Video Grading of Pancreatic Anastomoses During Robotic Pancreatoduodenectomy to Assess Both Learning Curve and the Risk of Pancreatic Fistula: A Post Hoc Analysis of the LAELAPS-3 Training Program.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the learning curve of pancreaticojejunostomy during robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) and to predict the risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) by using the objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS), taking the fistula risk into account. BACKGROUND: RPD is a challenging procedure that requires extensive training and confirmation of adequate surgical performance. Video grading, modified for RPD, of the pancreatic anastomosis could assess the learning curve of RPD and predict the risk of POPF. METHODS: Post hoc assessment of patients prospectively included in 4 Dutch centers in a nationwide LAELAPS-3 training program for RPD. Video grading of the pancreaticojejunostomy was performed by 2 graders using OSATS (attainable score: 12-60). The main outcomes were the combined OSATS of the 2 graders and POPF (grade B/C). Cumulative sum analyzed a turning point in the learning curve for surgical skill. Logistic regression determined the cutoff for OSATS. Patients were categorized for POPF risk (ie, low, intermediate, and high) based on the updated alternative fistula risk scores. RESULTS: Videos from 153 pancreatic anastomoses were included. Median OSATS score was 48 (interquartile range: 41-52) points and with a turning point at 33 procedures. POPF occurred in 39 patients (25.5%). An OSATS score below 49, present in 77 patients (50.3%), was associated with an increased risk of POPF (odds ratio: 4.01, P =0.004). The POPF rate was 43.6% with OSATS < 49 versus 15.8% with OSATS ≥49. The updated alternative fistula risk scores category "soft pancreatic texture" was the second strongest prognostic factor of POPF (odds ratio: 3.37, P =0.040). Median cumulative surgical experience was 17 years (interquartile range: 8-21). CONCLUSIONS: Video grading of the pancreatic anastomosis in RPD using OSATS identified a learning curve and a reduced risk of POPF in case of better surgical performance. Video grading may provide a valid method to surgical training, quality control, and improvement.

Ergonomics in the operating room.

BACKGROUND: Since the introduction of minimally invasive surgery, surgeons appear to be experiencing more occupational musculoskeletal injuries. The aim of this study is to investigate the current frequency and effects of occupational musculoskeletal injuries on work absence. METHODS: An online questionnaire was conducted among all surgeons affiliated to the Dutch Society for Endoscopic Surgery, Gastrointestinal Surgery, and Surgical Oncology. In addition, this survey was conducted among surgeons, gynaecologists, and urologists of one cluster of training hospitals in the Netherlands. RESULTS: There were 127 respondents. Fifty-six surgeons currently suffer from musculoskeletal complaints, and 30 have previously suffered from musculoskeletal complaints with no current complaints. Frequently reported localizations were the neck (39.5 %), the erector spinae muscle (34.9 %), and the right deltoid muscle (18.6 %). Most of the musculoskeletal complaints were present while operating (41.8 %). Currently, 37.5 % uses medication and/or therapy to reduce complaints. Of surgeons with past complaints, 26.7 % required work leave and 40.0 % made intraoperative adjustments. More surgeons with a medical history of musculoskeletal complaints have current complaints (OR 6.1, 95 % CI 1.9-19.6). There were no significant differences between surgeons of different operating techniques in localizations and frequency of complaints, or work leave. CONCLUSIONS: Despite previous various ergonomic recommendations in the operating room, the current study demonstrated that musculoskeletal complaints and subsequent work absence are still present among surgeons, especially among surgeons with a positive medical history for musculoskeletal complaints. Even sick leave was necessary to fully recover. There were no significant differences in reported complaints between surgeons of different operating techniques. Almost half of the respondents with complaints made intraoperative ergonomic adjustments to prevent future complaints. The latter would be interesting for future research.

A randomized controlled trial comparing intravesical to extravesical ureteroneocystostomy in living donor kidney transplantation recipients.

