4.5 Article

Identification of Risk Factors for Pancreatic Exocrine Insufficiency After Pancreaticoduodenectomy Using a 13C-Labeled Mixed Triglyceride Breath Test

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY
卷 39, 期 2, 页码 516-525

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00268-014-2832-4

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

There are only a few reports concerning long-term exocrine function after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), although the number of long-term survivors has increased. We assessed pancreatic exocrine function after PD in 189 patients to identify risk factors for pancreatic exocrine insufficiency. We evaluated patients' exocrine function by using the C-13-labeled mixed triglyceride breath test, a noninvasive test feasible in outpatient service units. The present study included 99 patients that underwent pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) at Wakayama Medical University Hospital and 90 patients that underwent pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) at Hiroshima University Hospital, the standard reconstruction techniques during PD at the respective hospitals. We also analyzed long-term morphological changes of remnant pancreas by computed tomography (main pancreatic duct dilation and parenchymal atrophy), nutritional status, and endocrine function. Independent risk factors for exocrine insufficiency after PD include hard pancreas (P = 0.003, odds ratio; 3.157) and PG reconstruction (P = 0.040, odds ratio; 2.321). Breath test results correlated significantly with post-operative morphological changes, nutritional status, and endocrine function. Atrophic changes of the remnant pancreas in the PG group were more severe than those in the PJ group. Furthermore, for patients with a soft pancreas, postoperative body weight changes, prognostic nutritional index, serum total protein levels as well as exocrine test were worse in the PG group, compared with the PJ group. Our results showed that PJ reconstruction might be superior to PG during PD, from the viewpoint of long-term pancreatic exocrine function, although further prospective studies are needed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据