|
1
|
Ganduboina R, Dutta P, Pawar SG, Mukherjee I. Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A propensity-matched national analysis on surgical outcomes and healthcare disparities. Am J Surg 2024; 236:115897. [PMID: 39153468 DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2024.115897] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2024] [Revised: 07/07/2024] [Accepted: 08/12/2024] [Indexed: 08/19/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pancreatic adenocarcinoma of distal pancreas is hard to treat due to late presentation. While open distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy has had favourable outcomes, it has also had many complications which were low among Minimally invasive procedures. This retrospective cohort analysis compares minimally invasive and open distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) outcomes using a national inpatient database. METHODS The study used 2016-2020 NIS data. The study included 1577 distal pancreatic malignant tumor surgery patients. There were 530 Minimally Invasive and 1047 Open groups. Propensity matched analysis was performed on surgical groups to reduce confounding variables. RESULTS In comparison to open procedures, minimally invasive techniques reduced hospital stays by 10 % (OR = 0.90, 95 % CI 0.86-0.93). While not statistically significant, the unmatched analysis linked MIDP to lower in-hospital mortality. African Americans were 37 % less likely to undergo MIDP than Caucasians (OR = 0.63, 95 % CI = 0.40-0.96). CONCLUSION Nationwide analysis suggests MIDP may be a safe and effective surgical treatment for distal pancreatic adenocarcinoma. It may reduce hospital stays and mortality over open surgery. The study also suggests race may affect minimally invasive procedure rates.
Collapse
|
|
2
|
Seufferlein T, Mayerle J, Boeck S, Brunner T, Ettrich TJ, Grenacher L, Gress TM, Hackert T, Heinemann V, Kestler A, Sinn M, Tannapfel A, Wedding U, Uhl W. S3-Leitlinie Exokrines Pankreaskarzinom – Version 3.1. ZEITSCHRIFT FUR GASTROENTEROLOGIE 2024; 62:1724-1785. [PMID: 39389105 DOI: 10.1055/a-2338-3716] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/12/2024]
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Thomas Brunner
- Universitätsklinik für Strahlentherapie-Radioonkologie, Medizinische Universität Graz, Austria
| | | | | | - Thomas Mathias Gress
- Gastroenterologie und Endokrinologie Universitätsklinikum Gießen und Marburg, Germany
| | - Thilo Hackert
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Allgemein-, Viszeral- und Thoraxchirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany
| | - Volker Heinemann
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik III, Klinikum der Universität München-Campus Grosshadern, München, Germany
| | | | - Marianne Sinn
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik II Onkologie und Hämatologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany
| | | | | | - Waldemar Uhl
- Allgemein- und Viszeralchirurgie, St Josef-Hospital, Bochum, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
|
3
|
Seufferlein T, Mayerle J, Boeck S, Brunner T, Ettrich TJ, Grenacher L, Gress TM, Hackert T, Heinemann V, Kestler A, Sinn M, Tannapfel A, Wedding U, Uhl W. S3-Leitlinie Exokrines Pankreaskarzinom – Version 3.1. ZEITSCHRIFT FUR GASTROENTEROLOGIE 2024; 62:e874-e995. [PMID: 39389103 DOI: 10.1055/a-2338-3533] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/12/2024]
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Thomas Brunner
- Universitätsklinik für Strahlentherapie-Radioonkologie, Medizinische Universität Graz, Austria
| | | | | | - Thomas Mathias Gress
- Gastroenterologie und Endokrinologie Universitätsklinikum Gießen und Marburg, Germany
| | - Thilo Hackert
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Allgemein-, Viszeral- und Thoraxchirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany
| | - Volker Heinemann
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik III, Klinikum der Universität München-Campus Grosshadern, München, Germany
| | | | - Marianne Sinn
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik II Onkologie und Hämatologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany
| | | | | | - Waldemar Uhl
- Allgemein- und Viszeralchirurgie, St Josef-Hospital, Bochum, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
|
4
|
Koh YX, Zhao Y, Tan IEH, Tan HL, Chua DW, Loh WL, Tan EK, Teo JY, Au MKH, Goh BKP. Evaluating the economic efficiency of open, laparoscopic, and robotic distal pancreatectomy: an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 2024; 38:3035-3051. [PMID: 38777892 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-024-10889-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2023] [Accepted: 04/29/2024] [Indexed: 05/25/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study compared the cost-effectiveness of open (ODP), laparoscopic (LDP), and robotic (RDP) distal pancreatectomy (DP). METHODS Studies reporting the costs of DP were included in a literature search until August 2023. Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted, and surface under cumulative ranking area (SUCRA) values, mean difference (MD), odds ratio (OR), and 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were calculated for outcomes of interest. Cluster analysis was performed to examine the similarity and classification of DP approaches into homogeneous clusters. A decision model-based cost-utility analysis was conducted for the cost-effectiveness analysis of DP strategies. RESULTS Twenty-six studies with 29,164 patients were included in the analysis. Among the three groups, LDP had the lowest overall costs, while ODP had the highest overall costs (LDP vs. ODP: MD - 3521.36, 95% CrI - 6172.91 to - 1228.59). RDP had the highest procedural costs (ODP vs. RDP: MD - 4311.15, 95% CrI - 6005.40 to - 2599.16; LDP vs. RDP: MD - 3772.25, 95% CrI - 4989.50 to - 2535.16), but incurred the lowest hospitalization costs. Both LDP (MD - 3663.82, 95% CrI - 6906.52 to - 747.69) and RDP (MD - 6678.42, 95% CrI - 11,434.30 to - 2972.89) had significantly reduced hospitalization costs compared to ODP. LDP and RDP demonstrated a superior profile regarding costs-morbidity, costs-mortality, costs-efficacy, and costs-utility compared to ODP. Compared to ODP, LDP and RDP cost $3110 and $817 less per patient, resulting in 0.03 and 0.05 additional quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), respectively, with positive incremental net monetary benefit (NMB). RDP costs $2293 more than LDP with a negative incremental NMB but generates 0.02 additional QALYs with improved postoperative morbidity and spleen preservation. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggests that LDP and RDP are more cost-effective options compared to ODP at various willingness-to-pay thresholds. CONCLUSION LDP and RDP are more cost-effective than ODP, with LDP exhibiting better cost savings and RDP demonstrating superior surgical outcomes and improved QALYs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ye Xin Koh
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Academia, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore.
- Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore, Singapore.
