Affiliations

From the Department of Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Bern, Inselspital, Bern, Switzerland.

Arch Surg. 2003;138(12):1310-1314. doi:10.1001/archsurg.138.12.1310
Abstract

Hypothesis  Advances in specialized centers for pancreatic diseases have improved surgical morbidity and outcome. In the past, postoperative local complications (pancreatic fistulae) were causing most of the mortality. Now, more patients experience postoperative complications related to their comorbidity.

Design  To report a prospective audit of a single center's experience with pancreatic resection during an 8-year period.

Setting  Tertiary referral center focused on pancreatic diseases.

Patients and Interventions  Six hundred seventeen consecutive patients underwent pancreatectomy between November 1, 1993, and August 31, 2001. The series included 468 pancreatic head resections (76%), 25 total pancreatectomies (4%), 88 left-sided resections (14%), and 36 others (6%).

Main Outcome Measures  Morbidity after pancreatic resection.

Results  Postoperative in-hospital mortality was 1.6%, and the additional operation rate was 4.1%. Four patients died of surgical complications and 6 of systemic complications. Systemic morbidity was 18% and consisted primarily of cardiopulmonary complications (13%). The most frequent postoperative complication was delayed gastric emptying (14%), which caused significant prolongation of the hospital stay. No patients died of a postoperative pancreatic fistula, which occurred in 3.2%, and no completion pancreatectomies were necessary.

Conclusions  Pancreatic resections can be performed with considerable safety and a low rate of pancreatic complications. More patients die of systemic complications than in the past, which increases the demand for precise preoperative patient selection. Completion pancreatectomy should no longer be considered in patients with a pancreatic fistula.

PANCREATIC SURGERY has changed substantially during the past 20 years. Pancreatic resection remains an intervention of particular significance, often technically challenging and with logistic demands for preoperative diagnostics and perioperative management. Recently, the value of centralization of pancreatic surgery in high-volume institutions has been demonstrated.14 The current mortality rate after pancreatic resection is less than 5%510 in specialized surgical centers, which is significantly lower than that in units with a low frequency of pancreatic surgery.11 Pancreatic anastomosis was long considered to be the critical step in pancreatic surgery, and it represented the main cause of morbidity and death. At a center for pancreatic surgery in Switzerland, we conducted a prospective audit with special attention to the recording of specific surgical and systemic morbidity after pancreatic resections. The aim of this study is to report a single center's experience with a high caseload during an 8-year period.

METHODS

Between November 1, 1993, and August 31, 2001, pancreatic resections were performed in 617 consecutive patients at the Department of Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Bern. All data were prospectively recorded on a standardized form.6 Two surgeons (M.W. and H.F.) monitored the completeness and consistency of data. A standardized preoperative diagnostic workup of the pancreas was performed by abdominal computed tomography (95%) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (67%) and, during the past 4 years, increasingly by magnetic resonance tomography (24%) and simultaneous magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. The preoperative risk assessment was performed by ergometry and spirometry and was graded according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists classification.

Patients received operative antibiotic prophylaxis (piperacillin-metronidazole or tazobactam) for 48 hours, a weight-adapted thrombosis prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin combined with compression stockings, and a pancreatic secretion inhibitor (octreotide, 300-600 µg/d subcutaneously for 7 days).12,13 In most cases, postoperative pain treatment was by peridural analgesia for 3 to 7 days. All patients were monitored postoperatively in the intensive care unit or the surgical intermediate care unit for at least 1 night.

SURGICAL TECHNIQUES

All pancreatic resections were performed in accordance with standardized procedures described elsewhere.6,1417 Pancreatic anastomosis after pancreatic head resection is performed as a 2-layer pancreaticojejunostomy (5/0 PDS [ETHICON ENDO-SURGERY, Division of Johnson & Johnson AG, Spreitenbach, Switzerland] or 5/0 Novafil [Davis & Geck, Division of American Cyanamid Co, Danbury, Conn], external suture rows: seromuscular onto the pancreatic capsule and parenchyma; internal suture rows: mucosa to mucosa of the pancreatic duct). Initially (1993-1994), end-to-end anastomoses (n = 34; 7%) to the pancreatic stump were carried out. Later, end-to-side anastomoses were performed exclusively (n = 434; 93%).18 Furthermore, in the case of duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resections, 150 additional side-to-side anastomoses to the remaining rim of the pancreatic head were performed. Reconstruction during pancreaticoduodenectomy was always performed with a single retrocolic jejunal Roux-en-Y loop. The pancreas, bile duct, and stomach (or duodenum in the case of pylorus-preserving pancreatic head resection) were anastomosed in consecutive order. No stents were used for the pancreatic or biliary anastomoses.

