Skip to main content
Log in

Digestive and nutritional consequences of pancreatic resections

The classical vs the pylorus-sparing procedure

  • Published:
International journal of pancreatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Digestive and nutritional alterations are a common occurrence after pancreatic resections. The authors report the results of a multiparametric evaluation performed in a group of 26 patients submitted to total or cephalic pancreatectomy. Patients were divided into two groups according to the surgical procedure; group A(n=13) included gastroresected patients and group B (n=13) included those submitted to pylorus-sparing pancreatic resection. Subclinical digestive and absorptive impairment has been found in 61.5% of group A patients; the nutritional status was clinically poor in four cases from the same group. Digestive alterations have also been found in 69.2% of group B cases, but nutritional status was always satisfactory in the whole group. The more positive results obtained with the pylorus-sparing technique encourage wider adoption of this procedure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Pliam MB, Remine WH. Further evaluation of total pancreatectomy.Arch Surg 1975; 110: 506–512.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Speranza B, Simi P. Prevenzione e trattamento dei gravi scompensi funzionali nel pancreasectomizzato.Ann It Chir 1980; 52: 1–7.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Fish JC, Lindsay BS, Williams RD. Digestive function after radical pancreaticoduodenectomy.Am J Surg 1969; 117: 40–45.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Aston SJ, Longmire WP. Pancreaticoduodenal resections.Arch Surg 1973; 106: 813–817.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Waugh JM, Clagett OT. Resection of the duodenum and head of the pancreas for carcinoma: an analysis of 30 cases.Surgery 1946; 20: 224–227.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cubilla AL, Fitzgerald PJ, Fortner JG. Pancreas cancer.J Surg Oncol 1978; 10: 465–482.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Cooperman AM. Cancer of the ampulla of Vater, bile duct and duodenum.Surg Clin North Am 1981; 61: 99–106.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Traverso LW, Longmire WP. Preservation of the pylorus in pancreaticoduodenectomy.Surg Gynecol Obst 1978; 146; 959–962.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Ishikawa O, Onigashi H, Sasaki Y, Kabuto T, Fukuda I, Furukawa H, Imaoka S, Iwanaga T. Practical usefulness of lymphatic and connective tissue clearance for the carcinoma of the pancreatic head.Ann Surg 1988; 208: 215–219.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Visick AH. Measured radical gastrectomy.Lancet 1948; 1: 505.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Robert S, Zarowitz BJ, Hyzy R, Eichenhorm M, Peterson EL, Popovich J. Bioelectrical impedance assessment of nutritional status in critically ill patients.Am J Clin Nutr 1993; 57: 840–844.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Seltzer MH, Slocum BA, Cataldi-Betcher EL. Instant nutritional assessment: absolute weight loss and surgical mortality.JPEN 1982; 6: 218–221.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Miggiano G, Rapaccini GL, Giocoli G, Gozzo ML, Anti M. Quantitative estimate of xylose absorption test by use of a score index.LAB J Res Lab Med, 1982; 9: 567–570.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kay G, Hine P, Braganza J. The pancreolauryl test—A method of assessing the combined functional efficacy of pancreatic esterase and bile salts in vivo?.Digestion 1982; 24: 241–245.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Penfold WAF, Keynes WM. Use of a standard fatty meal as a test for fat absorption.Ann Surg 1971; 173: 157–163.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Beeler MF, Kao YS, Scheer WD. Malabsorption, diarrhea, and examination of feces, inClinical Diagnosis and Management by Laboratory Methods, Henry JB, ed., WB Saunders Co., Philadelphia, 1979, pp. 779–800.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Christiansen J, Olsen JH, Worning H. The pancreatic function following subtotal pancreatectomy, for cancer.Scand J Gastroenterol 1971; 6 (Suppl. 9): 189–193.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Mori K, Misumi A, Sugiyama M, Sakamoto Y, Ishii J, Kaneko T, Akagi M. Postoperative evaluation of the exocrine function of the pancreas after pancreaticoduo-denectomy.Surg Gynecol Obst 1979; 148: 16–21.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Crisci C, Nocentini L, Ludovici M, Biagiotti S, Balanzano R. La pancreasectomia totale di principio nel trattamento dei tumori della testa e del corpo del pancreas.Bollettino Società Italiana di Chirurgia 1985; n 2: pp. 19–24.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Warren KW, Cristophi C, Armendariz R, Basu S. Current trends in the diagnosis and treatment of carcinoma of the pancreas.Am J Surg 1983; 145: 813–818.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Grant CS, VanHeerden JA. Anastomotic ulceration following subtotal and total pancreatectomy.Ann Surg 1979; 190: 1–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. McKeown A. A prospective study of the immediate and long term results of Polya gastrectomy for duodenal ulcer.Br J Surg 1972; 59: 849–868.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Fisher AB. Twenty-five years after Billroth II gastrectomy for duodenal ulcer.World J Surg 1984; 8: 293–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Braasch JW, Gray BN. Considerations that lower pancreatoduodenectomy mortality.Am J Surg 1977; 133: 480–484.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Boerma EJ, Koosemans JAR. Non-preservation of the pylorus in resection of pancreatic cancer.Br J Surg 1990; 77: 299–300.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Ramesh H, Thomas PG. Experience with pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomies.Surgery 1990; 108: 715–716.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Sharp K, Ross CB, Halter SA, Morrison JG, Richards WO, Williams LF, Sawyers JL. Pancreatoduodenectomy with pyloric preservation for carcinoma of the pancreas: a cautionary note.Surgery 1989; 105: 645–646.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Whipple AO, Parzon WB, Mullins CR. Treatment of carcinoma of the ampulla of Vater.Ann Surg 1935; 102: 763–770.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Watson K. Carcinoma of the ampulla of Vater; successful radical resection.Br J Surg 1944; 31: 368–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Braasch JW, Rossi RL, Watkins EJ, Deziel DJ, Winter PF. Pyloric and gastric preserving in pancreatic resection.Ann Surg 1986; 204: 411–418.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Hunt DR, McLean R. Pylorus-preserving: functional results.Br J Surg 1989; 76: 173–176.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Newman KD, Braasch JW, Rossi RL, O'Campo-Gonzales S. Pyloric and gastric preservation with pancreatico-duodenectomy.Am J Surg 1983; 145: 152–156.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Crucitti, F., Doglietto, G., Bellantone, R. et al. Digestive and nutritional consequences of pancreatic resections. Int J Pancreatol 17, 37–45 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02788357

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02788357

Key Words

Navigation