- Liver Transplant Service, SingHealth Duke-National University of Singapore Transplant Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
| | - Yun Zhao
- Group Finance Analytics, Singapore Health Services, Singapore, 168582, Singapore
| | - Ivan En-Howe Tan
- Group Finance Analytics, Singapore Health Services, Singapore, 168582, Singapore
| | - Hwee Leong Tan
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Academia, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore
- Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Darren Weiquan Chua
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Academia, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore
- Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore, Singapore
- Liver Transplant Service, SingHealth Duke-National University of Singapore Transplant Centre, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Wei-Liang Loh
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Academia, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore
- Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Ek Khoon Tan
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Academia, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore
- Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore, Singapore
- Liver Transplant Service, SingHealth Duke-National University of Singapore Transplant Centre, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Jin Yao Teo
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Academia, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore
- Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Marianne Kit Har Au
- Group Finance Analytics, Singapore Health Services, Singapore, 168582, Singapore
- Finance, SingHealth Community Hospitals, Singapore, 168582, Singapore
- Finance, Regional Health System & Strategic Finance, Singapore Health Services, Singapore, 168582, Singapore
| | - Brian Kim Poh Goh
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Academia, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore
- Duke-National University of Singapore Medical School, Singapore, Singapore
- Liver Transplant Service, SingHealth Duke-National University of Singapore Transplant Centre, Singapore, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
|
5
|
Acciuffi S, Hilal MA, Ferrari C, Al-Madhi S, Chouillard MA, Messaoudi N, Croner RS, Gumbs AA. Study International Multicentric Pancreatic Left Resections (SIMPLR): Does Surgical Approach Matter? Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:1051. [PMID: 38473411 PMCID: PMC10931444 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16051051] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2023] [Revised: 02/21/2024] [Accepted: 02/24/2024] [Indexed: 03/14/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Minimally invasive surgery is increasingly preferred for left-sided pancreatic resections. The SIMPLR study aims to compare open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches using propensity score matching analysis. METHODS This study included 258 patients with tumors of the left side of the pancreas who underwent surgery between 2016 and 2020 at three high-volume centers. The patients were divided into three groups based on their surgical approach and matched in a 1:1 ratio. RESULTS The open group had significantly higher estimated blood loss (620 mL vs. 320 mL, p < 0.001), longer operative time (273 vs. 216 min, p = 0.003), and longer hospital stays (16.9 vs. 6.81 days, p < 0.001) compared to the laparoscopic group. There was no difference in lymph node yield or resection status. When comparing open and robotic groups, the robotic procedures yielded a higher number of lymph nodes (24.9 vs. 15.2, p = 0.011) without being significantly longer. The laparoscopic group had a shorter operative time (210 vs. 340 min, p < 0.001), shorter ICU stays (0.63 vs. 1.64 days, p < 0.001), and shorter hospital stays (6.61 vs. 11.8 days, p < 0.001) when compared to the robotic group. There was no difference in morbidity or mortality between the three techniques. CONCLUSION The laparoscopic approach exhibits short-term benefits. The three techniques are equivalent in terms of oncological safety, morbidity, and mortality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sara Acciuffi
- Department of General-, Visceral-, Vascular- and Transplantation Surgery, University of Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany; (S.A.); (S.A.-M.); (R.S.C.)
| | - Mohammed Abu Hilal
- Hepatobiliopancreatic, Robotic and Minimally Invasive Surgery Unit, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Via Bissolati 57, 25124 Brescia, Italy;
| | - Clarissa Ferrari
- Research and Clinical Trials Office, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Via Bissolati 57, 25124 Brescia, Italy;
| | - Sara Al-Madhi
- Department of General-, Visceral-, Vascular- and Transplantation Surgery, University of Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany; (S.A.); (S.A.-M.); (R.S.C.)
| | - Marc-Anthony Chouillard
- Hepatobiliopancreatic Surgery, Université de Paris Cité, 85 boulevard Saint-Germain, 75006 Paris, France;
| | - Nouredin Messaoudi
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel and Europe Hospitals, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090 Brussels, Belgium;
| | - Roland S. Croner
- Department of General-, Visceral-, Vascular- and Transplantation Surgery, University of Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany; (S.A.); (S.A.-M.); (R.S.C.)
| | - Andrew A. Gumbs
- Department of General-, Visceral-, Vascular- and Transplantation Surgery, University of Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany; (S.A.); (S.A.-M.); (R.S.C.)
- Department of Advanced & Minimally Invasive Surgery, American Hospital of Tbilisi, 17 Ushangi Chkheidze Street, Tbilisi 0102, Georgia
| |
Collapse
|
|
6
|
Kakati RT, Naffouje S, Spanheimer PM, Dahdaleh FS. Role of minimally invasive surgery in the management of localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a review. J Robot Surg 2024; 18:85. [PMID: 38386224 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-024-01825-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/15/2023] [Accepted: 01/10/2024] [Indexed: 02/23/2024]
Abstract
Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains a highly lethal malignancy with a minority of patients eligible for curative-intent surgical intervention. Pancreatic resections are technically demanding operations associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. Minimally invasive pancreatic resections (MIPRs), which include laparoscopic and robotic approaches, may enhance postoperative outcomes by lessening physiological impact of open surgery. A limited number of randomized-controlled trials as well as numerous retrospective reports have focused on MIPR outcomes and role in management of a variety of tumors, including PDAC. Today, MIPRs are generally considered acceptable alternatives to open surgery as a trend towards improved short-term metrics is observed. However, several questions remain regarding the oncological adequacy of MIPR's as long-term experience is less extensive compared to open techniques. This review aims to summarize existing evidence on MIPRs with a focus on PDAC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rasha T Kakati
- Department of Surgical Oncology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Samer Naffouje
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Philip M Spanheimer
- Department of Surgical Oncology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Fadi S Dahdaleh
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Edward-Elmhurst Health, 120 Spalding Drive, Ste 205, Naperville, IL, 60540, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
|
7
|
Bao Y, Zhang M, Wu P, Wang Y, Wan B, Li X, Ding H. Cost-effectiveness of open pancreaticoduodenectomy with or without Heidelberg TRIANGLE operation for pancreatic cancer in China. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2023; 149:16705-16715. [PMID: 37726557 DOI: 10.1007/s00432-023-05406-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/07/2023] [Accepted: 09/04/2023] [Indexed: 09/21/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Pancreatic cancer is a digestive malignancy with dismal prognosis. The advent of Heidelberg TRIANGLE dissection technique brings a turning point to improve the chance of survival. Our study aimed to evaluated the cost-effectiveness of open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) versus OPD combined with TRIANGLE operation (OPD-TRIANGLE) for patients with pancreatic cancer from the perspective of healthcare system in China. METHODS Two hundred forty-six patients with pancreatic cancer who underwent OPD or OPD-TRIANGLE from January to September 2022 were enrolled in this study. We performed a decision tree model to assess clinical and economic implications of different surgical strategies. Estimation of health utilities was based on published literature, while costs were acquired from the hospitals, clinical expert consultations, and other local charge. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was regarded as the primary outcome. Uncertainty of the findings was addressed via sensitivity analyses and scenario analyses. RESULTS The results indicated that OPD-TRIANGLE group yielded additional 0.0402 QALYs at an incremental cost of US$1501.83 compared with OPD group, and the corresponding ICER was US$37,358.96 per QALY. The probabilities of OPD-TRIANGLE as the prior option were 52.8% at the WTP threshold of 60,000 US$/QALY. The main factors lined with costs incorporating total medical costs and operation-related costs. With 5-20% price reduction of OPD-TRIANGLE, the outcomes were also economically attractive. CONCLUSION The findings of this population-based study suggested that OPD-TRIANGLE was likely to be cost-effective for patients with pancreatic cancer when compared against OPD. Further in-depth studies should be conducted to provide more comprehensive evidence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yuwen Bao
- School of Health Policy and Management, Nanjing Medical University, No. 101 Longmian Avenue, Jiangning District, Nanjing, 211166, China
| | - Mengdie Zhang
- School of Pharmacy, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, 211166, China
| | - Pengfei Wu
- Pancreas Center, The First Affiliated Hospital with Nanjing Medical University (Jiangsu Province Hospital) Pancreas Institute of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, 210029, China
| | - Yingpeng Wang
- Department of Health Insurance Management, The First Affiliated Hospital with Nanjing Medical University (Jiangsu Province Hospital), 300 Guangzhou Road, Gulou District, Nanjing, 210029, China
| | - Bin Wan
- Department of Health Insurance Management, The First Affiliated Hospital with Nanjing Medical University (Jiangsu Province Hospital), 300 Guangzhou Road, Gulou District, Nanjing, 210029, China
| | - Xin Li
- School of Health Policy and Management, Nanjing Medical University, No. 101 Longmian Avenue, Jiangning District, Nanjing, 211166, China.
