Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The nature of palliative decompressive surgery for unresectable periampullary tumor is usually determined by the experience of the surgeon. We compared hepaticocholecystoduodenostomy (HCD), a new palliative decompressive anastomotic technique, to Roux-en-y choledochojejunostomy (CDJ) in this prospective, randomized study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty patients who were to undergo surgery for palliative bypass were randomized into two groups: group I was subjected to HCD (10 patients) and group II to CDJ (10 patients). Pre- and postoperative liver function tests, operative time, operative blood loss, onset of postoperative enteral feeding, length of hospital stay and survival rates were compared in the two groups. RESULTS: Effective surgical decompression was observed clinically as well as on analysis of pre- and postoperative liver function tests in both the groups. The results were statistically significant in favor of patients in group I when compared to those of group II with respect to operative time 84.7 (10.3) min vs 133.6 (8.9) min; P =<.0001), operative blood loss 137.8 (37.2) mL vs 201.6 (23.4) mL; P =.001), postoperative enteral feeding 3.3 (0.5) days vs 5.0 (0.7) days; P =<.0001) and length of hospital stay 7.5 (0.7) days vs 9.7 (1.2) days ; P =<.0001). During follow-up, recurrent jaundice was observed in one patient in group I and two patients in group II, while duodenal obstruction developed in one patient in the group I series. Gastrointestinal hemorrhage occurred in one patient belonging to group II. The difference in mean survival time was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Based on this small series, HCD seems to be a better palliative surgical procedure than the routinely performed CDJ.