Left-sided pancreatic resections were usually performed without anastomoses (88%; 77/88). In 11 patients, an end-to-end (n = 4) or an end-to-side (n = 7) pancreaticojejunostomy was carried out.

In case of malignant periampullary tumors, a standardized lymphatic dissection was performed in the hepatoduodenal ligament, along the celiac trunk and the common hepatic artery to the right side of the superior mesenteric artery, behind the pancreatic head (cava and aorta), and along the portal and superior mesenteric veins. For tumors of the pancreatic body and the pancreatic tail, dissection of the lymph nodes was performed in the region of the celiac trunk and the superior mesenteric artery and vein, as well as behind the pancreas along the left side of the renal vein and the left adrenal gland. In each patient, 1 soft drainage was placed close to the pancreatic anastomosis or stump.

COMPLICATIONS

Mortality was defined as the total number of in-hospital deaths. Gastric emptying delay was defined as the necessity to leave the nasogastric tube in for more than 10 days after surgery or the need for nasogastric tube reinsertion after day 10. A pancreatic fistula was defined as a persisting secretion of more than 30 mL/d of drainage fluid with a high level of amylase (>5000 U/mL) for more than 10 days or the later reoccurrence of amylase-rich fluid via the drainage canal. A biliary fistula was diagnosed when fluid with a high level of bilirubin was secreted for more than 5 days. Postoperative bleeding was defined as the necessity to transfuse more than 2 U of packed red blood cells more than 24 hours after surgery or as the need for an additional operation because of hemorrhage.

STATISTICS

For statistical comparisons of the individual patient groups, either a 2-sided χ2 test with the Yates correction for continuity or a Fisher exact test was used. Quantitative variables were tested by means of the Kruskal-Wallis H test or a Mann-Whitney test. Values of P<.05 were considered significant. All calculations were performed using a statistical program (SPSS for Windows; SPSS Inc, Chicago, Ill).

RESULTS

The demographic patient data are summarized in Table 1. There were 403 resections (65%) for neoplasia and 214 operations (35%) for nonneoplastic diseases of the pancreas. Data regarding the specific pathological diagnoses of the diseases are given in Table 2. A total of 468 pancreatic head resections (76%), 25 total pancreatectomies (4%), 88 left-sided resections (14%), and 36 atypical resections (6%), including segmental resections and tumor enucleations, were performed. Nine surgeons performed the pancreatic resections. The median length of stay for all patients was 14 days (range, 4-118 days). The hospital stay was longest after total pancreatectomy (median, 20 days) and shortest after duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection (median, 12 days) (P<.001).

INTRAOPERATIVE VARIABLES

Operative time, blood loss, and blood transfusion requirements are summarized in Table 3. The length of surgery was significantly shorter for left-sided pancreatic resections compared with pancreatic head resections (P<.001), whereas blood loss and blood substitution volumes were identical. Compared with total pancreatectomy, operative time (P<.001), blood loss (P = .001), and blood transfusions (P = .002) were significantly lower for left-sided pancreatic resection. Likewise, clear differences were evident when total pancreatectomy was compared with pancreatic head resection (length of surgery: P = .01; blood loss: P = .001; and blood substitution: P<.001). Duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection entailed shorter surgery times (P<.04) and less blood loss (P = .001) and blood substitution (P<.01) than the Whipple operation.