- School of Pharmacy, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, 211166, China.
- Center for Global Health, School of Public Health, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, 211166, China.
| | - Haixia Ding
- Department of Health Insurance Management, The First Affiliated Hospital with Nanjing Medical University (Jiangsu Province Hospital), 300 Guangzhou Road, Gulou District, Nanjing, 210029, China.
| |
Collapse
|
|
8
|
Timmerhuis HC, Ngongoni RF, Jensen CW, Baiocchi M, DeLong JC, Dua MM, Norton JA, Poultsides GA, Worth PJ, Visser BC. Comparison of Spleen-Preservation Versus Splenectomy in Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy. J Gastrointest Surg 2023; 27:2166-2176. [PMID: 37653153 DOI: 10.1007/s11605-023-05809-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/01/2023] [Accepted: 07/29/2023] [Indexed: 09/02/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Spleen-preservation during minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) can be technically challenging and remains controversial. Our primary aim was to compare MIDP and splenectomy with spleen-preserving MIDP. Secondarily, we compared two spleen-preserving techniques. METHODS Adults undergoing MIDP (2007-2021) were retrospectively included in this single-center study. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes between spleen-preservation and splenectomy and between the two spleen-preserving techniques were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test for continuous data, and Fisher's exact test for categorical data. RESULTS Of the 293 patients who underwent MIDP, preservation of the spleen was intended in 208 (71%) patients. Spleen-preservation was achieved in 174 patients (84%) via the Warshaw technique (130; 75%) or vessel-preservation (44; 25%). The spleen-preserving group had shorter length of stay (3 vs 4 days, p < 0.01), fewer conversions to open (1 vs 12, p < 0.01) and less blood loss (p < 0.01) compared to the splenectomy group. Operative (OR) times were comparable (229 vs 214 min, p = 0.67). Except for the operative time, which was longer for the Warshaw technique (245 vs 183 min, p = 0.01), no other differences between the two spleen-preserving techniques were found. At a median follow-up of 43 (IQR 18-79) months after spleen-preservation, only 2 (1.1%) patients had required splenectomy (1 partial splenectomy for infarct/abscess after Warshaw, 1 for variceal bleeding after vessel-preserving). CONCLUSIONS Spleen-preservation is not associated with increased risk of blood loss, longer hospital stay, conversion, nor lengthy OR times. Late splenectomy is very rarely required. Given the immune consequences of splenectomy, spleen-preservation should be strongly considered in MIDP.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hester C Timmerhuis
- Department of Surgery, Section of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA
| | - Rejoice F Ngongoni
- Department of Surgery, Section of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA
| | | | - Michael Baiocchi
- Stanford Prevention Research Center and Departments of Statistics and Health Research and Policy, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Jonathan C DeLong
- Department of Surgery, Section of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA
| | - Monica M Dua
- Department of Surgery, Section of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA
| | - Jeffrey A Norton
- Department of Surgery, Section of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA
| | - George A Poultsides
- Department of Surgery, Section of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA
| | - Patrick J Worth
- Department of Surgery, Section of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA
| | - Brendan C Visser
- Department of Surgery, Section of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
|
9
|
Abu Hilal M, Carvalho L, van Ramshorst TME, Ramera M. Minimally invasive vessel-preservation spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy-how I do it, tips and tricks and clinical results. Surg Endosc 2023; 37:7024-7038. [PMID: 37351643 PMCID: PMC10462519 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-023-10173-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2022] [Accepted: 05/16/2023] [Indexed: 06/24/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Minimally invasive spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) has emerged as a parenchyma-preserving approach and has become the standard treatment for pancreatic benign and low-grade malignant lesions. Nevertheless, minimally invasive SPDP is still technically challenging, especially when vessel preservation is intended. This study aims to describe the technique and outcomes of laparoscopic (LSPDP) and robot-assisted spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (RSPDP) with intended vessel preservation, highlighting the important tips and tricks to overcome technical obstacles and optimize surgical outcomes. METHODS A retrospective observational study of consecutive patients undergoing LSPDP and RSPDP with intended vessel preservation by a single surgeon in two different centers. A video demonstrating both surgical techniques is attached. RESULTS A total of 50 patients who underwent minimally invasive SPDP were included of which 88% underwent LSPDP and 12% RSPDP. Splenic vessels were preserved in 37 patients (74%) while a salvage vessel-resecting technique was performed in 13 patients (26%). The average surgery time was 178 ± 74 min for the vessel-preserving and 188 ± 57 for the vessel-resecting technique (p = 0.706) with an estimated blood loss of 100 mL in both groups (p = 0.663). The overall complication rate was 46% (n = 23) with major complications (Clavien Dindo ≥ III) observed in 14% (n = 7) of the patients. No conversions occurred. The median length of hospital stay was 4 days. CONCLUSION This study presented the results after minimally invasive SPDP with intended vessel preservation by a highly experienced pancreatic surgeon. It provided tips and tricks to successfully accomplish a minimally invasive SPDP, which can contribute to quick patient rehabilitation and optimal postoperative results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mohammad Abu Hilal
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Lúcia Carvalho
- Department of Surgery, Centro Hospitalar de Entre O Douro E Vouga, Santa Maria da Feira, Portugal
| | - Tess M. E. van Ramshorst
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marco Ramera
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
- Department of Clinical and Experimental Sciences, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
10
|
Lee S, Varghese C, Fung M, Patel B, Pandanaboyana S, Dasari BVM. Systematic review and meta-analysis of cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive versus open pancreatic resections. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2023; 408:306. [PMID: 37572127 PMCID: PMC10423165 DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-03017-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2023] [Accepted: 07/11/2023] [Indexed: 08/14/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The systematic review is aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open distal pancreatectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy. METHOD The MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, and clinical trial registries were systematically searched using the PRISMA framework. Studies of adults aged ≥ 18 year comparing laparoscopic and/or robotic versus open DP and/or PD that reported cost of operation or index admission, and cost-effectiveness outcomes were included. The risk of bias of non-randomised studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, while the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB2) tool was used for randomised studies. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for continuous variables. RESULTS Twenty-two studies (152,651 patients) were included in the systematic review and 15 studies in the meta-analysis (3 RCTs; 3 case-controlled; 9 retrospective studies). Of these, 1845 patients underwent MIS (1686 laparoscopic and 159 robotic) and 150,806 patients open surgery. The cost of surgical procedure (SMD 0.89; 95% CI 0.35 to 1.43; I2 = 91%; P = 0.001), equipment (SMD 3.73; 95% CI 1.55 to 5.91; I2 = 98%; P = 0.0008), and operating room occupation (SMD 1.17, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.24; I2 = 95%; P = 0.03) was higher with MIS. However, overall index hospitalisation costs trended lower with MIS (SMD - 0.13; 95% CI - 0.35 to 0.06; I2 = 80%; P = 0.17). There was significant heterogeneity among the studies. CONCLUSION Minimally invasive major pancreatic surgery entailed higher intraoperative but similar overall index hospitalisation costs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Suhyun Lee
- University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Chris Varghese
- Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | | | - Bijendra Patel
- Institute of Cancer, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, UK
- Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Sanjay Pandanaboyana
- HPB and Transplant Unit, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
| | - Bobby V M Dasari
- Department of HBP and Liver Transplant Surgery, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TH, UK.
