GastrointestinalClassic Whipple versus pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy in the ACS NSQIP

BackgroundThe classic Whipple operation carries substantial risk of complications. A pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy might confer the benefit of decreased perioperative morbidity, but existing data comparing both techniques are inconclusive.MethodsUsing a propensity score model to adjust for potentially confounding differences in patient characteristics, 30-d mortality, operative time, red blood cell transfusion requirements, major complications, and length of hospital stay were compared between both techniques in the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Separate analyses were carried out for underlying malignancy or benign disease, as defined by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes.ResultsA total of 6988 pancreaticoduodenectomies from 2005 through 2010 were included. In 5424 patients (77.6%) with underlying malignancy, there were no significant differences for 30-d mortality (2.4% versus 2.8%, P = 0.33) and major organ system complications (all P > 0.10). Patients undergoing the classic Whipple operation had a significantly longer operative time (389 versus 366 min, P < 0.01), longer length of hospital stay (13.1 versus 12.0 days, P < 0.01), and higher red blood cell transfusion requirements (1.0 versus 0.8 units, P < 0.01). Results were similar for 1564 patients (22.4%) with underlying benign disease, except for a higher occurrence of postoperative pulmonary (P = 0.02) and renal (P = 0.05) complications in patients undergoing the classic Whipple operation.ConclusionsShort-term outcomes after classic and pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy in this large, multicenter database are excellent, without significant differences in postoperative mortality and most major organ system complications. However, small advantages in resource and blood utilization may be accomplished with the pylorus-preserving technique.