Urological complications after kidney transplantation are mostly related to the ureteroneocystostomy leading to significant morbidity, mortality, and high costs. The most commonly used techniques for the ureteroneocystostomy are the intravesical and the extravesical anastomosis. No evidence in favor of one of these two anastomoses exists. Our aim was to determine the technique with the best outcome regarding urological complications in a prospective randomized controlled trial (Netherlands Trial Register NTR2320). We randomized 200 consecutive recipients of a living donor kidney for either an intravesical or an extravesical anastomosis. The primary outcome was defined as placement of a percutaneous nephrostomy. No significant differences were found in the number of percutaneous nephrostomy placements or ureter reinterventions between both groups. Nevertheless, significantly fewer urinary tract infections occurred in the group with an extravesical anastomosis. In addition, this anastomosis was performed significantly faster compared with the intravesical anastomosis. Thus, extravesical ureteroneocystostomy was associated with significantly fewer urinary tract infections and might be preferable because of its surgical simplicity.

Risk factors and outcomes of conversions in robotic and laparoscopic liver resections: A nationwide analysis.

BACKGROUND: Unfavorable intraoperative findings or incidents during minimally invasive liver surgery may necessitate conversion to open surgery. This study aimed to identify predictors for conversion in minimally invasive liver surgery and gain insight into outcomes following conversions. METHODS: This nationwide, retrospective cohort study compared converted and non-converted minimally invasive liver surgery procedures using data from 20 centers in the Dutch Hepatobiliary Audit (2014-2022). Propensity score matching was applied. Subgroup analyses of converted robotic liver resection versus laparoscopic liver resection and emergency versus non-emergency conversions were performed. Predictors for conversions were identified using backward stepwise multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 3,530 patients undergoing minimally invasive liver surgery (792 robotic liver resection, 2,738 laparoscopic liver resection), 408 (11.6%) were converted (4.9% robotic liver resection, 13.5% laparoscopic liver resection). Conversion was associated with increased blood loss (580 mL [interquartile range 250-1,200] vs 200 mL [interquartile range 50-500], P < .001), major blood loss (≥500 mL, 58.8% vs 26.7%, P < .001), intensive care admission (19.0% vs 8.4%, P = .005), overall morbidity (38.9% vs 21.0%, P < .001), severe morbidity (17.9% vs 9.6%, P = .002), and a longer hospital stay (6 days [interquartile range 5-8] vs 4 days [interquartile range 2-5], P < .001) but not mortality (2.2% vs 1.2%, P = .387). Emergency conversions had increased intraoperative blood loss (1,500 mL [interquartile range 700-2,800] vs 525 mL [interquartile range 208-1,000], P < .001), major blood loss (87.5% vs 59.3%, P = .005), and intensive care admission (27.9% vs 10.6%, P = .029), compared with non-emergency conversions. Robotic liver resection was linked to lower conversion risk, whereas American Society of Anesthesiologists grade ≥3, larger lesion size, concurrent ablation, technically major, and anatomically major resections were risk factors. CONCLUSION: Both emergency and non-emergency conversions negatively impact perioperative outcomes in minimally invasive liver surgery. Robotic liver resection reduces conversion risk compared to laparoscopic liver resection.

End-to-end versus end-to-side esophagogastrostomy after esophageal cancer resection: a prospective randomized study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare single-layered hand-sewn cervical end-to-side (ETS) anastomosis with end-to-end (ETE) anastomosis in a prospective randomized fashion. BACKGROUND: The preferred organ used for reconstruction after esophagectomy for cancer is the stomach. Previous studies attempted to define the optimal site of anastomosis and anastomotic techniques. However, anastomotic stricture formation and leakage still remain an important clinical problem. METHODS: From May 2005 to September 2007, 128 patients (64 in each group) were randomized between ETE and ETS anastomosis after esophagectomy for cancer with gastric tube reconstruction. Routine contrast swallow studies and endoscopy were performed. Anastomotic stricture within 1 year, requiring dilatation, was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints were anastomotic leak rate and mortality. RESULTS: Ninety-nine men and 29 women underwent esophagectomy and gastric tube reconstruction. Benign stenosis of the anastomosis, for which dilatation was required, occurred more often in the ETE group (40% vs. ETS 18%, P < 0.01) after 1 year of follow-up. The overall (clinical and radiological) anastomotic leak rate was lower in the ETE group (22% vs. ETS 41%, P = 0.04). Patients with an ETE anastomosis suffered less often from pneumonia; 17% versus ETS 44%, P = 0.002 and had subsequently significantly shorter in-hospital stay (15 days vs. 22 days, P = 0.02). In-hospital mortality did not differ between both groups. CONCLUSION: ETS anastomosis is associated with a lower anastomotic stricture rate, compared to ETE anastomosis. However, prevention of stricture formation was at high costs with increased anastomotic leakage and longer in-hospital stay. This study is registered with the Dutch Trial Registry and carries the ID number OND1317772.

Hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic versus standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: HARP-trial.

BACKGROUND: Transplantation is the only treatment offering long-term benefit to patients with chronic kidney failure. Live donor nephrectomy is performed on healthy individuals who do not receive direct therapeutic benefit of the procedure themselves. In order to guarantee the donor's safety, it is important to optimise the surgical approach. Recently we demonstrated the benefit of laparoscopic nephrectomy experienced by the donor. However, this method is characterised by higher in hospital costs, longer operating times and it requires a well-trained surgeon. The hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic technique may be an alternative to a complete laparoscopic, transperitoneal approach. The peritoneum remains intact and the risk of visceral injuries is reduced. Hand-assistance results in a faster procedure and a significantly reduced operating time. The feasibility of this method has been demonstrated recently, but as to date there are no data available advocating the use of one technique above the other. METHODS/DESIGN: The HARP-trial is a multi-centre randomised controlled, single-blind trial. The study compares the hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic approach with standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. The objective is to determine the best approach for live donor nephrectomy to optimise donor's safety and comfort while reducing donation related costs. DISCUSSION: This study will contribute to the evidence on any benefits of hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic versus standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register NTR1433.

Functional changes after pancreatoduodenectomy: diagnosis and treatment.

Relatively little is known about the gastrointestinal function after recovery of a pancreatoduodenectomy. This review focuses on the functional changes of the stomach, duodenum and pancreas that occur after pancreatoduodenectomy. Although the mortality in relation to pancreatoduodenectomy has decreased over the years, it remains associated with considerable morbidity, which occurs in 40-60% of patients. Physical complaints early after the operation are often caused by motility disorders, in particular delayed gastric emptying, which occurs in up to 40% of patients. During longer follow-up of these patients the occurrence of endocrine and exocrine pancreatic insufficiency becomes more predominant. Diabetes mellitus develops in 20-50% of patients after a pancreatic resection (pancreatogenic diabetes). The main presenting symptoms of exocrine insufficiency are weight loss and steatorrhea. Its presence is suspected on clinical ground and can be supported by fecal elastase-1 measurement. Exocrine insufficiency can be compensated with oral enteric-coated enzyme supplements. The quality of life issue will be addressed as an important outcome measurement after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Furthermore, the functional changes after pancreatoduodenectomy are described in detail with suggestions for diagnosis and treatment.

Patient preferences for the disclosure of prognosis after esophagectomy for cancer with curative intent.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to determine the preferences for content, style, and format of prognostic information of patients after potentially curative esophagectomy for cancer and to explore predictors of these preferences. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicenter study included a consecutive series of patients who underwent surgical resection for cancer in the past 2 years and who did not have evidence of cancer recurrence. A questionnaire was used to elicit patient preferences for the content, style, and format of prognostic information. Sociodemographic characteristics, clinicopathological factors, and quality of life (EORTC QLQ-30 and OES18) were explored as predictors for certain preferences. RESULTS: Of the 204 eligible patients, 176 patients (86%) returned the questionnaire. The majority of patients desired prognostic information. Information preferences declined when information became more specific and more negative. Married patients and higher-educated patients were more likely to want all prognostic information. The majority of patients wanted their specialist to start the discussion about prognosis. However, a significant proportion of these patients wanted their specialist to first ask if they want to have prognostic information. The percentage of patients wanted a realistic and individualistic approach was 97%. Words and numbers were preferred over visual presentations. CONCLUSION: After potentially curative esophagectomy for cancer, the majority of patients want detailed prognostic information and want their specialist to begin the prognostic discussion. Patients prefer their doctor to be realistic; words and numbers are preferred over figures and graphs.

