Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41628913›Full record

ArticleAnnals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery2026

Propensity score matched comparison of pancreatoduodenectomy with pancreatogastrostomy versus pancreatojejunostomy: A single institution experience shifting from pancreatogastrostomy to pancreatojejunostomy.

Teik Wen Lim, Sabrina Hui Xian Cheok, Yvette Chong, Darren Weiquan Chua, Ek Khoon Tan, Jin Yao Teo, Ye-Xin Koh, Peng Chung Cheow, Pierce Kah Hoe Chow, London Lucien Peng Jin Ooi and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Teik Wen LimMinistry of Health Holdings, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5553-737X
Sabrina Hui Xian CheokMinistry of Health Holdings, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3294-9678
Yvette ChongMinistry of Health Holdings, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-8399-0107
Darren Weiquan ChuaDepartment of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0707-338X
Ek Khoon TanDepartment of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5949-4741
Jin Yao TeoDepartment of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0777-8128
Ye-Xin KohDepartment of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5006-4174
Peng Chung CheowDepartment of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8102-1203
Pierce Kah Hoe ChowDepartment of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0584-2584
London Lucien Peng Jin OoiDepartment of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6777-8464
Alexander Yaw Fui ChungDepartment of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4598-6139
Brian Kim Poh GohDepartment of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8218-4576

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Backgrounds/Aims: Postoperative pancreatic fistulas (POPF) remain a major cause of morbidity and mortality following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). Pancreatogastrostomy (PG) and pancreatojejunostomy (PJ) are the two most commonly used reconstruction techniques, yet evidence favoring one over the other is inconclusive. This study evaluates postoperative outcomes following open PD at a single institution that transitioned from PG to PJ as the preferred reconstruction method. Methods: This retrospective comparative study included patients who underwent PD between April 2005 and August 2022. Of 757 patients identified, 522 met the inclusion criteria. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to adjust for clinically relevant covariates. Primary endpoints were clinically relevant (CR) POPF (grade B/C) and Clavien-Dindo (CD) grade ≥ 3 POPFs. Secondary outcomes included post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), systemic complications, length of hospital stay, and mortality. Results: Overall, CR-POPF and CD grade ≥ 3 POPFs occurred in 21.3% and 8.0% of patients, respectively. Thirty-day and in-hospital mortality rates were 3.1% and 4.2%. After PSM, 368 patients (184 PG and 184 PJ) were analyzed. Grade B POPFs were more frequent following PJ than PG (24.5% vs. 15.8%, Conclusions: PG was associated with a lower incidence of grade B POPFs but higher rates of DGE, PPH, and in-hospital mortality.

Indexed as

Pancreatic fistulaPancreaticogastrostomyPancreaticojejunostomyPancreatoduodenectomyPropensity score matching

Identifiers

PMID41628913
PMCPMC12958851

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.