- Institute of Immunology and Immunotherapy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
|
11
|
van Ramshorst TM, Edwin B, Han HS, Nakamura M, Yoon YS, Ohtsuka T, Tholfsen T, Besselink MG, Abu Hilal M. Learning curves in laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a different experience for each generation. Int J Surg 2023; 109:1648-1655. [PMID: 37144678 PMCID: PMC10389345 DOI: 10.1097/js9.0000000000000408] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2022] [Accepted: 04/06/2023] [Indexed: 05/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Learning curves of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) are mostly based on 'self-taught' surgeons who acquired sufficient proficiency largely through self-teaching. No learning curves have been investigated for 'trained' surgeons who received training and built on the experience of the 'self-taught' surgeons. This study compared the learning curves and outcome of LDP between 'self-taught' and 'trained' surgeons in terms of feasibility and proficiency using short-term outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS Data of consecutive patients with benign or malignant disease of the left pancreas who underwent LDP by four 'self-taught' and four 'trained' surgeons between 1997 and 2019 were collected, starting from the first patient operated by a contributing surgeon. Risk-adjusted cumulative sum (RA-CUSUM) analyses were performed to determine phase-1 feasibility (operative time) and phase-2 proficiency (major complications) learning curves. Outcomes were compared based on the inflection points of the learning curves. RESULTS The inflection points for the feasibility and proficiency learning curves were 24 and 36 procedures for 'trained' surgeons compared to 64 and 85 procedures for 'self-taught' surgeons, respectively. In 'trained' surgeons, operative time was reduced after completion of the learning curves (230.5-203 min, P= 0.028). In 'self-taught' surgeons, operative time (240-195 min, P ≤0.001), major complications (20.6-7.8%, P= 0.008), and length of hospital stay (9-5 days, P ≤0.001) reduced after completion of the learning curves. CONCLUSION This retrospective international cohort study showed that the feasibility and proficiency learning curves for LDP of 'trained' surgeons were at least halved as compared to 'self-taught' surgeons.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tess M.E. van Ramshorst
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
- Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bjørn Edwin
- The Intervention Centre and Department of HPB Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, also Institute of Medicine, University of Oslo
| | - Ho-Seong Han
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Masafumi Nakamura
- Department of Surgery and Oncology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka
| | - Yoo-Seok Yoon
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Takao Ohtsuka
- First Department of Surgery, Kagoshima University School of Medicine, Kagoshima, Japan
| | - Tore Tholfsen
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Rikshospitalet, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Marc G. Besselink
- Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Mohammad Abu Hilal
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton National Health Service, Southampton, Hampshire, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
|
12
|
Seufferlein T, Mayerle J, Böck S, Brunner T, Ettrich TJ, Grenacher L, Gress TM, Hackert T, Heinemann V, Kestler A, Sinn M, Tannapfel A, Wedding U, Uhl W. S3-Leitlinie zum exokrinen Pankreaskarzinom – Langversion 2.0 – Dezember 2021 – AWMF-Registernummer: 032/010OL. ZEITSCHRIFT FUR GASTROENTEROLOGIE 2022; 60:e812-e909. [PMID: 36368658 DOI: 10.1055/a-1856-7346] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Stefan Böck
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik III, Universitätsklinikum München, Germany
| | - Thomas Brunner
- Universitätsklinik für Strahlentherapie-Radioonkologie, Medizinische Universität Graz, Austria
| | | | | | - Thomas Mathias Gress
- Klinik für Gastroenterologie und Endokrinologie, Universitätsklinikum Gießen und Marburg, Germany
| | - Thilo Hackert
- Klinik für Allgemein-, Viszeral- und Transplantationschirurgie Universitätsklinikum, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Volker Heinemann
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik III, Klinikum der Universität München-Campus Grosshadern, München, Germany
| | | | - Marianne Sinn
- Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik II Onkologie Hämatologie, Hamburg, Germany
| | | | | | - Waldemar Uhl
- Allgemein- und Viszeralchirurgie, St Josef-Hospital, Bochum, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
|
13
|
Bozkurt E, Sijberden JP, Hilal MA. What Is the Current Role and What Are the Prospects of the Robotic Approach in Liver Surgery? Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:4268. [PMID: 36077803 PMCID: PMC9454668 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14174268] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/30/2022] [Revised: 08/24/2022] [Accepted: 08/29/2022] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
In parallel with the historical development of minimally invasive surgery, the laparoscopic and robotic approaches are now frequently utilized to perform major abdominal surgical procedures. Nevertheless, the role of the robotic approach in liver surgery is still controversial, and a standardized, safe technique has not been defined yet. This review aims to summarize the currently available evidence and prospects of robotic liver surgery. Minimally invasive liver surgery has been extensively associated with benefits, in terms of less blood loss, and lower complication rates, including liver-specific complications such as clinically relevant bile leakage and post hepatectomy liver failure, when compared to open liver surgery. Furthermore, comparable R0 resection rates to open liver surgery have been reported, thus, demonstrating the safety and oncological efficiency of the minimally invasive approach. However, whether robotic liver surgery has merits over laparoscopic liver surgery is still a matter of debate. In the current literature, robotic liver surgery has mainly been associated with non-inferior outcomes compared to laparoscopy, although it is suggested that the robotic approach has a shorter learning curve, lower conversion rates, and less intraoperative blood loss. Robotic surgical systems offer a more realistic image with integrated 3D systems. In addition, the improved dexterity offered by robotic surgical systems can lead to improved intra and postoperative outcomes. In the future, integrated and improved haptic feedback mechanisms, artificial intelligence, and the introduction of more liver-specific dissectors will likely be implemented, further enhancing the robots' abilities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emre Bozkurt
- Department of Surgery, Poliambulanza Foundation Hospital, 25124 Brescia, Italy
- Department of Surgery, Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery Division, Koç University Hospital, Istanbul 34010, Turkey
| | - Jasper P. Sijberden
- Department of Surgery, Poliambulanza Foundation Hospital, 25124 Brescia, Italy
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Mohammed Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Poliambulanza Foundation Hospital, 25124 Brescia, Italy
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK
| |
Collapse
|
|
14
|
Seufferlein T, Mayerle J, Böck S, Brunner T, Ettrich TJ, Grenacher L, Gress TM, Hackert T, Heinemann V, Kestler A, Sinn M, Tannapfel A, Wedding U, Uhl W. S3-Leitlinie zum exokrinen Pankreaskarzinom – Kurzversion 2.0 – Dezember 2021, AWMF-Registernummer: 032/010OL. ZEITSCHRIFT FUR GASTROENTEROLOGIE 2022; 60:991-1037. [PMID: 35671996 DOI: 10.1055/a-1771-6811] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/13/2023]