3D Endoscopic Donor Nephrectomy Versus Robot-assisted Donor Nephrectomy: A Detailed Comparison of 2 Prospective Cohorts.

BACKGROUND: There are 2 endoscopic surgical techniques that implement 3-dimensional (3D) vision to overcome visual misperception: 3D endoscopy and the da Vinci surgical system. 3D endoscopy has several advantages, such as the presence of tactile feedback and easy implementation, at lower costs. We aimed to assess whether 3D endoscopy could be an alternative to the robot during living donor nephrectomy. METHODS: Between April 2015 and April 2016, we prospectively collected data on 40 patients undergoing 3D endoscopic living donor nephrectomies in 1 center, performed by a da Vinci-certified surgeon. Data on donors' perioperative results and recipient and graft survival were collected. These data were compared to 40 robot-assisted donor nephrectomies performed in the same center (between January 2012 and May 2014). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics for both groups were comparable. Intraoperative results showed a significantly shorter median skin-to-skin time of 138.5 minutes (125.8-163.8) versus 169.0 (141.5-209.8) minutes in favor of the 3D group (P = 0.001). Warm ischemia time (P = 0.003) and hilar phase for both single (1 artery and vein) and multiple anatomies (≥1 artery and/or vein [P = 0.002 and P = 0.010, respectively]) were also significantly reduced in favor of the 3D group, with a flat learning curve. Follow-up demonstrated no readmissions nor significant differences for donors, recipients, and graft survival. CONCLUSIONS: 3D endoscopy may be a good alternative to robot-assisted donor nephrectomy because morbidity, graft, and recipient survival were comparable, with a significantly shorter median skin-to-skin time, warm ischemia time, and hilar dissection phase. Furthermore, implementation was easy and at lower costs, whereas tactile feedback was preserved.

Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (LEOPARD-2): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Data from observational studies suggest that minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) is superior to open pancreatoduodenectomy regarding intraoperative blood loss, postoperative morbidity, and length of hospital stay, without increasing total costs. However, several case-matched studies failed to demonstrate superiority of MIPD, and large registry studies from the USA even suggested increased mortality for MIPDs performed in low-volume (<10 MIPDs annually) centers. Randomized controlled multicenter trials are lacking but clearly required. We hypothesize that time to functional recovery is shorter after MIPD compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy, even in an enhanced recovery setting. METHODS/DESIGN: LEOPARD-2 is a randomized controlled, parallel-group, patient-blinded, multicenter, phase 2/3, superiority trial in centers that completed the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group LAELAPS-2 training program for laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy or LAELAPS-3 training program for robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and have performed ≥ 20 MIPDs. A total of 136 patients with symptomatic benign, premalignant, or malignant disease will be randomly assigned to undergo minimally invasive or open pancreatoduodenectomy in an enhanced recovery setting. After the first 40 patients (phase 2), the data safety monitoring board will assess safety outcomes (not blinded for treatment allocation) and decide on continuation to phase 3. Patients from phase 2 will then be included in phase 3. The primary outcome measure is time (days) to functional recovery. All patients will be blinded for the surgical approach, at least until postoperative day 5, but preferably until functional recovery has been attained. Secondary outcome measures are operative and postoperative outcomes, including clinically relevant complications, mortality, quality of life, and costs. DISCUSSION: The LEOPARD-2 trial is designed to assess whether MIPD reduces time to functional recovery, as compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy in an enhanced recovery setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register, NTR5689 . Registered on 2 March 2016.

First case report of chylous ascites after robot-assisted donor nephrectomy.

