The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Pancreaticoduodenectomy With or Without Distal Gastrectomy and Extended Retroperitoneal Lymphadenectomy for Periampullary Adenocarcinoma, Part 2: Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating Survival, Morbidity, and Mortality
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate, in a prospective, randomized single-institution trial, the end points of operative morbidity, operative mortality, and survival in patients undergoing standard versus radical (extended) pancreaticoduodenectomy. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Numerous retrospective reports and a few prospective randomized trials have suggested that the performance of an extended lymphadenectomy in association with a pancreaticoduodenal resection may improve survival for patients with pancreatic and other periampullary adenocarcinomas. METHODS: Between April 1996 and June 2001, 299 patients with periampullary adenocarcinoma were enrolled in a prospective, randomized single-institution trial. After intraoperative verification (by frozen section) of margin-negative resected periampullary adenocarcinoma, patients were randomized to either a standard pancreaticoduodenectomy (removing only the peripancreatic lymph nodes en bloc with the specimen) or a radical (extended) pancreaticoduodenectomy (standard resection plus distal gastrectomy and retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy). All pathology specimens were reviewed, fully categorized, and staged. The postoperative morbidity, mortality, and survival data were analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 299 patients randomized, 5 (1.7%) were subsequently excluded because their final pathology failed to reveal periampullary adenocarcinoma, leaving 294 patients for analysis (146 standard vs. 148 radical). The two groups were statistically similar with regard to age (median 67 years) and gender (54% male). All the patients in the radical group underwent distal gastric resection, while 86% of the patients in the standard group underwent pylorus preservation ( <.0001). The mean operative time in the radical group was 6.4 hours, compared to 5.9 hours in the standard group ( =.002). There were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to intraoperative blood loss, transfusion requirements (median zero units), location of primary tumor (57% pancreatic, 22% ampullary, 17% distal bile duct, 3% duodenal), mean tumor size (2.6 cm), positive lymph node status (74%), or positive margin status on final permanent section (10%). The mean total number of lymph nodes resected was significantly higher in the radical group. Of the 148 patients in the radical group, only 15% (n = 22) had metastatic adenocarcinoma in the resected retroperitoneal lymph nodes, and none had retroperitoneal nodes as the only site of lymph node involvement. One patient in the radical group with negative pancreaticoduodenectomy specimen lymph nodes had a micrometastasis to one perigastric lymph node. There were six perioperative deaths (4%) in the standard group versus three perioperative deaths (2%) in the radical group ( = NS). The overall complication rates were 29% for the standard group versus 43% for the radical group ( =.01), with patients in the radical group having significantly higher rates of early delayed gastric emptying and pancreatic fistula and a significantly longer mean postoperative stay. With a mean patient follow-up of 24 months, there were no significant differences in 1-, 3-, or 5-year and median survival when comparing the standard and radical groups. CONCLUSIONS: Radical (extended) pancreaticoduodenectomy can be performed with similar mortality but some increased morbidity compared to standard pancreaticoduodenectomy. The data to date fail to indicate that a survival benefit is derived from the addition of a distal gastrectomy and retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy to a pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Hingorani, S. R., Wang, L., Multani, A. S., Combs, C., Deramaudt, T. B., Hruban, R. H., Rustgi, A. K., Chang, S., & Tuveson, D. A. (2005) · Cancer Cell · doi:10.1016/j.ccr.2005.04.023 · Cited by 2,609
Self-citationPreinvasive and invasive ductal pancreatic cancer and its early detection in the mouse
Hingorani, S. R., Petricoin, E. F., Maitra, A., Rajapakse, V., King, C., Jacobetz, M. A., Ross, S., Conrads, T. P., Veenstra, T. D., Hitt, B. A., et al. (2003) · Cancer Cell · doi:10.1016/s1535-6108(03)00309-x · Cited by 2,471
Self-citationIntraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms of the Pancreas: An Updated Experience
Sohn, T. A., Yeo, C. J., Cameron, J. L., Hruban, R. H., Fukushima, N., Campbell, K. A., & Lillemoe, K. D. (2004) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000128306.90650.aa · Cited by 874
Self-citationSalvia, R., Castillo, C. F.-D., Bassi, C., Thayer, S. P., Falconi, M., Mantovani, W., Pederzoli, P., & Warshaw, A. L. (2004) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000124386.54496.15 · Cited by 746
Redefining the R1 resection in pancreatic cancer
Verbeke, C. S., Leitch, D., Menon, K. V., McMahon, M. J., Guillou, P. J., & Anthoney, A. (2006) · British Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1002/bjs.5397 · Cited by 593
Metadata
- Authors
- Yeo, C. J., Cameron, J. L., Lillemoe, K. D., Sohn, T. A., Campbell, K. A., Sauter, P. K., Coleman, J., Abrams, R. A., & Hruban, R. H.
- Venue
- Annals of Surgery
- Published
- 2002-09
- Volume
- 236
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 355-368
- ISSN
- 0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2073963371
- Cited by
- 807
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Pancreaticoduodenectomy With or Without Distal Gastrectomy and Extended Retroperitoneal Lymphadenectomy for Periampullary Adenocarcinoma, Part 2: Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating Survival, Morbidity, and Mortality. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00000658-200209000-00012
- The paper
- Yeo, C. J., Cameron, J. L., Lillemoe, K. D., Sohn, T. A., Campbell, K. A., Sauter, P. K., Coleman, J., Abrams, R. A., & Hruban, R. H. (2002). Pancreaticoduodenectomy With or Without Distal Gastrectomy and Extended Retroperitoneal Lymphadenectomy for Periampullary Adenocarcinoma, Part 2: Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating Survival, Morbidity, and Mortality. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-200209000-00012
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.