Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery

, Volume 15, Issue 5, pp 824–828 | Cite as

Reflux Esophagitis and Marginal Ulcer After Pancreaticoduodenectomy

  • Jin-Ming Wu
  • Meng-Kun Tsai
  • Rey-Heng Hu
  • Kin-Jen Chang
  • Po-Huang Lee
  • Yu-Wen Tien
Original Article

Abstract

Background

Reflux esophagitis is a common complication following a distal gastrectomy. Increasingly, Roux-en-Y reconstruction has been used to prevent reflux esophagitis; however, marginal ulcer is a concern in patients with a Roux-en-Y reconstruction after distal gastrectomy. The effect of Roux-en-Y reconstruction on the development of reflux esophagitis and marginal ulcer after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) has not been studied.

Methods

We retrospectively studied both reflux esophagitis and marginal ulcer after 371 PDs and analyzed the association with different methods of gastrointestinal reconstruction.

Results

In a median follow-up time of 20 months, 40 (10.8%) of the 371 patients developed reflux esophagitis, 15 after 158 standard PD, and 25 after 213 pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPPD; P = 0.62). Cox regression model showed Roux-en-Y reconstruction was significantly inversely related to occurrence of reflux esophagitis in 158 patients after standard PD (P = 0.04) but not in 213 patients after PPPD (P = 0.24). Thirty-five of 371 studied patients developed marginal ulcer, 15 after standard PD and 20 after PPPD (P = 0.45). Multivariate analysis showed that Roux-en-Y reconstruction was the only significant predictor for marginal ulcer after PD (P = 0.02).

Conclusions

Our data support the use of Roux-en-Y reconstruction after standard PD but not after PPPD.