We present the first case report of chylous ascites following total robot-assisted donor nephrectomy. A 39-year-old female underwent a transperitoneal left-sided total robot-assisted donor nephrectomy. The procedure was uneventful and the patient was discharged without any symptoms. At postoperative Day 29, the patient presented with abdominal pain, nausea and a distended, painful abdomen with shifting dullness. She was diagnosed with chylous ascites by ultrasonography and puncture analysis, and treated with therapeutic drainage and dietary restriction. After 4 weeks, she was free of symptoms. The occurrence of this complication is rare after donor nephrectomy. Fortunately, the complication can be successfully treated within a few weeks with minimal discomfort for the patient as demonstrated in this case. It is of utmost importance to minimize the risks and limit discomfort for live kidney donors who willingly undergo major surgery to improve the well-being of another individual.

Randomized controlled trial comparing hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic versus standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) has become the gold standard for live-donor nephrectomy, as it results in a short convalescence time and increased quality of life. However, intraoperative safety has been debated, as severe complications occur incidentally. Hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy (HARP) is an alternative approach, combining the safety of hand-guided surgery with the benefits of endoscopic techniques and retroperitoneal access. We assessed the best approach to optimize donors' quality of life and safety. METHODS: In two tertiary referral centers, donors undergoing left-sided nephrectomy were randomly assigned to HARP or LDN. Primary endpoint was physical function, one of the dimensions of the Short Form-36 questionnaire on quality of life, at 1 month postoperatively. Secondary endpoints included intraoperative events and operation times. Follow-up was 1 year. RESULTS: In total, 190 donors were randomized. Physical function at 1 month follow-up did not significantly differ between groups (estimated difference, 1.79; 95% confidence interval, -4.1 to 7.68; P=0.55). HARP resulted in significantly shorter skin-to-skin time (mean, 159 vs. 188 min; P<0.001), shorter warm ischemia time (2 vs. 5 min; P<0.001) and a lower intraoperative event rate (5% vs. 11%, P=0.117). Length of stay (both 3 days; P=0.135) and postoperative complication rate (8% vs. 8%; P=1.00) were not significantly different. Potential graft-related complications did not significantly differ (6% vs. 13%; P=0.137). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with LDN, left-sided HARP leads to similar quality of life, shorter operating time, and warm ischemia time. Therefore, we recommend HARP as a valuable alternative to the laparoscopic approach for left-sided donor nephrectomy.

Outcome of esophagectomy for cancer in elderly patients.

BACKGROUND: This study analyzes the outcome of esophageal resection in patients 70 or more years of age, compared with patients aged less than 70 years and identifies risk factors for worse outcome in the elderly. METHODS: Comorbidity, postoperative morbidity, in-hospital mortality and survival rates were compared between 811 patients aged less than 70 years and 250 patients aged 70 years or more who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in a single high-volume center from 1985 to 2005. RESULTS: Groups were similar regarding surgical approach, resectability, and tumor stage. More patients aged 70 years or more had cardiovascular and respiratory concomitant disease. Among patients aged 70 years or more, the prevalence of adenocarcinoma and Barrett's transformation was higher (67% versus 53% for patients aged less than 70 years, and 22% versus 15%, respectively). There were no differences in surgical complications (20% versus 17%). Nonsurgical complications occurred more in patients aged 70 years or more (35% versus 27%) and operative mortality was higher among elderly patients (8.4 versus 3.8%), as was in-hospital mortality (11.6% versus 5.4%). The disease-specific 5-year survival was lower for patients aged 70 years or more (27% versus 34%). The 1-year survival, reflecting the impact of operative morbidity and mortality, was 58% for patients aged 70 years or more and 68% for the patients aged less than 70 years (p = 0.002). Among patients aged 70 years or more, respiratory comorbidity and thoracoabdominal resection were risk factors for the occurrence of nonsurgical complications and respiratory comorbidity for in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Older patients have increased operative and in-hospital mortality and decreased 5-year survival after esophageal resection for cancer. Our results indicate that especially thoracoabdominal resection for esophageal carcinoma should be carefully considered for patients older than 70 years who suffer from respiratory disease.

Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a plea for the right-sided approach.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) has become the preferred procedure for live donor nephrectomy. Most transplant surgeons are reluctant toward right-sided LDN (R-LDN) fearing short vessels and renal vein thrombosis. METHODS: In our institution, selection of the appropriate kidney for donation was based on the same criteria that traditionally governed open donor nephrectomy. All intraoperative and postoperative data were prospectively recorded. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-nine R-LDNs (56%) and 124 left-sided LDNs (L-LDN, 44%) were performed. Demographics did not significantly differ. Complications occurred in 10 (6%) vs. 23 (19%) procedures (R-LDN vs. L-LDN, P=0.002), resulting in 2 and 11 conversions, respectively. Right-sided kidney donation was the only independent preventative factor for complications in multivariate analysis (P=0.008, Odds ratio 0.33). R-LDN was associated with shorter operation time (mean 202 vs. 247 min, P<0.001) and less blood loss (139 vs. 294 mL, P<0.001). Hospital stay was 3 days in both groups. With regard to the recipients, the second warm ischemia time was similar (29 vs. 28 min, P=0.699). CONCLUSIONS: R-LDN is faster and safer than L-LDN and does not adversely affect graft function. R-LDN may be advocated to allow donors to benefit from the advantages of laparoscopic surgery.

The need for a prophylactic gastrojejunostomy for unresectable periampullary cancer: a prospective randomized multicenter trial with special focus on assessment of quality of life.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of a prophylactic gastrojejunostomy on the development of gastric outlet obstruction and quality of life in patients with unresectable periampullary cancer found during explorative laparotomy. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Several studies, including one randomized trial, propagate to perform a prophylactic gastrojejunostomy routinely in patients with periampullary cancer found to be unresectable during laparotomy. Others suggest an increase of postoperative complications. Controversy still exists in general surgical practice if a double bypass should be performed routinely in these patients. METHODS: Between December 1998 and March 2002, patients with a periampullary carcinoma who were found to be unresectable during exploration were randomized to receive a double bypass (hepaticojejunostomy and a retrocolic gastrojejunostomy) or a single bypass (hepaticojejunostomy). Randomization was stratified for center and presence of metastases. Patients with gastrointestinal obstruction and patients treated endoscopically for more than 3 months were excluded. Primary endpoints were development of clinical gastric outlet obstruction and surgical intervention for gastric outlet obstruction. Secondary endpoints were mortality, morbidity, hospital stay, survival, and quality of life, measured prospectively by the EORTC-C30 and Pan26 questionnaires. It was decided to perform an interim analysis after inclusion of 50% of the patients (n = 70). RESULTS: Five of the 70 patients randomized were lost to follow-up. From the remaining 65 patients, 36 patients underwent a double and 29 a single bypass. There were no differences in patient demographics, preoperative symptoms, and surgical findings between the groups. Clinical symptoms of gastric outlet obstruction were found in 2 of the 36 patients (5.5%) with a double bypass, and in 12 of the 29 patients (41.4%) with a single bypass (P = 0.001). In the double bypass group, one patient (2.8%) and in the single bypass group 6 patients (20.7%) required (re-)gastrojejunostomy during follow-up (P = 0.04). The absolute risk reduction for reoperation in the double bypass group was 18%, and the numbers needed to treat was 6. Postoperative morbidity rates, including delayed gastric emptying, were 31% in the double versus 28% in the single bypass group (P = 0.12). Median postoperative length of stay was 11 days (range 4-76 days) in the double versus 9 days (range 6-20 days) in the single bypass group (P = 0.06); median survival was 7.2 months in the double versus 8.4 months in the single bypass group (P = 0.15). No differences were found in the quality of life between both groups. After surgery most quality of life scores deteriorated temporarily and were restored to their baseline score (t = -1) within 4 months. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic gastrojejunostomy significantly decreases the incidence of gastric outlet obstruction without increasing complication rates. There were no differences in quality of life between the two groups. Together with the previous randomized trial from the Hopkins group, this study provides sufficient evidence to state that a double bypass consisting of a hepaticojejunostomy and a prophylactic gastrojejunostomy is preferable to a single bypass consisting of only a hepaticojejunostomy in patients undergoing surgical palliation for unresectable periampullary carcinoma. Therefore, the trial was stopped earlier than planned.