Pancreaticojejunostomy versus pancreaticogastrostomy: systematic review and meta-analysis |
| |
Authors: | Wente Moritz N Shrikhande Shailesh V Müller Michael W Diener Markus K Seiler Christoph M Friess Helmut Büchler Markus W |
| |
Affiliation: | Department of General, Visceral and Trauma Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. |
| |
Abstract: | ![]() OBJECTIVE: Pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) and pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) are the commonly preferred methods of anastomosis after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). The ideal choice of anastomosis remains a matter of debate. DATA SOURCES: Articles published until end of March 2006 comparing PJ and PG after PD were searched. STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers independently assessed quality and eligibility of the studies and extracted data for further analysis. Meta-analysis was performed with a random-effects model by using weighted odds ratios. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Sixteen articles were included; meta-analysis of 3 randomized controlled trials (RCT) revealed no significant difference between PJ and PG regarding overall postoperative complications, pancreatic fistula, intra-abdominal fluid collection, or mortality. On the contrary, analysis of 13 nonrandomized observational clinical studies (OCSs) showed significant results in favor of PG for the outcome parameters with a reduction of pancreatic fistula and mortality in favor of PG. CONCLUSIONS: All OCSs reported superiority of PG over PJ, most likely influenced by publication bias. In contrast, all RCTs failed to show advantage of a particular technique, suggesting that both PJ and PG provide equally good results. This meta-analysis yet again highlights the singular importance of performing well-designed RCTs and the role of evidence-based medicine in guiding modern surgical practice. |
| |
Keywords: | Pancreaticoduodenectomy Pancreaticojejunostomy Pancreaticogastrostomy Complications Meta-analysis Systematic review |
本文献已被 ScienceDirect PubMed 等数据库收录! |
|