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Stefan Böck
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik III, Universitätsklinikum München, Germany
| | - Thomas Brunner
- Universitätsklinik für Strahlentherapie-Radioonkologie, Medizinische Universität Graz, Austria
| | | | | | - Thomas Mathias Gress
- Klinik für Gastroenterologie und Endokrinologie, Universitätsklinikum Gießen und Marburg, Germany
| | - Thilo Hackert
- Klinik für Allgemein-, Viszeral- und Transplantationschirurgie Universitätsklinikum, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Volker Heinemann
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik III, Klinikum der Universität München-Campus Grosshadern, München, Germany
| | | | - Marianne Sinn
- Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik II Onkologie Hämatologie, Hamburg, Germany
| | | | | | - Waldemar Uhl
- Allgemein- und Viszeralchirurgie, St Josef-Hospital, Bochum, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
|
15
|
Ban D, Nishino H, Ohtsuka T, Nagakawa Y, Abu Hilal M, Asbun HJ, Boggi U, Goh BKP, He J, Honda G, Jang JY, Kang CM, Kendrick ML, Kooby DA, Liu R, Nakamura Y, Nakata K, Palanivelu C, Shrikhande SV, Takaori K, Tang CN, Wang SE, Wolfgang CL, Yiengpruksawan A, Yoon YS, Ciria R, Berardi G, Garbarino GM, Higuchi R, Ikenaga N, Ishikawa Y, Kozono S, Maekawa A, Murase Y, Watanabe Y, Zimmitti G, Kunzler F, Wang ZZ, Sakuma L, Osakabe H, Takishita C, Endo I, Tanaka M, Yamaue H, Tanabe M, Wakabayashi G, Tsuchida A, Nakamura M. International Expert Consensus on Precision Anatomy for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: PAM-HBP Surgery Project. JOURNAL OF HEPATO-BILIARY-PANCREATIC SCIENCES 2022; 29:161-173. [PMID: 34719123 DOI: 10.1002/jhbp.1071] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/25/2021] [Revised: 09/29/2021] [Accepted: 10/20/2021] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Surgical views with high resolution and magnification have enabled us to recognize the precise anatomical structures that can be used as landmarks during minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP). This study aimed to validate the usefulness of anatomy-based approaches for MIDP before and during the Expert Consensus Meeting: Precision Anatomy for Minimally Invasive HBP Surgery (February 24, 2021). METHODS Twenty-five international MIDP experts developed clinical questions regarding surgical anatomy and approaches for MIDP. Studies identified via a comprehensive literature search were classified using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology. Online Delphi voting was conducted after experts had drafted the recommendations, with the goal of obtaining >75% consensus. Experts discussed the revised recommendations in front of the validation committee and an international audience of 384 attendees. Finalized recommendations were made after a second round of online Delphi voting. RESULTS Four clinical questions were addressed, resulting in 10 recommendations. All recommendations reached at least a 75% consensus among experts. CONCLUSIONS The expert consensus on precision anatomy for MIDP has been presented as a set of recommendations based on available evidence and expert opinions. These recommendations should guide experts and trainees in performing safe MIDP and foster its appropriate dissemination worldwide.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daisuke Ban
- Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Hitoe Nishino
- Department of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan
- Department of General Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan
| | - Takao Ohtsuka
- First Department of Surgery, Kagoshima University School of Medicine, Kagoshima, Japan
| | - Yuichi Nagakawa
- Department of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Mohammed Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Horacio J Asbun
- Hepato-Biliary and Pancreas Surgery, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, Florida, USA
| | - Ugo Boggi
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy
| | - Brian K P Goh
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore City, Singapore
| | - Jin He
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Goro Honda
- Department of Surgery, Institute of Gastroenterology, Tokyo Women's Medical University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Jin-Young Jang
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Chang Moo Kang
- Department of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | | | - David A Kooby
- Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Winship Cancer Institute, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Rong Liu
- Faculty of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Institute of Hepatobiliary Surgery of Chinese PLA, Key Laboratory of Digital Hepatobiliary Surgery of Chinese PLA, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | | | - Kohei Nakata
- Department of Surgery and Oncology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan
| | - Chinnusamy Palanivelu
- Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery and Minimal Access Surgery, GEM Hospital and Research Centre, Coimbatore, India
| | - Shailesh V Shrikhande
- Department of Gastrointestinal and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India
| | - Kyoichi Takaori
- Division of Hepatobiliary-Pancreatic Surgery and Transplantation, Department of Surgery, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan
| | - Chung-Ngai Tang
- Department of Surgery, Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Hospital, Hong Kong SAR, China
| | - Shin-E Wang
- Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Christopher L Wolfgang
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreas Surgery, NYU Langone Health System, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA
| | - Anusak Yiengpruksawan
- Minimally Invasive Surgery Division, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Yoo-Seok Yoon
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Ruben Ciria
- Unit of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Hospital Reina Sofía, IMIBIC, Cordoba, Spain
| | - Giammauro Berardi
- Department of General Surgery and Liver Transplantation Service, San Camillo Forlanini Hospital of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Giovanni Maria Garbarino
- Department of Medical Surgical Science and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Ryota Higuchi
- Department of Surgery, Institute of Gastroenterology, Tokyo Women's Medical University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Naoki Ikenaga
- Department of Surgery and Oncology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan
| | - Yoshiya Ishikawa
- Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Shingo Kozono
- Department of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Aya Maekawa
- Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yoshiki Murase
- Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yusuke Watanabe
- Department of Surgery and Oncology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan
| | - Giuseppe Zimmitti
- Department of Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Filipe Kunzler
- Hepato-Biliary and Pancreas Surgery, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, Florida, USA
| | - Zi-Zheng Wang
- Faculty of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Institute of Hepatobiliary Surgery of Chinese PLA, Key Laboratory of Digital Hepatobiliary Surgery of Chinese PLA, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | | | - Hiroaki Osakabe
- Department of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Chie Takishita
- Department of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Itaru Endo
