ArticleCureus2025
Jejunal Perforation Due to Internal Pancreatic Stents Following Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Case Series and Technical Modification.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Internal stent angle as a risk factor for jejunal penetration after pancreaticoduodenectomy: The efficacy of a modified insertion technique.Surgery today · 2026Article
- Jejunal perforation caused by transanastomotic pancreaticojejunostomy internal stent following pancreaticoduodenectomy: a case report.Journal of surgical case reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is a complex surgical procedure performed to treat various conditions, including pancreatic head cancer and ampullary tumors. Postoperative pancreatic fistulas (POPFs) remain one of the most challenging complications of PD, with potentially severe consequences such as abscess formation, bleeding, and even mortality. To mitigate the risk of POPFs, internal pancreatic stents are often employed to promote healing by diverting pancreatic secretions. Although internal stents offer advantages, including the avoidance of external drainage, complications such as stent migration, cholangitis, and liver abscesses have been commonly documented. A jejunal perforation caused by internal pancreatic stents, however, is an extremely rare complication. In this report, we describe three cases of jejunal perforations caused by internal pancreatic stents following PD and present a modified technique to reduce the risk of this complication. Three cases of jejunal perforation following PD were observed. In Case 1, a 69-year-old female developed intra-abdominal abscesses, and computed tomography (CT) revealed a perforation caused by a pancreatic stent, necessitating reoperation. In Case 2, an 83-year-old male exhibited a perforation and hematoma on CT 36 hours after surgery, requiring reoperation. In Case 3, a 66-year-old male presented with an inflammatory response five days post-surgery. CT revealed stent-related perforation, leading to reoperation. All patients fully recovered following surgical intervention. These cases underscore the importance of careful pancreatic stent placement during PD to minimize complications. The likely cause of the jejunal perforations was the perpendicular angle of the stent placement, leading to erosion of the jejunal wall. To address this issue, a modified technique was introduced, involving advancing the stent 5 cm into the jejunal lumen to reduce any direct pressure on the jejunal wall. This adjustment has prevented further cases of perforation, highlighting the critical need for surgical vigilance and technical modifications to enhance patient outcomes following PD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.