HOSPITAL MORTALITY

Ten patients (2%) died in the hospital (Table 4). Analysis of the causes of death showed that 4 patients died of surgical complications. Of these, 2 patients died of an abscess in the pancreatic region with subsequent multiple-organ failure, 1 developed small bowel necrosis after enteral alimentation (percutaneous catheter jejunostomy), and 1 died of septic complications after a postoperative biliary fistula. Six patients died of systemic complications: 3 of multiple-organ failure, with no surgical complications as documented by autopsy; 2 of acute heart failure; and 1 of a systemic methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus catheter infection (central venous catheter). Regarding mortality, no statistical difference was evident among the various surgical procedures. Mortality was lowest in the group having duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection (0.7%) and highest after total pancreatectomy (4%).

POSTOPERATIVE MORBIDITY

Total morbidity was 36%, that is, 221 of 617 patients had 1 or more complications. The surgical complications (26%) are listed in Table 5. The most frequent complication was gastric emptying delay (14%). The incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistulae was 3.2% (n = 20), and it was highest after left-sided pancreatic resection (5/88; 5.7%). No patient with a pancreatic fistula died. One patient underwent another operation owing to a high-output pancreatic fistula (>200 mL/d) after duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection. Two patients underwent an interventional drainage procedure after developing a low-output fistula and a simultaneous perianastomotic abscess. In the remaining 17 patients, the fistulae healed with conservative treatment without additional interventions, and no patient with a pancreatic fistula had to undergo completion pancreatectomy. Additional operations were performed on 4 of the 11 patients with an intra-abdominal abscess; the remaining patients were treated by interventional radiology. Aside from septic complications, postoperative bleeding was the most frequent cause of additional surgery, but none of the 10 patients who underwent another surgery for postoperative bleeding died. Mortality after the second operation (16%) was significantly higher than that in the group without surgical revision (1%) (P<.001).

Systemic complications were mainly cardiopulmonary (Table 6). Systemic morbidity was highest after total pancreatectomy (32%).

COMMENT

Elective pancreatic resections have developed into safe surgical procedures, and mortality in specialized centers has decreased to 2% to 5%.14,6,8,19,20 This rate is consistent with that of the present series of 617 pancreatic resections performed during the past 8 years. Pancreatic surgery today is performed by a variety of techniques, which allows the surgeon to use a more tailored, disease-directed approach depending on the localization, extent, and gravity of the underlying disease.14,17,2123 We prefer organ preservation when feasible oncologically, and we adapted the various techniques into clinical routine with mortality less than 2% for the entire group and 0.7% for patients with chronic pancreatitis.

Several concepts to increase the safety of pancreatic surgery have been assimilated into clinical routine, including the formation of pancreatic centers with high patient volumes (caseload4); standardized perioperative management, including the inhibition of pancreatic secretion; and various methods to increase the safety of pancreatic resection, reconstruction, and anastomotic techniques.6,2428 Their relative importance with respect to safety remains to be tested. Centralization as a concept to improve results has been demonstrated in many surgical fields, including the pancreas,4,19 and may be more important for the postoperative outcome than differences in surgical technique. However, surgical advances pioneered by individual surgeons during the past 30 years allowed the current trend toward minimal mortality and the currently reported "acceptable morbidity."

Mortality and morbidity rates seem to be good in many large centers despite considerable differences in technique and complication rates (eg, pancreatic fistula rates of 2%-15%). Factors such as the technique of pancreatic anastomosis, including ductal drainage, type of reconstruction, the need for preoperative biliary drainage, and intraoperative drain placement, have been debated for many years. Their relative importance needs to be assessed in light of publications that demonstrate that a preoperative biliary drain2931 may be a risk factor for infectious complications3235 and that the placement of drains in the surgical area to allow postoperative wound drainage is not related to local complications.36 Our previous analysis of more than 250 consecutive patients undergoing pancreatic head resection could not document a positive effect of a preoperative biliary drain on morbidity, mortality, infection, and long-term survival rates. On the other hand, a multiple-variant regression analysis identified the presence of jaundice (bilirubin level >5.8 mg/dL [>100 µmol/L]) as a significant risk factor for postoperative hemorrhage.37

The cause of postoperative deaths has changed considerably. Four of the 10 patients died as a result of surgical complications. Six patients died of systemic complications. Previously, mortality was primarily attributed to complications from pancreatic anastomoses.3840 Although local complications decrease with increasing experience in pancreatic surgery, systemic complications, caused by the patient's comorbidity, need to be addressed by careful preoperative evaluation and perioperative management.