Keywords

Pancreaticoduodenectomy Anastomosis Roux-en-Y Marginal ulcer Reflux esophagitis 

References

  1. 1.
    Cameron JL, Pitt HA, Yeo CJ, et al. One hundred and forty-five consecutive pancreaticoduodenectomies without mortality. Ann Surg 1993;217:430–435.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Crist DW, Sitzmann JV, Cameron JL. Improved hospital morbidity, mortality, and survival after the Whipple procedure. Ann Surg 1987;206:358–365.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Trede M, Schwall G, Saeger HD. Survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy. 118 consecutive resections without an operative mortality. Ann Surg 1990;211:447–458.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Traverso LW, Longmire WP Jr. Preservation of the pylorus in pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surg Gyn Obster 1978:146:959–962.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Grace PA, Pitt HA, Longmire WP. Pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy: an overview. Br J Surg 1990;77:968–974.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Roder JD, Stein HJ, Hüttl W, et al. Pylorus-preserving versus standard pancreaticoduodenectomy: an analysis of 110 pancreatic and periampullary carcinomas. Br J Surg 1992;79:152–155.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Klinkenbijl JH, van der Schelling GP, Hop WC, et al. The advantages of pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy in malignant disease of the pancreas and periampullary region. Ann Surg 1992;216:142–145.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nishikawa M, Tangoku A, Hamanaka Y, et al. Gastric pH monitoring after pylorus preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy with Billroth I type of reconstruction. J Am Coll Surg 1994;179:129–134.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    McAfee MK, van Heerden JA, Adson MA. Is proximal pancreaticoduodenectomy with pyloric preservation superior to total pancreatectomy? Surgery 1989;105:347–351.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hunt DR, McLean R. Pylorus-preserving pancreatectomy: functional results. Br J Surg 1989;76:173–176.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kobayashi I, Miyachi M, Kanai M, et al. Different gastric emptying of solid and liquid meals after pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg 1998;85:927–930.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Thor PJ, Matyja A, Popiela T, et al. Early effects of standard and pylorus-preserving pancreatectomy on myoelectric activity and gastric emptying. Hepatogastroenterology 1999;46:1963–1967.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lin PW, Lin YJ. Prospective randomized comparison between pylorus-preserving and standard pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg 1999;86:603–607.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hochwald SN, Grobmyer SR, Hemming AW, et al. Braun enteroenterostomy is associated with reduced delayed gastric emptying and early resumption of oral feeding following pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Surg Oncol 2010;101:351–355.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    YW Tien, C-Y Yang, Y-M Wu, et al. Enteral Nutrition and Biliopancreatic Diversion Effectively Minimize Impacts of Gastroparesis after Pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Gastrointest Surg 2009;13:929–937.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sakaguchi T, Nakamura S, Suzuki S, et al. Marginal ulceration after pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 2000;7:193–197.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kawamura T, Yasui A, Shibata Y, et al. Evaluation of gastroesophageal reflux disease following various reconstructive procedures for a distal gastrectomy. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2003;388:250–254.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hoya Y, Mitsumori N, Yanaga K. The advantages and disadvantages of a Roux-en-Y reconstruction after a distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Surg Today 2009;39:647–651.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Csendes A, Burgos AM, Smok G, et al. Latest results (12–21 years) of a prospective randomized study comparing Billroth and Roux-en-Y Anastomosis after a partial gastrectomy plus vagotomy in patients with duodenal ulcers. Ann Surg 2009;249:189–194.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Arlt G, Schumpelick V, Kloppel G. Ulcer risk in the Roux-Y stomach. An experimental study. Langenbecks Arch Chir 1984;362:43–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Armstrong D, Bennett JR, Blum AL, et al. The endoscopic assessment esophagitis: a progress report on observer agreement. Gastroenterology 1996;111:85–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yoshida M, Tsuyuki A, Kikuchi K, et al. Reflux esophagitis after distal gastrectomy and endoscopic findings of the cardia. In 2nd International Gastric Cancer Congress, Munich 1997;1009–1013.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Windsor CWO. Gastro-esophageal reflux after distal gastrectomy. Br Med J 1964;14:1233–1234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kono K, Takahashi A, Sugai H, et al. Oral trypsin inhibitor can improve reflux esophagitis after distal gastrectomy concomitant with decreased trypsin activity. Am J Surg 2005;190:412–417.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tolin RD, Malmud LS, Stelzer F, et al. Enterogastric reflux in normal subjects and patients with Billroth II gastroenterostomy. Measurement of enterogastric reflux. Gastroenterology 1979;77:1027–1033.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Natomi H, Sugano K, Iwamori M, et al. Region-specific distribution of glycospingolipids in the rabbit gastrointestinal tract: preferential enrichment of sulfoglycolipids in the mucosal regions exposed to acid. Biochim Biophys Acta 1988;961:213–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gotley DC, Ball DE, Owen RW, et al. Evaluation and surgical correction of esophagitis after partial gastectomy. Surgery 1992:111:29–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Imada T, Chen C, Hatori S, et al. Effect of trypsin inhibitor on reflux esophagitis after total gastrectomy in rats. Eur J Surg 1999;165:1045–1050.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mud HJ, Kranendonk SE, Obertop H, et al. Active trypsin and reflux esophagitis: an experimental study in rats. Br J Surg 1982;69:269–272.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tomita R, Tanjoh K, Fujisaki S, et al. Relation between gastroduodenal interdigestive migrating motor complex and postoperative gastrointestinal symptoms before and after cisapride therapy following distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer. World J Surg 2000;20:1250–1256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kono K, Takahashi A, Sugai H,et aL. Oral trypsin inhibitor can improve reflux esophagitis after distal gastrectomy concomitant with decreased trypsin activity. Am J Surg 2005;190:412–417.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sasaki I, Suzuki Y, Naito H, et al. Effect of camostat in the treatment of reflux esophagitis after gastrectomy: an experimental study in rats and a pilot clinical study. Biomed Res 1989;10(suppl-1):167–173.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Dallal RM, Bailey LA. Ulcer disease after gastric bypass surgery. Surgery for Obesity & Related Diseases 2006; 2:455–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Aydinli B, Yilmaz O, Ozturk G, et al. Is perforated marginal ulcer after the surgery of gastroduodenal ulcer associated with inadequate treatment for Helicobacter pylori eradication? Langenbecks Arch Surg 2007;392:593–599.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rasmussen JJ. Fuller W. Ali MR. Marginal ulceration after laparoscopic gastric bypass: an analysis of predisposing factors in 260 patients. Surg Endoscopy 2007; 21:1090–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Dimenas E. Methodological aspects of evaluation of quality of life in upper gastrointestinal disease. Scand J Gastroenterol 1993;28(Suppl.199):18–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Takahashi T, Yoshida M, Kubota T, et al. Morphologic analysis of gastroesophageal reflux disease in patients after distal gastrectomy. World J Surg 2005; 29(1):50–57PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jin-Ming Wu
    • 1
  • Meng-Kun Tsai
    • 1
  • Rey-Heng Hu
    • 1
  • Kin-Jen Chang
    • 1
  • Po-Huang Lee
    • 1
  • Yu-Wen Tien
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Surgery, National Taiwan University HospitalNational Taiwan University College of MedicineTaipeiRepublic of China

Personalised recommendations