Bile Duct Dilatation after Subtotal Gastrectomy in Stomach Cancer: Comparison with Gastroduodenostmy (BillothI) and Gastro Jejunosto my (Billoth II)

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To evaluate the incidence and degree of bile duct dilatation after partial gastrectomy due togastric cancer and to determine any differences between gastroduodenostomy (Billoth I) and gastrojejunostomy(Billoth II). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the follow up abdominal CT findings in 113patients who had undergone partial gastrectomy without truncal vagotomy or cholecystectomy. In all cases,preoperative abdminal CT findings showed no evidence of bile duct dilatation. Among 113 patients, 41 underwentBilloth I surgery, and 72 underwent Billoth II. No case showed clinical or radiological evidence of obstructivecauses of bile duct dilatation. Among these patients, we decided the criteria for dilatation when this was noted.The grade was either mild (3 -4 mm), moderate (5 -8mm), or severe (over 9mm), as measured at the centralintra-hepatic duct. Extra-hepatic duct dilatation was graded as mild (6 -8mm), moderate (9 -12mm) or severe (over13 mm). We analyzed serum bilrirubin and alkaline phosphatase levels. RESULTS: When the central intrahepatic ductwas measured, 78 of 113 patients(69 %) showed bile duct dilata-tion; 24 of 41 cases(58.5 %) were in the billoth Igroup and 54 of 72 (75 %) were the in Billoth II group. After measurement of the extra hepatic duct, 22 of41cases(53.6%) in the Billoth I group and 54 of 72 (75 %) in the Billoth II group were found to be dilated. Theresults showed a slightly increased incidence of bile duct dilatation in the Billoth, II group but this was notstatistically significant(p>0.05). In the laboratory, total, direct, and indirect bilirubin, as well as alkalinephosphatase levels, were measured. Higher levels were found in Billoth II than in Billoth I but all findings werewithin normal limits. CONCLUSION: Mild dilatation of the bile duct after partial gastrectomy was a not uncommonfinding, and there was no significant difference of incidence or degree of dilatation according to the procedureperformed. If a patient has no clinical symptoms, it appears that clinical it appears that clinical evaluationdoes not require fur-ther study.