Efficacy of duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection versus pancreaticoduodenectomy in the treatment of chronic pancreatitis in adults: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Descripción del Articulo

Background: Studies comparing duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection versus pancreaticoduodenectomy in the treatment of chronic pancreatitis demonstrate notable differences, however, the current evidence is inadequate to clearly establish the superiority of these approaches. Objective: To det...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Silva-Santisteban Gálvez, Sergio, Caballero-Alvarado, José
Formato: artículo
Fecha de Publicación:2022
Institución:Cuerpo Médico Hospital Nacional Almanzor Aguinaga Asenjo
Repositorio:Revista del Cuerpo Médico Hospital Nacional Almanzor Aguinaga Asenjo
Lenguaje:español
OAI Identifier:oai:cmhnaaa_ojs_cmhnaaa.cmhnaaa.org.pe:article/1607
Enlace del recurso:https://cmhnaaa.org.pe/ojs/index.php/rcmhnaaa/article/view/1607
Nivel de acceso:acceso abierto
Materia:Pancreatitis crónica
Resección pancreática
Preservación duodenal
Eficacia
Chronic pancreatitis
Pancreatic resection
Duodenal preservation
Efficacy
Descripción
Sumario:Background: Studies comparing duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection versus pancreaticoduodenectomy in the treatment of chronic pancreatitis demonstrate notable differences, however, the current evidence is inadequate to clearly establish the superiority of these approaches. Objective: To determine duodenum preserving pancreatic head resection is more effective than pancreaticoduodenectomy in treating chronic pancreatitis in adults. Material and Methods: A systematic review was conducted identifying and extracting data from seven randomized clinical trials and seven observational studies comparing the efficacy of duodenum-preserving pancreatic resection versus pancreaticoduodenectomy. Results: Bleeding had a mean difference (MD) of -0.18, 95% CI of -0.25 – -0.12, and p < 0.00001. Operative time had an MD of -1.32, 95% CI of -2.20 –      -0.44 and p = 0.003. Hospital stay had an MD of -3.94, 95% CI of -6.16 – -1.71 and p = 0.0005. Endocrine insufficiency had a RR of 0.78, 95% CI of 0.65 – 0.95 and p = 0.01. Pain Score showed an MD of -7.39, 95% CI of -13.05 – -1.74 and p = 0.01. Global quality of life, showed MD of 8.97, 95% CI of 4.05 - 13.90 and p = 0.0004. Conclusions: DPPHR is more effective than PD by reducing intraoperative bleeding, operative time, hospital stay, the risk of endocrine failure, and by providing better pain relief and quality of life.
Nota importante:
La información contenida en este registro es de entera responsabilidad de la institución que gestiona el repositorio institucional donde esta contenido este documento o set de datos. El CONCYTEC no se hace responsable por los contenidos (publicaciones y/o datos) accesibles a través del Repositorio Nacional Digital de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación de Acceso Abierto (ALICIA).