COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
REVIEW
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Isolated Roux-en-Y pancreaticojejunostomy versus conventional pancreaticojejunostomy after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the advantage between isolated Roux loop pancreaticojejunostomy (IPJ) and conventional pancreaticojejunostomy (CPJ) after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD).

METHODS: Comparative studies on this topic published between January 1976 and April 2015 in PubMed, EMbase, EBSCO, Science Citation Index Expanded and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library were searched, and selected based on specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. Perioperative outcomes such as postoperative pancreatic fistula, delayed gastric emptying, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative blood transfusion, postoperative bleeding, intra-abdominal abscess, bile leakage, wound infection, morbidity and mortality were compared. Pooled odds ratios (OR) or weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using either fixed- or random-effects model.

RESULTS: Six studies were included with two randomized controlled and four nonrandomized trials. A total of 712 patients (359 patients from the IPJ group and 353 patients from the CPJ group) were analyzed. The pooled results revealed that IPJ had longer operation time (WMD = 36.55, 95% CI 6.98 to 66.11, P = 0.02). However, there were no significant differences between both groups in postoperative pancreatic fistula, intraoperative blood loss, blood transfusion, delayed gastric emptying, postoperative bleeding, intra-abdominal abscess, bile leakage, wound infection, morbidity, mortality and postoperative hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS: PD with IPJ was comparable to CPJ in intraoperative outcomes and postoperative complications. However, further randomized controlled trials should be undertaken to ascertain these findings.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app