Prophylactic gastrojejunostomy for unresectable periampullary carcinoma

Department of Surgery, Royal Free Campus, UCL Medical School, 9th Floor, Royal Free Hospital, Pond Street, London, UK, NW3 2QG.
Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) (Impact Factor: 6.03). 10/2010; 2(10):CD008533. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008533.pub2
Source: PubMed


The role of prophylactic gastrojejunostomy in patients with unresectable periampullary cancer is controversial.
To determine whether prophylactic gastrojejunostomy should be performed routinely in patients with unresectable periampullary cancer.
We searched the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2010, issue 3), MEDLINE, EMBASE and Science Citation Index Expanded until April 2010.
We included randomised controlled trials comparing prophylactic gastrojejunostomy versus no gastrojejunostomy in patients with unresectable periampullary cancer (irrespective of language or publication status).
Two authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and independently extracted data. We analysed data with both the fixed-effect and the random-effects models using Review Manager (RevMan). We calculated the hazard ratio (HR), risk ratio (RR), or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) based on an intention-to-treat or available case analysis.
We identified two trials (of high risk of bias) involving 152 patients randomised to gastrojejunostomy (80 patients) and no gastrojejunostomy (72 patients). In both trials, patients were found to be unresectable during exploratory laparotomy. Most of the patients also underwent biliary-enteric drainage. There was no evidence of difference in the overall survival (HR 1.02; 95% CI 0.84 to 1.25), peri-operative mortality or morbidity, quality of life, or hospital stay (MD 0.97 days; 95%CI -0.18 to 2.12) between the two groups. The proportion of patients who developed long term gastric outlet obstruction was significantly lower in the prophylactic gastrojejunostomy group (2/80; 2.5%) compared with no gastrojejunostomy group (20/72; 27.8%) (RR 0.10; 95%CI 0.03 to 0.37). The operating time was significantly longer in the gastrojejunostomy group compared with no gastrojejunostomy group (MD 45.00 minutes; 95%CI 21.39 to 68.61).
Routine prophylactic gastrojejunostomy is indicated in patients with unresectable periampullary cancer undergoing exploratory laparotomy (with or without hepaticojejunostomy).

Download full-text


Available from: MP Senthil Kumar,
  • Source
    • "Choledochojejunostomy is preferred method for bilio-pancreatic malignancy8,13 because majority of cases are not curable & present with obstructive jaundice6 thus most commonly performed method is cholecystojejunostomy for irresectable pancreatic carcinoma14 along with routine gastrojejunostomy.15 In this study different variants of choledochojejunostomy in the form of side to side choledochojejunostomy (6.02%), side to side choledochojejunostomy with enter-enterostomy (6.02%) and Roux-en-Y choledochojejunostomy (12.05%) were performed mainly for benign conditions such as biliary strictures, biliary obstruction of unknown aetiology & biliary injuries. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives: This study reports the indications and outcome of various biliary bypass surgical procedures from a single centre over a period of 10 years. Methods: This is a prospective observational study conducted over a period of 10 years (January 2001-december 2010). A total of 1500 patients were included, who underwent pancreatico-biliary surgery due to common bile duct (CBD) stones, congenital anomalies of biliary tree, unoperable pancreatico-biliary malignancies, CBD strictures and cases who developed iatrogenic biliary injuries during cholecystectomy (both open & laproscopic) during this period of time. The patients who required biliary bypass surgery were further analysed for indications and outcome. Results: Out of 1500 patients 83(5.53%) required biliary bypass surgical procedures. The CBD stones were observed as the most common indication (25.3%), followed by CBD injuries after open(10.84%) or laproscopic-cholecystectomy (14.46%), carcinoma head of pancreas (12.05%) and CBD obstruction(14.46%) either due to CBD strictures or unknown distal obstruction. Roux-en-Y-hepatico-jejunostomy (26.51%) was the most frequently performed procedure, followed by choledochoduodenostomy and Roux-en-Y choledocho-jejunostomy (i.e. 25.3% and 12.05% respectively). Roux-en-Y biliary bypass procedure was observed to be associated with better outcome in terms of rate of complications as well duration of hospital stay. Conclusion: Biliary bypass surgical procedures are the better options to restore the continuity of biliary system in patients with iatrogenic biliary tree injuries and un-operable pancreatico-biliary malignancy. Roux-en-Y biliary bypass procedure is safe and problem solving method in these cases.
    Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences Online 05/2013; 29(3):799-802. DOI:10.12669/pjms.293.3394 · 0.23 Impact Factor

  • Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer 08/2013; 45(S1). DOI:10.1007/s12029-013-9538-y · 0.38 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Laparoscopy is recommended to detect radiographically occult metastases in patients with pancreatic cancer before curative resection. The selection process inherent in NAT to include post-treatment, preoperative imaging may make routine DL unnecessary. We hypothesized that DL remains cost effective in patients who underwent curative resection for localized PC treated with either SF or the NAT. Methods: Decision tree modeling compared routine DL versus exploratory laparotomy (ExLap) at the time of curative resection for – (i) patients with resectable PC (R-PC) treated with SF, and (ii) patients with borderline PC (BR) treated with NAT. Costs (US$) from payers’ perspective, quality-adjusted-life-months (QALMs) and incremental-cost-effectiveness-ratios (ICER) were calculated. Base case estimates and multi-way sensitivity-analyses were performed. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) was $4,166/QALM (or $50,000/QALY). Results: The base-case costs were $34,921 for ExLap vs. $33,441.74 for DL in R-PC treated with SF; and $39,633 for ExLap vs. $39,713 for DL in BR treated with NAT. Routine DL is the dominant (preferred) strategy in the SF approach (cost reduction of $10,695/QALM) and in BR treated with NAT ($4,158/QALM). Conclusion: Our analysis supports the cost effectiveness of routine DL before curative resection for pancreatic cancer patients treated either with SF or NAT.
    American Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Annual Meeting, Miami, FL; 02/2014
Show more