Cargando…
Pancreatogastrostomy versus Pancreatojejunostomy: An Up-to-Date Meta-Analysis of RCTs
BACKGROUND: A meta-analysis was conducted in order to provide an up-to-date comparison of pancreatogastrostomy (PG) and pancreatojejunostomy (PJ), after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), in terms of clinically significant postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) and other postoperative complications. METHO...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5535752/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28798875 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/7526494 |
_version_ | 1783253901271629824 |
---|---|
author | Perivoliotis, Konstantinos Sioka, Eleni Tatsioni, Athina Stefanidis, Ioannis Zintzaras, Elias Zacharoulis, Dimitrios |
author_facet | Perivoliotis, Konstantinos Sioka, Eleni Tatsioni, Athina Stefanidis, Ioannis Zintzaras, Elias Zacharoulis, Dimitrios |
author_sort | Perivoliotis, Konstantinos |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: A meta-analysis was conducted in order to provide an up-to-date comparison of pancreatogastrostomy (PG) and pancreatojejunostomy (PJ), after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), in terms of clinically significant postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) and other postoperative complications. METHODS: This meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. A systematic literature search in MEDLINE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials was performed. Fixed Effects or Random Effects model was used, based on the Cochran Q test. RESULTS: In total, 10 studies (1629 patients) were included. There was no statistical significance between PG and PJ regarding the rate of clinically significant POPF (OR: 0.70, 95%CI: 0.46–1.06). PG was associated with a higher rate of postpancreatoduodenectomy haemorrhage (PPH) (OR: 1.52, 95%CI: 1.08–2.14). There was no difference between the two techniques in terms of clinically significant PPH (OR: 1.35, 95%CI: 0.95–1.93) and clinically significant postoperative delayed gastric emptying (DGE) (OR: 0.98, 95%CI: 0.59–1.63). DISCUSSION: There is no difference between the two anastomotic techniques regarding the rate of clinically significant POPF. Given several limitations, more large scale high quality RCTs are required. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5535752 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Hindawi |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-55357522017-08-10 Pancreatogastrostomy versus Pancreatojejunostomy: An Up-to-Date Meta-Analysis of RCTs Perivoliotis, Konstantinos Sioka, Eleni Tatsioni, Athina Stefanidis, Ioannis Zintzaras, Elias Zacharoulis, Dimitrios Int J Surg Oncol Review Article BACKGROUND: A meta-analysis was conducted in order to provide an up-to-date comparison of pancreatogastrostomy (PG) and pancreatojejunostomy (PJ), after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), in terms of clinically significant postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) and other postoperative complications. METHODS: This meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. A systematic literature search in MEDLINE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials was performed. Fixed Effects or Random Effects model was used, based on the Cochran Q test. RESULTS: In total, 10 studies (1629 patients) were included. There was no statistical significance between PG and PJ regarding the rate of clinically significant POPF (OR: 0.70, 95%CI: 0.46–1.06). PG was associated with a higher rate of postpancreatoduodenectomy haemorrhage (PPH) (OR: 1.52, 95%CI: 1.08–2.14). There was no difference between the two techniques in terms of clinically significant PPH (OR: 1.35, 95%CI: 0.95–1.93) and clinically significant postoperative delayed gastric emptying (DGE) (OR: 0.98, 95%CI: 0.59–1.63). DISCUSSION: There is no difference between the two anastomotic techniques regarding the rate of clinically significant POPF. Given several limitations, more large scale high quality RCTs are required. Hindawi 2017 2017-07-17 /pmc/articles/PMC5535752/ /pubmed/28798875 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/7526494 Text en Copyright © 2017 Konstantinos Perivoliotis et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Review Article Perivoliotis, Konstantinos Sioka, Eleni Tatsioni, Athina Stefanidis, Ioannis Zintzaras, Elias Zacharoulis, Dimitrios Pancreatogastrostomy versus Pancreatojejunostomy: An Up-to-Date Meta-Analysis of RCTs |
title | Pancreatogastrostomy versus Pancreatojejunostomy: An Up-to-Date Meta-Analysis of RCTs |
title_full | Pancreatogastrostomy versus Pancreatojejunostomy: An Up-to-Date Meta-Analysis of RCTs |
title_fullStr | Pancreatogastrostomy versus Pancreatojejunostomy: An Up-to-Date Meta-Analysis of RCTs |
title_full_unstemmed | Pancreatogastrostomy versus Pancreatojejunostomy: An Up-to-Date Meta-Analysis of RCTs |
title_short | Pancreatogastrostomy versus Pancreatojejunostomy: An Up-to-Date Meta-Analysis of RCTs |
title_sort | pancreatogastrostomy versus pancreatojejunostomy: an up-to-date meta-analysis of rcts |
topic | Review Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5535752/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28798875 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/7526494 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT perivoliotiskonstantinos pancreatogastrostomyversuspancreatojejunostomyanuptodatemetaanalysisofrcts AT siokaeleni pancreatogastrostomyversuspancreatojejunostomyanuptodatemetaanalysisofrcts AT tatsioniathina pancreatogastrostomyversuspancreatojejunostomyanuptodatemetaanalysisofrcts AT stefanidisioannis pancreatogastrostomyversuspancreatojejunostomyanuptodatemetaanalysisofrcts AT zintzaraselias pancreatogastrostomyversuspancreatojejunostomyanuptodatemetaanalysisofrcts AT zacharoulisdimitrios pancreatogastrostomyversuspancreatojejunostomyanuptodatemetaanalysisofrcts |