Management of the difficult duodenal stump.

Burch JM, Cox CL, Feliciano DV, Richardson RJ, Martin RR. Management of the difficult duodenal stump. Am J Surg. 1991 Dec;162(6):522-6.

Full-text for Emory users.

Abstract: Leakage from the duodenal stump has been the most feared complication of the Billroth II reconstruction following gastric resection. The purpose of our study was to evaluate four methods of duodenal stump closure in 200 patients. One hundred and forty-seven (74%) patients had duodenal ulcers; 28 (14%) had gastric ulcers; and 25 (13%) had a variety of other inflammatory conditions. The most common indication for operation was acute hemorrhage (51%), followed by perforation (24%), intractability (15%), and obstruction (10%). Conventional duodenal closures were performed in 160 (80%) patients, Nissen’s closure in 25 (13%), Bancroft’s closure in 6 (3%), and tube duodenostomy in 9 (5%). Duodenal leaks occurred in four (2.5%) patients with conventional closures and in three (33%) patients with tube duodenostomies. No leaks occurred in patients with Nissen’s or Bancroft’s closures. The hospital mortality rate for the series was 9.5%; however, no patient who developed a duodenal leak died. We conclude that Nissen’s and Bancroft’s closures were safe and effective, but that tube duodenostomy did not reliably prevent uncontrolled leakage.


Vashist YK, et al. Management of the difficult duodenal stump in penetrating duodenal ulcer disease: a comparative analysis of duodenojejunostomy with “classical” stump closure (Nissen-Bsteh). Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2012 Dec;397(8):1243-9.

Full-text for Emory users.

Table 4. Multivariable Analysis for Perioperative Mortality and Leakage in All 124 Patients

Results: Overall perioperative mortality was 10.5%. However, DJ significantly reduced the mortality rate (4.8%) associated with penetrating duodenal ulcer compared to CC (16.1%, P < 0.04). The overall morbidity in DJ patients nearly equalled that in the CC group (P = 0.4). Differences in the prevalence of duodenal leakage rate between DJ (14.5%) and CC (29%) patients were of borderline significance (P = 0.05). Temporary biliary diversion was identified as a prognostic factor for closure consistency with lower duodenal leakage rates in both DJ (odds ratio 0.05, 95% confidence interval 0.005-0.42) and CC patients (odds ratio 0.2, 95% confidence interval 0.05-0.6). In contrast, gastric diversion performed in a subset of 35 DJ patients had no protective effect.

Conclusion: Duodenojejunostomy combined with temporary biliary diversion substantially improves perioperative outcome in management of penetrating duodenal ulcer.


Gupta S, Kaushik R, Sharma R, Attri A. The management of large perforations of duodenal ulcers. BMC Surg. 2005 Jun 25;5:15.

Results: A total of 40 patients were identified to have duodenal ulcer perforations more than 1 cm in size, thus accounting for nearly 25 % of all duodenal ulcer perforations operated during this period. These patients had a significantly higher incidence of leak, morbidity and mortality when compared to those with smaller perforations.

Conclusion: There are three distinct types of perforations of duodenal ulcers that are encountered in clinical practice. The first, are the ‘small’ perforations that are easy to manage and have low morbidity and mortality. The second are the ‘large’ perforations, that are also not uncommon, and omental patch closure gives the best results even in this subset of patients. The word ‘giant’ should be reserved for perforations that exceed 3 cms in diameter, and these are extremely uncommon.


Created 12/04/20; updated 09/03/21.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s