Efficacy comparison between pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy and standard pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary carcinoma
Hongxu Zhu,Wentao Zhou,Yefei Rong,Tiantao Kuang,Wenhui Lou,Dayong Jin,Dansong Wang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1673-9752.2015.10.016
2015-01-01
Abstract:Objective To compare the short-term efficacy of pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPPD) and standard pancreaticoduodenectomy (SPD) for the treatment of periampullary carcinoma.Methods The clinical data of 85 patients with periampullary carcinoma who were admitted to the Zhongshan Hospital of Fudan University from October 2010 to October 2012 were retrospectively analyzed.Forty-four patients who underwent PPPD were divided into the PPPD group and 41 patients who underwent SPD were divided into the SPD group.The pancreatic fistula(Grade B and above), biliary fistula, blood loss, intra-abdominal infection, delayed gastric emptying (DGE) and prognosis were analyzed.Patients were followed up by telephone interview and outpatient examination once every 3 months within postoperative 1 year and once every 6 months within postoperative 2-3 years till October 2014.Count data were analyzed using the chi-square test, measurement data with normal distribution were presented as M(Qn) and comparison was analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test.The survival curve was drawn by the Kaplan-Meier method, and survival rate was analyzed using the Log rank test.Results The operation time was 195 minutes (180 minutes, 240 minutes) in the PPPD group and 210 minutes (180 minutes,300 minutes) in the SPD group, with a significant difference (Z =-2.090, P ＜ 0.05).The volume of intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative blood transfusion and duration of postoperative hospital stay were 200 mL(113 mL,288 mL), 0 mL(0 mL, 0 mL) and 17 days(12 days, 24 days) in the PPPD group, and 200 mL(150 mL, 325 mL),0 mL(0 mL, 400 mL) and 16 days(12 days, 30 days) in the SPD group respectively, with no significant differences between the 2 groups (Z =-1.185,-1.780,-0.533, P ＞0.05).There was no perioperative death and incidence of overall complication was 42.4％ (36/85) with pancreatic fistula, intra-abdominal infection and DGE as the top 3 common postoperative complications.The incidence of DGE was 20.5％ (9/44) in the PPPD group,which was significantly different from 4.9％ (2/41) in the SPD group (x2=4.571, P ＜ 0.05).The incidence of pancreatic fistula, biliary fistula, intra-abdominal infection, postoperative bleeding and 2 or more complications were 20.5 ％ (9/44), 2.3 ％ (1/44), 15.9％ (7/44), 4.5 ％ (2/44), 25.0％ (11/44) in the PPPD group, and 14.6％ (6/41), 4.9％ (2/41), 19.5％ (8/41), 7.3％ (3/41), 14.6％ (6/41) in the SPD group, respectively, showing no significant difference between the 2 groups (x2=0.495, 0.423, 0.295, 0.190, 1.425, P ＞ 0.05).Eighty-five patients were followed up for 6-47 months with a median time of 31 months, and postoperative overall 1-and 3-year survival rates were 95.3％ and 75.5％, respectively.The 1-and 3-year survival rates were 97.7％ and 78.9％ in the PPPD group, and 92.7％ and 71.7％ in the SPD group, respectively, with no significant difference in 3-year survival rate (x2=0.690, P ＞0.05).The 3-year overall survival rate was 80.5％ in patients without lymph node involvement (LNI) compared with 54.9％ in patients with LNI, showing a significant difference (x2=4.290, P ＜ 0.05).Conclusions Both PPPD and SPD have good short-term efficacy for periampullary carcinoma.There is no significant difference between PPPD and SPD concerning short-term survival rate of periampullary carcinoma.PPPD has shorter operation time, but has a higher postoperative DGE incidence.LNI is a significant prognostic factor for short-term survival of periampullary carcinoma.PPPD is not recommended while the lymph nodes are involved.