Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is one of the most challenging endeavor and formidable procedures in abdominal surgery. This procedure is inherently difficult and associated with high mortality and complication morbidity. The revolution of the concept of surgical oncology, the modifications in surgical techniques, introduction of advanced surgical equipment and the developments of critical care medicine have led to significant reduction in reduced surgical mortality and complication morbidity. Comprehensive evaluation before operation, precise dissection during operation and management of the stump of pancreas in pancreaticoduodenectomy procedure are reviewed and comments are provided in this article.
Humans ; Pancreaticoduodenectomy ; methods

With the development of minimally invasive techniques, laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy has been gaining increasing recognition in recent years, but it is still associated with a relatively high morbidity and mortality compared with surgeries for gastrointestinal carcinoma, and its practice has highly complex procedure and longer learning curve. This is a result of the complex nature of the organ, the difficult access as a result of the retroperitoneal position and the number of technically challenging anastomoses required. We try to find the solution for the surgical difficulties encountered with laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy.
Humans ; Laparoscopy ; methods ; Pancreaticoduodenectomy ; methods

Humans ; Laparoscopy ; methods ; trends ; Pancreaticoduodenectomy ; methods

Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy(LPD)is one of the most challenging abdominal procedures.It has been developed for nearly 25 years since the first report in 1994.During the first 10 years,LPD has developed slowly due to widespread controversy and opposition.In the past 10 years,a number of breakthroughs have been made in LPD with the introduction of high-definition laparoscopy,improvements in laparoscopic instruments,advances in minimally invasive surgery,improved selections of patients,and accumulation of experiences in open pancreaticoduodenectomy(OPD).However,many controversies still exist.This review summarizes the strength and weakness of LPD versus OPD in terms of indications,learning curve,complications,short-term benefits,long-term oncology results,and cost and proposes its future directions.
Humans ; Laparoscopy ; Pancreatic Neoplasms ; surgery ; Pancreaticoduodenectomy ; methods

Humans ; Laparoscopy ; methods ; Pancreaticoduodenectomy ; methods ; Prospective Studies ; Robotics ; methods

No abstract available.
Catheterization/*methods ; Drainage/*methods ; Humans ; Male ; *Pancreaticoduodenectomy ; Postoperative Complications/*therapy

PURPOSE: In this study, we introduced a novel technique, the pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ), which uses only two transpancreatic sutures with buttresses (PJt), and compared the surgical outcomes with previously used methods, especially for hard pancreases. METHODS: A total of 101 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy with hard pancreases were enrolled and divided into 3 groups according to the method of pancreaticoenteric anastomosis: 30 patients (29.7%) underwent the conventional dunking method (Du), 31 patients (30.7%) underwent pancreaticogastrostomy using transpancreatic sutures (PGt) and 40 patients (39.6%) underwent PJ using transpancreatic sutures (PJt). The surgical outcomes were compared according to the type of anastomosis to analyze the feasibility and ease of each technique. RESULTS: The overall operative time was shorter in the PJt group (325.1 +/- 63.8 minutes) than in the PGt group (367.3 +/- 70.5 minutes) or the Du group (412.0 +/- 38.2 minutes, P < 0.001). In terms of pancreaticoenteric anastomosis time, it was also shorter in the PJt group (10.3 +/- 3.5 minutes) than in the Du group (20.7 +/- 0.7 minutes) or the PGt group (16.8 +/- 5.4 minutes, P = 0.005). Significant postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) developed in 2 cases (6.7%) in the Du group, whereas there were no POPF cases in the PGt or PJt groups (P = 0.086). Overall postoperative morbidities occurred in 31 cases (30.7%), and there were no significant differences among the 3 groups (P = 0.692). CONCLUSION: The novel PJ technique, which uses only two transpancreatic sutures with buttresses, is a very simple, easy and secure method for hard pancreases and can be performed in a shorter amount of time compared with conventional methods.
Humans ; Methods* ; Operative Time ; Pancreas* ; Pancreatic Fistula ; Pancreaticoduodenectomy ; Pancreaticojejunostomy* ; Sutures*

Pancreatic enteric anastomosis is an important step during pancreaticoduodenectomy. Based on the anastomosis site, pancreatic enteric anastomosis is classified as pancreaticojejunostomy anastomosis and pancreaticogastrostomy. Depending on the jejunum site, reconstruction can be perform as end-to-end or end-to-side anastomosis. Previous randomized clinical trials, showed no significant differences between pancreaticojejunostomy and pancreaticogastrostomy. Binding pancreaticojejunostomy and binding pancreaticogastrostomy are easy to perform. The rate of pancreatic leakage is related to the texture of the pancreas and the size of the pancreatic duct. It is helpful to reduce pancreatic leakage by placing a pancreatic duct stent. The simple and effective pancreatic enteric reconstruction is the future direction for minimizing leakage.
Humans ; Pancreatic Fistula ; etiology ; prevention & control ; Pancreaticoduodenectomy ; Pancreaticojejunostomy ; methods

Pancreatic cancer still represents a serious medical concern for which no adequate solution has thus far been found. Surgical resection, when possible, remains the primary treatment modality and can result in long-term cure. The value of more radical resection remains open to debate, despite the negative results of some recent randomized trials with standard vs. extended lymphadenectomy. More effective patient selection, more rational resection, and more compositive treatment should be emphasized in management strategies. In the future, appropriately designed randomized trials of standard vs. extended resections may confirm the benefit of extended surgical resections. In addition, well powered trials of adjuvant therapies strategies together with surgical resections may identify more effective combinations, which may improve the survival of patients with pancreatic cancer.
Humans ; Lymph Node Excision ; methods ; Pancreatectomy ; methods ; trends ; Pancreatic Neoplasms ; pathology ; surgery ; Pancreaticoduodenectomy ; adverse effects ; methods

BACKGROUNDPostoperative pancreatic fistula remains one of the most common and troublesome complications following pancreaticoduodenectomy. No consensus exists regarding the optimal pancreaticojejunostomy reconstruction technique to reduce this complication. We aimed to perform a systematic review comparing two commonly used techniques of pancreaticojejunostomy reconstruction (duct-to-mucosa versus invagination), by meta-analysis and assessment of evidence quality.

METHODSDatabases searched including The Cochrane Library, Medline, PubMed, Embase, etc. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing duct-to-mucosa and invagination pancreaticojejunostomy were included. Outcomes of interest were pancreatic fistula rate, mortality, morbidity, reoperation and hospital stay. Pooled estimates were expressed as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference.

RESULTSFrom 321 identified abstracts, four RCTs (467 patients; duct-to-mucosa: 232; invagination: 235) were included. Pancreatic fistula rate (RR, 0.74; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.24-2.28; P = 0.60), mortality (RR, 1.18; 95% CI: 0.39- 3.54; P = 0.77), morbidity (RR, 0.91; 95% CI: 0.69-1.21; P = 0.53), reoperation (RR, 1.09; 95% CI: 0.54-2.22; P = 0.81) and hospital stay (mean difference, -1.78; 95% CI: -4.60-1.04; P = 0.22) were similar between techniques.

CONCLUSIONSDuct-to-mucosa and invagination pancreaticojejunostomy are comparable with regards to assessed parameters. High-quality, large-volume, multi-center RCTs with standard outcome definitions are required.

Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Pancreaticoduodenectomy ; methods ; Pancreaticojejunostomy ; methods