Pancreatogastrostomy versus Pancreatojejunostomy: An Up-to-Date Meta-Analysis of RCTs.

IF 1.6 Q4 ONCOLOGY

International Journal of Surgical Oncology Pub Date : 2017-01-01 Epub Date: 2017-07-17 DOI:10.1155/2017/7526494

Konstantinos Perivoliotis, Eleni Sioka, Athina Tatsioni, Ioannis Stefanidis, Elias Zintzaras, Dimitrios Zacharoulis

{"title":"Pancreatogastrostomy versus Pancreatojejunostomy: An Up-to-Date Meta-Analysis of RCTs.","authors":"Konstantinos Perivoliotis, Eleni Sioka, Athina Tatsioni, Ioannis Stefanidis, Elias Zintzaras, Dimitrios Zacharoulis","doi":"10.1155/2017/7526494","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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.","PeriodicalId":45960,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Surgical Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2017/7526494","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Surgical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/7526494","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/7/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 16

Abstract

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.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

胰胃吻合术与胰空肠吻合术:一项最新的随机对照试验荟萃分析。

背景:一项荟萃分析旨在比较胰十二指肠切除术(PD)后胰胃吻合术(PG)和胰空肠吻合术(PJ)在临床上显著的术后胰瘘(POPF)和其他术后并发症方面的最新情况。方法:本荟萃分析依据PRISMA指南和Cochrane干预措施系统评价手册进行。在MEDLINE和Cochrane对照临床试验中央注册库中进行了系统的文献检索。采用固定效应或随机效应模型，基于Cochran Q检验。结果:共纳入10项研究(1629例患者)。PG组与PJ组临床显著性POPF发生率比较，差异无统计学意义(OR: 0.70, 95%CI: 0.46 ~ 1.06)。PG与胰十二指肠切除术后出血(PPH)发生率较高相关(OR: 1.52, 95%CI: 1.08-2.14)。两种方法在临床显著的PPH (OR: 1.35, 95%CI: 0.95-1.93)和临床显著的术后胃排空延迟(DGE) (OR: 0.98, 95%CI: 0.59-1.63)方面无差异。讨论:两种吻合技术在临床上显著的POPF发生率方面没有差异。考虑到一些限制，需要更多的大规模高质量随机对照试验。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

International Journal of Surgical Oncology ONCOLOGY-

CiteScore

3.70

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

20 weeks

期刊介绍： International Journal of Surgical Oncology is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that publishes original research articles, review articles, and clinical studies in all areas of surgical oncology.