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Masao Tanaka
- Department of Surgery, Shimonoseki City Hospital, Shimonoseki, Japan
| | - Hiroki Yamaue
- Second Department of Surgery, Wakayama Medical University, Wakayama, Japan
| | - Minoru Tanabe
- Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Go Wakabayashi
- Center for Advanced Treatment of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Diseases, Ageo Central General Hospital, Saitama, Japan
| | - Akihiko Tsuchida
- Department of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Masafumi Nakamura
- Department of Surgery and Oncology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
|
16
|
Nishino H, Zimmitti G, Ohtsuka T, Abu Hilal M, Goh BKP, Kooby DA, Nakamura Y, Shrikhande SV, Yoon YS, Ban D, Nagakawa Y, Nakata K, Endo I, Tsuchida A, Nakamura M. Precision vascular anatomy for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: A systematic review. JOURNAL OF HEPATO-BILIARY-PANCREATIC SCIENCES 2022; 29:136-150. [PMID: 33527704 DOI: 10.1002/jhbp.903] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/27/2020] [Revised: 12/23/2020] [Accepted: 01/18/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is increasingly performed worldwide; however, the surgical anatomy required to safely perform MIDP has not yet been fully considered. This review evaluated the literature concerning peripancreatic vascular anatomy, which is considered important to conduct safe MIDP. METHODS A database search of PubMed and Ichushi (Japanese) was conducted. Qualified studies investigating the anatomical variations of peripancreatic vessels related to MIDP were evaluated using SIGN methodology. RESULTS Of 701 articles yielded by our search strategy, 76 articles were assessed in this systematic review. The important vascular anatomy required to recognize MIDP included the pancreatic parenchymal coverage on the root and the running course of the splenic artery, branching patterns of the splenic artery, confluence positions of the left gastric vein and the inferior mesenteric vein, forms of pancreatic veins including the centro-inferior pancreatic vein, characteristics of the left renal vein, and collateral routes perfusing the spleen following Warshaw's technique. Very few articles evaluating the relationship between the anatomical variations and surgical outcomes of MIDP were found. CONCLUSIONS The precise knowledge of peripancreatic vessels is important to adequately complete MIDP. More detailed anatomic analyses and descriptions will benefit surgeons and their patients who are facing these operations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hitoe Nishino
- Department of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Giuseppe Zimmitti
- Department of Surgery, Istituto Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Takao Ohtsuka
- First Department of Surgery, Kagoshima University School of Medicine, Kagoshima, Japan
| | - Mohammed Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Istituto Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Brian K P Goh
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore City, Singapore
| | - David A Kooby
- Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Winship Cancer Institute, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | | | - Shailesh V Shrikhande
- Department of Gastrointestinal and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
| | - Yoo-Seok Yoon
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
| | - Daisuke Ban
- Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery Division, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yuichi Nagakawa
- Department of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Kohei Nakata
- Department of Surgery and Oncology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan
| | - Itaru Endo
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Akihiko Tsuchida
- Department of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Masafumi Nakamura
- Department of Surgery and Oncology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
|
17
|
Evaluation of factors predicting loss of benefit provided by laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy compared to open approach. Updates Surg 2021; 74:213-221. [PMID: 34687429 DOI: 10.1007/s13304-021-01194-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/03/2021] [Accepted: 10/12/2021] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
Several studies showed safety and feasibility of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) as compared to open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). Patients who underwent LDP or ODP (2015-2019) were included. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was used to reduce the effect of treatment selection bias. Aim of this study was to identify those factors influencing the loss of benefit (defined as a significantly better outcome compared to ODP) after LDP. Overall, 387 patients underwent DP (n = 250 LDP, n = 137 ODP). After PSM, 274 patients (n = 137 LDP, n = 137 ODP) were selected. LDP was associated with reduced intraoperative blood loss (median: 200 mL vs. 250 mL, p < 0.001), decreased wound infection rate (1% vs. 9%, p = 0.044) and shorter time to functional recovery (TFR) (median: 4 days vs. 5 days, p = 0.002). Consequently, TFR > 5 days and blood loss > 250 mL were defined as loss of benefit after LDP. In the LDP group, age > 70 years [Odds Ratio (OR) 2.744, p = 0.022] and duration of surgery > 208 min (OR 2.957, p = 0.019) were predictors of TFR > 5 days and intraoperative blood loss > 250 mL, respectively. No differences in terms of TFR were found between ODP and LDP groups in patients > 70 years (p = 0.102). Intraoperative blood loss was significantly higher in the ODP group, also when the analysis was limited to surgical procedures with operative time > 208 min (p = 0.003). In conclusion, LDP seems comparable to ODP in terms of TFR in patients aged > 70 years. This finding could be helpful in the choice of the best surgical approach in elderly patients undergoing potentially challenging DPs.
Collapse
|
|
18
|
Lequeu JB, Cottenet J, Facy O, Perrin T, Bernard A, Quantin C. Failure to rescue in patients with distal pancreatectomy: a nationwide analysis of 10,632 patients. HPB (Oxford) 2021; 23:1410-1417. [PMID: 33622649 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2021.02.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/12/2020] [Revised: 02/01/2021] [Accepted: 02/02/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND FTR appears as a major cause of postoperative mortality (POM). Hospital volume has an impact on FTR in pancreatic surgery but no study has investigated this relationship more specifically in DP. METHODS We analysed patients with DP between 2009 and 2018 through a nationwide database. FTR definition was mortality among patients who experiment major complications. The cutoff between high and low volume centers was 20 pancreatectomies per year. RESULTS Some 10,632 patients underwent DP, 5048 (47.5%) were operated in 602 (95.4%) low volume centers and 5584 (52.5%) in 29 (4.6%) high volume centers. Overall FTR occurred in 11.2% of patients and was significantly reduced in high volume centers compared to low volume centers (10.2% vs 12.5%, p = 0.047). In multivariate analysis, surgery in a high volume center was a protective factor for POM (OR = 0.570, CI95% [0.505-0.643], p < 0.001) and also for FTR (OR = 0.550, CI95% [0.486-0.630], p < 0.001). CONCLUSION Hospital volume has a positive impact on FTR in DP. Patients with higher risk of FTR are men, with high modified Charlson comorbidity index, malignant conditions and open procedures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jean-Baptiste Lequeu
- Dijon University Hospital, Department of Digestive Surgical Oncology, Dijon F-21000, France.
