title: [Wound healing after pancreaticojejunostomy in piglets: a comparison between two anastomotic methods].
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To evaluate wound healing after types of pancreaticojejunostomy.
  
  
  METHODS
  After resection of the pancreatic head, 38 domestic piglets were divided into two groups according to the types of anastomoses: group I: binding pancreaticojejunostomy, a new technique designed and advocated by professor Peng Shuyou; group II: end-to-end pancreaticojejunal invagination. Anastomotic strength in vivo and histopathological findings were assessed on operative day and postoperative day 5 and 10.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Bursting pressure was 139.7 +/- 8.0, 178.7 +/- 9.7 and 268.8 +/- 12.8 mm Hg in group I on day 0, 5 and 10, whereas 67.3 +/- 7.9, 96.2 +/- 10.4 and 130.6 +/- 9.3 mm Hg in group II. The gain on day 0 to 5 and 5 to 10 was 27.9% and 50.5% in group I and 42.9% and 35.7% in group II, respectively. A significant difference was observed between group I and group II, and between 5 and 10 day after anastomoses (P < 0.01). Breaking strength was 4.5 +/- 0.4, 6.6 +/- 0.4 and 10.0 +/- 0.6 N in group I on day 0, 5 and 10 and 4.6 +/- 0.6, 5.8 +/- 0.5 and 7.1 +/- 0.6 N in group II. Although a similar value was shown in both types of anastomoses on day 0, a rapider gain was demonstrated on day 0 to 5 and 5 to 10 in group I (44.8% and 52.9%) than in group II (25.4% and 22.0%). A significant difference was found on day 5 and 10 between the two types of anastomoses (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01). Anastomotic site was well repaired by connective tissue and the cut surface of pancreatic stump was covered by mucosal epithelium in group I on day 10, but the cut surface was incompletely repaired by granulation tissue and no, regeneration of the epithelium was found in group II.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Anastomotic strength of binding pancreaticojejunostomy was stronger than end-to-end pancreaticojejunal invagination and the healing was better and rapid.
authors.affiliation: Department of General Surgery, Second Affiliated Hospital of Medical College, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310009, China.
authors.forename: Ming-dong
authors.initials: MD
authors.lastname: Bai
authors.forename: Shu-you
authors.initials: SY
authors.lastname: Peng
authors.forename: Ying-bin
authors.initials: YB
authors.lastname: Liu
authors.forename: Xiao-peng
authors.initials: XP
authors.lastname: Chen
authors.forename: Liu-bin
authors.initials: LB
authors.lastname: Shi
authors.forename: Jin-fei
authors.initials: JF
authors.lastname: Pan
authors.forename: Jun-min
authors.initials: JM
authors.lastname: Xu
authors.forename: Xing-kai
authors.initials: XK
authors.lastname: Meng
authors.forename: Xiang-dong
authors.initials: XD
authors.lastname: Cheng
authors.forename: Yong
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Wang
authors.forename: Jiu-mei
authors.initials: JM
authors.lastname: Sun
authors.forename: Ming-min
authors.initials: MM
authors.lastname: Fan
authors.forename: Zhe
authors.initials: Z
authors.lastname: Tang
mesh_terms: D000714:Anastomosis, Surgical / Q000379:methods*; D000818:Animals; D005260:Female; D008297:Male; D010193:Pancreaticojejunostomy / Q000379:methods*; D013552:Swine; D014945:Wound Healing