These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Pancreatic function and quality of life after resection of the head of the pancreas in chronic pancreatitis. A prospective, randomized comparative study after duodenum preserving resection of the head of the pancreas versus Whipple's operation].
    Author: Klempa I, Spatny M, Menzel J, Baca I, Nustede R, Stöckmann F, Arnold W.
    Journal: Chirurg; 1995 Apr; 66(4):350-9. PubMed ID: 7634946.
    Abstract:
    Given an indication for surgery in patients with chronic pancreatitis, such as distal common bile duct obstruction, duodenal stenosis, or dilated pancreatic duct with stones and congestion, the surgeon must decide the type of operation to perform. A duodenopancreatectomy, the Whipple procedure, is widely considered to be the gold standard. It is highly effective in relieving pain and eliminating the structural abnormalities noted above. Duodenum-preserving resection of the head of the pancreas (DPRHP) seems to be an attractive alternative to pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) in the treatment of chronic pancreatitis. In a clinical prospective randomized trial the efficiency of both operative methods was investigated. Between 7/1987 and 12/1993 43 patients were randomly assigned to undergo either a Whipple procedure (n = 21) or DPRHP (n = 22). Data on postoperative course, mortality, and postoperative morbidity were compiled. As concerns long-term results, postoperative hormonal status (insulin, neurotensin, cholecystokinin, gastrin) was checked, basal and stimulated with a standardized meal, using standard hormonal assay kits. All patients with PD survived, whereas one with DPRHP died from peritonitis. Patients with DPRHP had a significant more rapid convalescence (16.5 vs. 21.7 days). The range for postoperative follow-up is from 36 months to 5.5 years. In the DPRHP group 18 patients are in good condition. Two had diabetes and one developed carcinoma. In the PD group one died from hepatic coma, 14 are in good condition and 6 developed diabetes. All gained body weight with an average of 6.4 vs. 4.9 kg, DPRHP vs. PD. A difference between DPRHP and PD was obvious for the postoperative hormonal status. Results are satisfactory in both groups. For patients with DPRHP however, we see a quicker convalescence and a significant benefit as concerns postoperative hormonal status.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]