| | - Jonathan Cottenet
- Dijon University Hospital, Clinical Epidemiology/Clinical Trials Unit, Clinical Investigation Center, Dijon F-21000, France
| | - Olivier Facy
- Dijon University Hospital, Department of Digestive Surgical Oncology, Dijon F-21000, France
| | - Thomas Perrin
- Dijon University Hospital, Department of Digestive Surgical Oncology, Dijon F-21000, France
| | - Alain Bernard
- Dijon University Hospital, Department of Thoracic Surgery, Dijon F-21000, France
| | - Catherine Quantin
- Dijon University Hospital, Clinical Epidemiology/Clinical Trials Unit, Clinical Investigation Center, Dijon F-21000, France
| |
Collapse
|
|
19
|
Partelli S, Ricci C, Cinelli L, Montorsi RM, Ingaldi C, Andreasi V, Crippa S, Alberici L, Casadei R, Falconi M. Evaluation of cost-effectiveness among open, laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Surg 2021; 222:513-520. [PMID: 33853724 DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2021.03.066] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2021] [Revised: 03/20/2021] [Accepted: 03/30/2021] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is still a matter of debate. This study compares the cost-effectiveness of open (ODP), laparoscopic (LDP) and robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP). METHODS Pubmed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases were searched. Studies comparing cost-effectiveness of ODP and MIDP were included. RESULTS A total of 1052 titles were screened and 16 articles were included in the study, 2431 patients in total. LDP resulted the most cost-efficient procedure, with a mean total cost of 14,682 ± 5665 € and the lowest readmission rates. ODP had lower surgical procedure costs, 3867 ± 768 €. RDP was the safest approach regarding hospital stay costs (5239 ± 1741 €), length of hospital stay, morbidity, clinically relevant pancreatic fistula and reoperations. CONCLUSION In this meta-analysis MIDP resulted as the most cost-effective approach. LDP seems to be protective against high costs, but RDP seems to be safer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stefano Partelli
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational & Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Claudio Ricci
- Department of Internal Medicine and Surgery (DIMEC), Alma Mater Studorium, University of Bologna, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy; Division of Pancreatic Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Lorenzo Cinelli
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational & Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Roberto Maria Montorsi
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational & Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Carlo Ingaldi
- Department of Internal Medicine and Surgery (DIMEC), Alma Mater Studorium, University of Bologna, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy; Division of Pancreatic Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Valentina Andreasi
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational & Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Stefano Crippa
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational & Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Laura Alberici
- Department of Internal Medicine and Surgery (DIMEC), Alma Mater Studorium, University of Bologna, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy; Division of Pancreatic Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Riccardo Casadei
- Department of Internal Medicine and Surgery (DIMEC), Alma Mater Studorium, University of Bologna, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy; Division of Pancreatic Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Massimo Falconi
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational & Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
|
20
|
van Hilst J, de Graaf N, Abu Hilal M, Besselink MG. The Landmark Series: Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Resection. Ann Surg Oncol 2021; 28:1447-1456. [PMID: 33341916 PMCID: PMC7892688 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-020-09335-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2020] [Accepted: 10/26/2020] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pancreatic resections are among the most technically demanding procedures, including a high risk of potentially life-threatening complications and outcomes strongly correlated to hospital volume and individual surgeon experience. Minimally invasive pancreatic resections (MIPRs) have become a part of standard surgical practice worldwide over the last decade; however, in comparison with other surgical procedures, the implementation of minimally invasive approaches into clinical practice has been rather slow. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to highlight and summarize the available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the role of minimally invasive approaches in pancreatic surgery. METHODS A WHO trial registry and Pubmed database literature search was performed to identify all RCTs comparing MIPRs (robot-assisted and/or laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy [DP] or pancreatoduodenectomy [PD]) with open pancreatic resections (OPRs). RESULTS Overall, five RCTs on MIPR versus OPR have been published and seven RCTs are currently recruiting. For DP, the results of two RCTs were in favor of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) in terms of shorter hospital stay and less intraoperative blood loss, with comparable morbidity and mortality. Regarding PD, two RCTs showed similar advantages for MIPD. However, concerns were raised after the early termination of the third multicenter RCT on MIPD versus open PD due to higher complication-related mortality in the laparoscopic group and no clear other demonstrable advantages. No RCTs on robot-assisted pancreatic procedures are available as yet. CONCLUSION At the current level of evidence, MIDP is thought to be safe and feasible, although oncological safety should be further evaluated. Based on the results of the RCTs conducted for PD, MIPD cannot be proclaimed as the superior alternative to open PD, although promising outcomes have been demonstrated by experienced centers. Future studies should provide answers to the role of robotic approaches in pancreatic surgery and aim to identity the subgroups of patients or indications with the greatest benefit of MIPRs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jony van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Nine de Graaf
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Instituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Mohammad Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Instituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
|
21
|
Balduzzi A, van der Heijde N, Alseidi A, Dokmak S, Kendrick ML, Polanco PM, Sandford DE, Shrikhande SV, Vollmer CM, Wang SE, Zeh HJ, Hilal MA, Asbun HJ, Besselink MG. Risk factors and outcomes of conversion in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2020; 406:597-605. [PMID: 33301071 PMCID: PMC8106568 DOI: 10.1007/s00423-020-02043-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/30/2020] [Accepted: 11/20/2020] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
Purpose The reported conversion rates for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) range widely from 2 to 38%. The identification of risk factors for conversion may help surgeons during preoperative planning and patient counseling. Moreover, the impact of conversion on outcomes of MIDP is unknown. Methods A systematic review was conducted as part of the 2019 Miami International Evidence-Based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR). The PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched for studies concerning conversion to open surgery in MIDP. Results Of the 828 studies screened, eight met the eligibility criteria, resulting in a combined dataset including 2592 patients after MIDP. The overall conversion rate was 17.1% (range 13.0–32.7%) with heterogeneity between studies associated with the definition of conversion adopted. Only one study divided conversion into elective and emergency conversion. The main indications for conversion were vascular involvement (23.7%), concern for oncological radicality (21.9%), and bleeding (18.9%). The reported risk factors for conversion included a malignancy as an indication for surgery, the proximity of the tumor to vascular structures in preoperative imaging, higher BMI or visceral fat, and multi-organ resection or extended resection. Contrasting results were seen in terms of blood loss and length of stay in comparing converted MIDP and completed MIDP patients. Conclusion The identified risk factors for conversion from this study can be used for patient selection and counseling. Surgeon experience should be considered when contemplating MIDP for a complex patient. Future studies should divide conversion into elective and emergency conversion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Balduzzi
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - N van der Heijde
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital, Southampton, UK.,Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - A Alseidi
- Department of Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - S Dokmak
- Department of Surgery, Beaujon Hospital, Paris, France
| | - M L Kendrick
- Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - P M Polanco
- Department of Surgery, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - D E Sandford
- Department of Surgery, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - S V Shrikhande
- Department of Surgery, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
| | - C M Vollmer
- Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - S E Wang
- Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China
| | - H J Zeh
- Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital, Southampton, UK.,Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - H J Asbun
- Hepatobiliary and Pancreas, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, FL, USA
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
22
|