Standardized resections and improvement of the anastomotic technique may explain reduced local morbidity rates. In the present series, the postoperative rate of pancreatic fistula was 3.2%, including a 5.7% fistula rate in left-sided pancreatic resections. Only 1 (5%) of 20 patients, who had a high-output fistula, required a second operation, on the seventh day, after a duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection. We therefore propose that the pancreatic fistula should be treated conservatively as long as it is not accompanied by organ failure.4144 The concept of a second operation might be abandoned in patients with a pancreatic fistula, and we have not seen an indication to perform completion pancreatectomy during the past 8 years.

The morbidity rate after pancreatic resection remains high. The most frequent surgical complication was gastric emptying delay. Although this complication seldom occurs after left-sided resection and after duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection, we recorded delayed gastric emptying in 23% of the patients after pancreatoduodenectomy. Gastric emptying delay has clinical and economic relevance, as the affected patients remained in the hospital for more than a week longer, often requiring additional feeding. The positive effect of administration of erythromycin in the early postoperative period on gastric emptying after pancreatoduodenectomy was documented in a randomized study.45 However, delayed gastric emptying remains the unsolved postoperative complication, and, in the future, the method of resection and reconstruction needs to be studied.46

Left-sided pancreatic resections without anastomoses have significantly higher fistula rates compared with pancreatic head resections. The risk of a pancreatic leak from a directly closed pancreas is higher than from a technically correct pancreatic anastomosis. Although the rate of pancreatic fistula may be reduced by performing an anastomosis after left-sided resection, these fistulae without anastomosis regularly heal with external drainage and seem to have less potential for additional complications (erosive hemorrhage), perhaps because the pancreatic secretion is not activated through contact with intestinal enzymes.

In conclusion, this study underlines that pancreatic resections can be performed with considerable safety and low pancreatic complication rates. Under the present circumstances, completion pancreatectomy has probably lost its indications.

Back to top
Article Information

Corresponding author and reprints: Markus W. Büchler, MD, Department of General Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, D-69120 Heidelberg, Germany (e-mail: markus_buechler@med.uni-heidelberg.de).

Accepted for publication March 23, 2003.

This article is dedicated to Hans G. Beger, MD, for his lifetime achievements in pancreatic surgery.

