Duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection--a randomized controlled trial comparing the original Beger procedure with the Berne modification (ISRCTN No. 50638764).

OBJECTIVE: A prospective, randomized study was performed to evaluate two variations of the duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection (DPPHR), either with (Beger procedure) or without (Berne modification) the division of the pancreas anterior to the portal vein, in patients with chronic pancreatitis. METHODS: Randomized, controlled, patient-blinded trial of patients with inflammatory pancreatic head tumors. The primary endpoint was the duration of surgery. Other a priori-ordered endpoints were length of ICU stay, postoperative complication, length of hospital stay, and quality of life after 24 months. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients were randomized to the Berne or Beger procedures. The Berne modification could be performed faster (46 minutes difference, P < .05). The median length of stay on the ICU was one day in both groups (P = .97) but the median hospital stay was shorter in the Berne group (11 (8-39) versus 15 (8-47); P = .015). The quality of life two years after surgery did not differ significantly between the two groups (EORTC-QLQ-C30, Beger 65.6% vs. Berne 71.3%, P = .371). Three patients who had received the Berne procedure were reoperated on during the follow-up period due to ongoing pancreatitis and bile duct obstruction (P = .22). CONCLUSION: The Berne technique is technically simpler compared with the original Beger procedure, reflected in its significantly shorter operation times and hospital stays. The quality of life is similar after both procedures. The Berne modification of DPPHR adds to our panel of surgical procedures that can be applied with effective early and late outcomes.

Localization of hyperfunctioning parathyroid glands by selective venous sampling in reoperation for primary or secondary hyperparathyroidism.

BACKGROUND: Localization of hyperfunctioning parathyroid glands in patients with previous cervical operations is not always successful with noninvasive methods such as ultrasound, sestamibi scan, or magnetic resonance imaging. The aim of our study was to evaluate the results of selective venous sampling (SVS) of intact parathyroid hormone (PTH) in patients undergoing surgery for primary (75%) or secondary (25%) hyperparathyroidism (HPT). METHODS: Between January 2000 and January 2006, SVS for PTH was performed in 51 consecutive patients with persistent or recurrent HPT or patients with previous cervical explorations. The results of SVS were compared with those of noninvasive localization studies. RESULTS: Successful surgical treatment was achieved in 47 of 51 patients (92%). SVS had a sensitivity of 83.3% for the correct localization of a parathyroid adenoma (79.5%) or hyperplastic parathyroid glands (91.6%). False-positive or indeterminate results of SVS were found in 6% and 2%, respectively, of the patients. Ultrasound detected enlarged parathyroid glands with a sensitivity of 33.3%, and sestamibi scan with a sensitivity of 57.1%. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with noninvasive localization studies, SVS for PTH yielded the best results for recurrent or persistent HPT and for patients with previous neck explorations. SVS is strongly recommended in reoperative surgery for HPT with indeterminate results of noninvasive methods.

Duodenum preserving pancreatectomy in chronic pancreatitis: design of a randomized controlled trial comparing two surgical techniques [ISRCTN50638764].

BACKGROUND: Chronic pancreatitis is an inflammatory disease which is characterized by an irreversible conversion of pancreatic parenchyma to fibrous tissue. Beside obstructive jaundice and pseudocyst formation, about half of the patients need surgical intervention due to untreatable chronic pain during the course of the disease. In most of the patients with chronic pancreatitis, the head of the pancreas is the trigger of the chronic inflammatory process. Therefore, resection of pancreatic head tissue must be the central part of any surgical intervention. However, it is unclear to which extent the surgical procedure must be radical in order to obtain a favourable outcome for the patients. DESIGN: A single centre randomized controlled, superiority trial to compare two techniques of duodenum preserving pancreatic head resection. SAMPLE SIZE: 65 patients will be included and randomized intraoperatively. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All patients with chronic pancreatitis and indication for surgical resection and signed informed consent. Cumulative primary endpoint (hierarchical model): duration of surgical procedure, quality of life after one year, duration of intensive care unit stay, duration of hospital stay. Reference treatment: Resection of the pancreatic head with dissection of the pancreas from the portal vein and transsection of the gland (Beger procedure). INTERVENTION: Partial Resection of the pancreatic head without transsection of the organ and visualization of the portal vein (Berne procedure). DURATION: September 2003-October 2007. ORGANISATION/RESPONSIBILITY: The trial is conducted in compliance with the protocol and in accordance with the moral, ethical, regulatory and scientific principles governing clinical research as set out in the Declaration of Helsinki (1989) and the Good Clinical Practice guideline (GCP). The Center for Clinical Studies of the Department of Surgery Heidelberg is responsible for planning, conducting and final analysis of the trial.

Postsurgical pain outcome of vertical and transverse abdominal incision: design of a randomized controlled equivalence trial [ISRCTN60734227].

BACKGROUND: There are two ways to open the abdominal cavity in elective general surgery: vertically or transversely. Various clinical studies and a meta-analysis have postulated that the transverse approach is superior to other approaches as regards complications. However, in a recent survey it was shown that 90 % of all abdominal incisions in visceral surgery are still vertical incisions. This discrepancy between existing recommendations of clinical trials and clinical practice could be explained by the lack of acceptance of these results due to a number of deficits in the study design and analysis, subsequent low internal validity, and therefore limited external generalisability. The objective of this study is to address the issue from the patient's perspective. METHODS: This is an intraoperatively randomized controlled observer and patient-blinded two-group parallel equivalence trial. The study setting is the Department of General-, Visceral-, Trauma Surgery and Outpatient Clinic of the University of Heidelberg, Medical School. A total of 172 patients of both genders, aged over 18 years who are scheduled for an elective abdominal operation and are eligible for either a transverse or vertical incision. To show equivalence of the two approaches or the superiority of one of them from the perspective of the patient, a primary endpoint is defined: the pain experienced by the patient (VAS 0-100) on day two after surgery and the amount of analgesic required (piritramide [mg/h]). A confidence interval approach will be used for analysis. A global alpha-Level of 0.05 and a power of 0.8 is guaranteed, resulting in a size of 86 patients for each group. Secondary endpoints are: time interval to open and close the abdomen, early-onset complications (frequency of burst abdomen, postoperative pulmonary complications, and wound infection) and late complications (frequency of incisional hernias). Different outcome variables will be ranked by patients and surgeons to assess the relevance of possible endpoints from the patients' and surgeons' perspective. CONCLUSION: This is a randomized controlled observer and patient-blinded two-group parallel trial to answer the question if the transverse abdominal incision is equivalent to the vertical one due to the described endpoints.