Comparison of wound healing after pancreaticojejunostomy with three anastomotic methods in piglets.
- Author:
Ying-bin LIU
1
;
Jin-hui ZHU
;
Jian-wei WANG
;
He-qing FANG
;
Jiang-tao LI
;
Fu-bao LIU
;
Jian-feng XUE
;
Xu-an WANG
;
Wei-long CAI
;
Jun WANG
;
Shu-you PENG
Author Information
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH: Anastomosis, Surgical; methods; Animals; Female; Male; Pancreaticojejunostomy; adverse effects; methods; Surgical Stomas; pathology; Swine; Wound Healing
- From: Chinese Journal of Surgery 2006;44(5):339-343
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVETo evaluate wound healing after pancreaticojejunostomy of three anastomotic methods.
METHODSFifty-four domestic piglets were divided into three groups according to the types of anastomoses: group of end-to-end pancreaticojejunal invagination (EE group), group of binding pancreaticojejunostomy (BP group) and group of inkwell pancreaticojejunostomy (IP group). Bursting pressure, breaking strength and histopathological findings of anastomosis were assessed on operative day and on the 5th and 10th day after operation.
RESULTSBursting pressure was (67+/-8) mm Hg, (96+/-11) mm Hg and (131+/-9) mm Hg in EE group on day 0, 5 and 10; and (140+/-8) mm Hg, (179+/-10) mm Hg and (269+/-13) mm Hg in BP group; and (102+/-10) mm Hg, (171+/-18) mm Hg and (254+/-24) mm Hg in IP group. Compare to EE group, bursting pressure of BP group and IP group were all increased with significant differences (P<0.05). Another significant difference was observed between BP group and IP group after anastomoses on operative day. Breaking strength was (4.6+/-0.6) N, (5.8+/-0.5) N and (7.1+/-0.6) N in EE group on 0 d, 5 d and 10 d; and (4.5+/-0.4) N, (6.6+/-0.4) N and (10.0+/-0.6) N in BP group; and (4.6+/-0.3) N, (6.5+/-0.4) N and (9.1+/-0.9) N in IP group. A similar value of anastomoses was shown in BP group and IP group on day 0, day 5 and day 10, but significant increase was demonstrated compared to EE group on day 5 and 10. Anastomotic site was well repaired by connective tissue and the cut surface of pancreatic stump was covered by mucosal epithelium in BP group and IP group on day 10, but the cut surface was incompletely repaired by granulation tissue and no regeneration of the epithelium was found in EE group.
CONCLUSIONSWound healing of binding pancreaticojejunostomy and inkwell pancreaticojejunostomy is more rapid and better than end-to-end pancreaticojejunal invagination, but breaking strength of inkwell pancreaticojejunostomy is weaker than binding pancreaticojejunostomy.