References
1.
Gordon  TABowman  HMTielsch  JMBass  EBBurleyson  GPCameron  JL Statewide regionalization of pancreaticoduodenectomy and its effect on in-hospital mortality. Ann Surg. 1998;22871- 78
PubMedArticle
2.
Gouma  DJvan Geenen  RCvan Gulik  TM  et al.  Rates of complications and death after pancreaticoduodenectomy: risk factors and the impact of hospital volume. Ann Surg. 2000;232786- 795
PubMedArticle
3.
Neoptolemos  JPRussell  RCGBramhall  STheis  B Low mortality following resection for pancreatic and periampullary tumours in 1026 patients: UK survey of specialist pancreatic units: UK Pancreatic Cancer Group. Br J Surg. 1997;841370- 1376
PubMedArticle
4.
Birkmeyer  JDSiewers  AEFinlayson  EF  et al.  Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2002;3461128- 1137
PubMedArticle
5.
Balcom  JHRattner  DWWarshaw  ALChang  YFernandez-del Castillo  C Ten-year experience with 733 pancreatic resections: changing indications, older patients, and decreasing length of hospitalization. Arch Surg. 2001;136391- 398
PubMedArticle
6.
Büchler  MWFriess  HWagner  MKulli  CWagener  VZ'graggen  K Pancreatic fistula after pancreatic head resection: analysis of 331 consecutive patients. Br J Surg. 2000;87883- 889
PubMedArticle
7.
Trede  MSaeger  HDSchwall  GRumstadt  B Resection of pancreatic cancer: surgical achievements. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 1998;383121- 128
PubMedArticle
8.
Yeo  CJCameron  JLSohn  TA  et al.  Six hundred fifty consecutive pancreaticoduodenectomies in the 1990s: pathology, complications, and outcomes. Ann Surg. 1997;226248- 257
PubMedArticle
9.
Beger  HGBüchler  MWFriess  H Chirurgische ergebnisse und indikation zu adjuvanten massnahmen beim pankreascarcinom [in German]. Chirurg. 1994;65246- 252
PubMed
10.
Trede  MSchwall  GSaeger  HD Survival after pancreatoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 1990;211447- 458
PubMedArticle
11.
Bramhall  SRAllum  WHJones  AGAllwood  ACummins  CNeoptolemos  JP Treatment and survival in 13 560 patients with pancreatic cancer, and incidence of the disease, in the West Midlands: an epidemological study. Br J Surg. 1995;82111- 115
PubMedArticle
12.
Büchler  MFriess  HKlempa  I  et al.  The role of octreotide in the prevention of postoperative complications following pancreatic resection. Am J Surg. 1992;163125- 131
PubMedArticle
13.
Friess  HBeger  HGSulkowski  U  et al.  Randomized controlled multicentre study of the prevention of complications by octreotide in patients undergoing surgery for chronic pancreatitis. Br J Surg. 1995;821270- 1273
PubMedArticle
14.
Wagner  MZ'Graggen  KVagianos  CE  et al.  Pylorus-preserving total pancreatectomy: early and late results. Dig Surg. 2001;18188- 195
PubMedArticle
15.
Seiler  CAWagner  MSadowski  CKulli  CBüchler  MW Randomized prospective trial on pylorus preserving versus classic duodenopancreatectomy (Whipple): first clinical results. J Gastrointest Surg. 2000;4443- 452
PubMedArticle
16.
Andren-Sandberg  AWagner  MTihanyi  TLofgren  PFriess  H Technical aspects of left-sided pancreatic resection for cancer. Dig Surg. 1999;16305- 312
PubMedArticle
17.
Büchler  MWFriess  HMüller  MWWheatley  AMBeger  HU Randomized trial of duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection versus pylorus-preserving Whipple in chronic pancreatitis. Am J Surg. 1995;16965- 70
PubMedArticle
18.
Z'graggen  KUhl  WFriess  HBüchler  MW How to do a safe pancreatic anastomosis. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 2002;9733- 737
PubMedArticle
19.
Birkmeyer  JDFinlayson  SRTosteson  ANSharp  SMWarshaw  ALFisher  ES Effect of hospital volume on in-hospital mortality with pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surgery. 1999;125250- 256
PubMedArticle
20.
Birkmeyer  JDWarshaw  ALFinlayson  SRGrove  MRTosteson  AN Relationship between hospital volume and late survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surgery. 1999;126178- 183
PubMedArticle
21.
Warshaw  ALRattner  DWFernandez-del Castillo  CZ'Graggen  K Middle segment pancreatectomy: a novel technique for conserving pancreatic tissue. Arch Surg. 1998;133327- 331
PubMedArticle
22.
Beger  HGSchlosser  WFriess  HMBüchler  MW Duodenum-preserving head resection in chronic pancreatitis changes the natural course of the disease: a single-center 26-year experience. Ann Surg. 1999;230512- 519discussion, 519-523
PubMedArticle
23.
