European Journal of Surgical Oncology
Volume 34, Issue 11 , Pages 1237-1245, November 2008

A comparison of pancreaticoduodenectomy with pylorus preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy: A meta-analysis of 2822 patients

  • N. Iqbal

      Affiliations

    • Barts and The London HPB Centre, The Royal London Hospital, London, UK
  • ,
  • R.E. Lovegrove

      Affiliations

    • Imperial College London, Department of Biosurgery and Surgical Technology, St Mary's Hospital, London, UK
  • ,
  • H.S. Tilney

      Affiliations

    • Imperial College London, Department of Biosurgery and Surgical Technology, St Mary's Hospital, London, UK
  • ,
  • A.T. Abraham

      Affiliations

    • Barts and The London HPB Centre, The Royal London Hospital, London, UK
  • ,
  • S. Bhattacharya

      Affiliations

    • Barts and The London HPB Centre, The Royal London Hospital, London, UK
  • ,
  • P.P. Tekkis

      Affiliations

    • Imperial College London, Department of Biosurgery and Surgical Technology, St Mary's Hospital, London, UK
  • ,
  • H.M. Kocher

      Affiliations

    • Barts and The London HPB Centre, The Royal London Hospital, London, UK
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Barts and The London HPB Centre, The Royal London Hospital, Whitechapel, London E1 1BB, UK. Tel.: +44 20 7014 0416; fax: +44 20 7014 0400.

Accepted 17 December 2007.

Abstract 

Background

The gold-standard for surgical excision of peri-ampullary tumours has not been established despite numerous studies, due to conflicting outcomes.

Aim

To consolidate the published evidence and compare outcomes between pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) and pylorus preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPPD) across all published comparative studies.

Methods

Using meta-analytical techniques the study compared: operative details, post-operative adverse events and survival following PD and PPPD. Comparative studies published between 1986 and 2005 of PD versus PPPD were included. A random effect model was employed, with significance reported at the 5% level.

Results

32 studies comprising 2822 patients (1335 PD and 1487 PPPD), including 5 randomized controlled trials with 421 patients (215 PD and 206 PPPD) were included. Patients undergoing PPPD were found to have smaller tumours (weighted mean difference (WMD) −0.54cm, p=0.030), although no significant difference in the number of patients with stage III or IV disease existed between the groups (odds ratio, OR 1.55, p=0.320). Decreased operating times (WMD −41.3min, p=0.010) and fewer blood transfusions (WMD −0.9units, p<0.001) were observed in the PPPD group. There was no difference in post-operative complications, including pancreatic and biliary leaks or fistulae, between the two groups. It was suggested that peri-operative mortality was decreased in the PPPD group (OR 1.7, p=0.040), and overall survival was better (hazard ratio (HR) 0.66, p=0.02), although this did not remain significant on subgroup analysis.

Conclusions

Both PD and PPPD had similar peri-operative adverse events, however, in overall analysis PPPD has lower mortality and improved long-term patient survival, although this was not reflected in the sub-group analysis.

Keywords: Survival, Gastric emptying, Length of stay, Operative time, Complications, Blood loss, Survival

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 This work was presented in the Poster Presentation session at 7th World Congress of International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association on 5 September 2006 in Edinburgh, Scotland and abstracted as HPB 2006;8(Suppl 2):224.

PII: S0748-7983(07)00667-1

doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2007.12.004

European Journal of Surgical Oncology
Volume 34, Issue 11 , Pages 1237-1245, November 2008