Balcolm  JFernandez-Del Castillo  CWarshaw  A Cystic lesions in the pancreas: when to watch, when to resect. Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2000;2152- 158
PubMedArticle
24.
O'Neil  SPickleman  JAranha  GV Pancreaticogastrostomy following pancreaticoduodenectomy: review of 102 consecutive cases. World J Surg. 2001;25567- 571
PubMedArticle
25.
Aranha  GV A technique for pancreaticogastrostomy. Am J Surg. 1998;175328- 329
PubMedArticle
26.
Takao  SShimazu  HMaenohara  SShinchi  HAikou  T Modified pancreaticogastrostomy following pancreaticoduodenectomy. Am J Surg. 1993;165317- 321
PubMedArticle
27.
Yeo  CJCameron  JLMaher  MM  et al.  A prospective randomized trial of pancreaticogastrostomy versus pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 1995;222580- 588discussion, 588-592
PubMedArticle
28.
Roder  JDStein  HJBöttcher  KABusch  RHeidecke  CDSiewert  JR Stented versus nonstented pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreatoduodenectomy: a prospective study. Ann Surg. 1999;22941- 48
PubMedArticle
29.
Pitt  HAGomes  ASLois  JF Does preoperative percutaneous biliary drainage reduce operative risk or increase hospital cost? Ann Surg. 1985;201545- 553
PubMedArticle
30.
McPherson  GABenjamin  ISHodgson  HJBowley  NBAllison  DJBlumgart  LH Pre-operative percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage: the results of a controlled trial. Br J Surg. 1984;71371- 375
PubMedArticle
31.
Hatfield  ARTobias  RTerblanche  J  et al.  Preoperative external biliary drainage in obstructive jaundice: a prospective controlled clinical trial. Lancet. 1982;2896- 899
PubMedArticle
32.
Lai  ECMok  FPFan  ST  et al.  Preoperative endoscopic drainage for malignant obstructive jaundice. Br J Surg. 1994;811195- 1198
PubMedArticle
33.
Pisters  PWHudec  WAHess  KR  et al.  Effect of preoperative biliary decompression on pancreaticoduodenectomy-associated morbidity in 300 consecutive patients. Ann Surg. 2001;23447- 55
PubMedArticle
34.
Sewnath  MEBirjmohun  RSRauws  EAHuibregtse  KObertop  HGouma  DJ The effect of preoperative biliary drainage on postoperative complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Am Coll Surg. 2001;192726- 734
PubMedArticle
35.
Povoski  SPKarpeh  MS  JrConlon  KCBlumgart  LHBrennan  MF Association of preoperative biliary drainage with postoperative outcome following pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 1999;230131- 142
PubMedArticle
36.
Heslin  MJHarrison  LEBrooks  ADHochwald  SNCoit  DGBrennan  MF Is intra-abdominal drainage necessary after pancreaticoduodenectomy? J Gastrointest Surg. 1998;2373- 378
PubMedArticle
37.
Martignoni  MEWagner  MKrahenbühl  LRedaelli  CAFriess  HBüchler  MW Effect of preoperative biliary drainage on surgical outcome after pancreatoduodenectomy. Am J Surg. 2001;18152- 59discussion, 87
PubMedArticle
38.
Cullen  JJSarr  MGIlstrup  DM Pancreatic anastomotic leak after pancreaticoduodenectomy: incidence, significance, and management. Am J Surg. 1994;168295- 298
PubMedArticle
39.
Aston  SJLongmire  WP  Jr Management of the pancreas after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 1974;179322- 327
PubMedArticle
40.
Gilsdorf  RBSpanos  P Factors influencing morbidity and mortality in pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 1973;177332- 337
PubMedArticle
41.
van Berge Henegouwen  MIDe Wit  LTVan Gulik  TMObertop  HGouma  DJ Incidence, risk factors, and treatment of pancreatic leakage after pancreaticoduodenectomy: drainage versus resection of the pancreatic remnant. J Am Coll Surg. 1997;18518- 24
PubMedArticle
42.
Yeh  TSJan  YYJeng  LB  et al.  Pancreaticojejunal anastomotic leak after pancreaticoduodenectomy: multivariate analysis of perioperative risk factors. J Surg Res. 1997;67119- 125
PubMedArticle
43.
Farley  DRSchwall  GTrede  M Completion pancreatectomy for surgical complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg. 1996;83176- 179
PubMedArticle
44.
Smith  CDSarr  MGvan Heerden  JA Completion pancreatectomy following pancreaticoduodenectomy: clinical experience. World J Surg. 1992;16521- 524
PubMedArticle
45.
Yeo  CJBarry  MKSauter  PK  et al.  Erythromycin accelerates gastric emptying after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg. 1993;218229- 238
PubMedArticle
46.
Müller  MFriess  HBeger  H  et al.  Gastric emptying following pylorus-preserving Whipple and duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection in patients with chronic pancreatitis. Am J Surg. 1997;173257- 263
PubMedArticle
×