Partelli S, Ricci C, Rancoita PMV, Montorsi R, Andreasi V, Ingaldi C, Arru G, Pecorelli N, Crippa S, Alberici L, Di Serio C, Casadei R, Falconi M. Preoperative predictive factors of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy difficulty. HPB (Oxford) 2020; 22:1766-1774. [PMID: 32340858 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2020.04.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/01/2019] [Revised: 03/29/2020] [Accepted: 04/02/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is a challenging operation due to technical complexity and tumor-related factors. Aim of this study was to identify preoperative risk factors affecting LDP difficulty. METHODS Consecutive patients who underwent LDP between 2015 and 2018 at San Raffaele Hospital and Policlinico S.Orsola-Malpighi Hospital were enrolled retrospectively. Three variables were used to define surgical difficulty: conversion to open, duration of surgery >3rd quartile and intraoperative blood loss >3rd quartile. The presence of ≥1 of these 3 variables was considered as another measure of difficulty. RESULTS Overall, 191 patients were included. Conversion to open was required in 25 patients (13%). At multiple regression analysis, tumor proximity to major vessels was the only independent predictor of conversion from laparoscopic to open (p < 0.001). No variables independently predicted an excessive duration of surgery. Male gender (p = 0.033) and increasing parenchymal thickness at resection line (p = 0.018) were independent predictors of excessive blood loss. Increasing parenchymal thickness at resection line (p = 0.014) and tumor proximity to major vessels (p = 0.002) were significant risk factors for the presence of ≥1 outcome of surgical difficulty. CONCLUSION Male gender, increasing parenchymal thickness at resection line and tumor proximity to major vessels represent preoperative risk factors of LDP difficulty.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stefano Partelli
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, San Raffaele Scientific Institute IRCCS, Milan, Italy; "Vita-Salute San Raffaele" University, Milan, Italy
| | - Claudio Ricci
- Department of Internal Medicine and Surgery, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, S. Orsola-Malpighi, Bologna, Italy
| | - Paola M V Rancoita
- University Centre of Statistics in the Biomedical Sciences, "Vita-Salute San Raffaele" University, Milan, Italy
| | - Roberto Montorsi
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, San Raffaele Scientific Institute IRCCS, Milan, Italy; "Vita-Salute San Raffaele" University, Milan, Italy
| | - Valentina Andreasi
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, San Raffaele Scientific Institute IRCCS, Milan, Italy; "Vita-Salute San Raffaele" University, Milan, Italy
| | - Carlo Ingaldi
- Department of Internal Medicine and Surgery, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, S. Orsola-Malpighi, Bologna, Italy
| | - Giaime Arru
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, San Raffaele Scientific Institute IRCCS, Milan, Italy; "Vita-Salute San Raffaele" University, Milan, Italy
| | - Nicolò Pecorelli
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, San Raffaele Scientific Institute IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Stefano Crippa
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, San Raffaele Scientific Institute IRCCS, Milan, Italy; "Vita-Salute San Raffaele" University, Milan, Italy
| | - Laura Alberici
- Department of Internal Medicine and Surgery, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, S. Orsola-Malpighi, Bologna, Italy
| | - Clelia Di Serio
- University Centre of Statistics in the Biomedical Sciences, "Vita-Salute San Raffaele" University, Milan, Italy
| | - Riccardo Casadei
- Department of Internal Medicine and Surgery, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, S. Orsola-Malpighi, Bologna, Italy
| | - Massimo Falconi
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, San Raffaele Scientific Institute IRCCS, Milan, Italy; "Vita-Salute San Raffaele" University, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
|
23
|
Lyu Y, Cheng Y, Wang B, Zhao S, Chen L. Assessment of laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. MINIM INVASIV THER 2020; 31:350-358. [PMID: 32903097 DOI: 10.1080/13645706.2020.1812664] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Yunxiao Lyu
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Affiliated Dongyang Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Dongyang, Zhejiang, China
| | - Yunxiao Cheng
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Affiliated Dongyang Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Dongyang, Zhejiang, China
| | - Bin Wang
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Affiliated Dongyang Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Dongyang, Zhejiang, China
| | - Sicong Zhao
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Affiliated Dongyang Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Dongyang, Zhejiang, China
| | - Liang Chen
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Affiliated Dongyang Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Dongyang, Zhejiang, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
24
|
Watson MD, Baimas-George MR, Thompson KJ, Iannitti DA, Ocuin LM, Baker EH, Martinie JB, Vrochides D. Improved oncologic outcomes for minimally invasive left pancreatectomy: Propensity-score matched analysis of the National Cancer Database. J Surg Oncol 2020; 122:1383-1392. [PMID: 32772366 DOI: 10.1002/jso.26147] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/14/2020] [Revised: 06/17/2020] [Accepted: 07/25/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Minimally invasive (MIS) left pancreatectomy (LP) is increasingly used to treat pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Despite improved short-term outcomes, no studies have demonstrated long-term benefits over open resection. METHODS The National Cancer Database was queried between 2010 and 2016 for patients with PDAC, grouped by surgical approach (MIS vs open). Demographics, comorbidities, clinical staging, and pathologic staging were used for propensity-score matching. Perioperative, short-term oncologic, and survival outcomes were compared. RESULTS After matching, both cohorts included 805 patients. There were no differences in baseline characteristics, staging, or preoperative therapy between cohorts. The MIS cohort had a shorter length of stay (6.8 ± 5.5 vs 8.5 ± 7.3 days; P < .0001) with the trend toward improved time to chemotherapy (53.9 ± 26.1 vs 57.9 ± 29.9 days; P = .0511) and margin-positive resection rate (15.3% vs 18.9%; P = .0605). Lymph node retrieval and receipt of chemotherapy were similar. The MIS cohort had higher median overall survival (28.0 vs 22.1 months; P = .0067). Subgroup analysis demonstrated the highest survival for robotic compared with laparoscopic and open LP (41.9 vs 26.6 vs 22.1 months; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrates the safety of MIS LP and favorable long-term oncologic outcomes. The improved survival after MIS LP warrants further study with prospective, randomized trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael D Watson
- Department of Surgery, Division of HPB Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, North Carolina
| | - Maria R Baimas-George
- Department of Surgery, Division of HPB Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, North Carolina
| | - Kyle J Thompson
- Department of Surgery, Division of HPB Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, North Carolina
| | - David A Iannitti
- Department of Surgery, Division of HPB Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, North Carolina
| | - Lee M Ocuin
- Department of Surgery, Division of HPB Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, North Carolina
| | - Erin H Baker
- Department of Surgery, Division of HPB Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, North Carolina
| | - John B Martinie
- Department of Surgery, Division of HPB Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, North Carolina
| | - Dionisios Vrochides
- Department of Surgery, Division of HPB Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, North Carolina
| |
Collapse
|
|
25
|
Outcomes of Elective and Emergency Conversion in Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: An International Multicenter Propensity Score-matched Study. Ann Surg 2019; 274:e1001-e1007. [PMID: 31850984 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000003717] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of conversion during minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) on outcome by a propensity-matched comparison with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). BACKGROUND MIDP is associated with faster recovery as compared with ODP. The high conversion rate (15%-25%) in patients with PDAC, however, is worrisome and may negatively influence outcome. METHODS A post hoc analysis of a retrospective cohort including distal pancreatectomies for PDAC from 34 centers in 11 countries. Patients requiring conversion were matched, using propensity scores, to ODP procedures (1:2 ratio). Indications for conversion were classified as elective conversions (eg, vascular involvement) or emergency conversions (eg, bleeding). RESULTS Among 1212 distal pancreatectomies for PDAC, 345 patients underwent MIDP, with 68 (19.7%) conversions, mostly elective (n = 46, 67.6%). Vascular resection (other than splenic vessels) was required in 19.1% of the converted procedures. After matching (61 MIDP-converted vs 122 ODP), conversion did not affect R-status, recurrence of cancer, nor overall survival. However, emergency conversion was associated with increased overall morbidity (61.9% vs 31.1%, P= 0.007) and a trend to worse oncological outcome compared with ODP. Elective conversion was associated with comparable overall morbidity. CONCLUSIONS Elective conversion in MIDP for PDAC was associated with comparable short-term and oncological outcomes in comparison with ODP. However, emergency conversions were associated with worse both short- and long-term outcomes, and should be prevented by careful patient selection, awareness of surgeons' learning curve, and consideration of early conversion when unexpected intraoperative findings are encountered.
Collapse
|
|
26
|
Moekotte AL, Lof S, White SA, Marudanayagam R, Al-Sarireh B, Rahman S, Soonawalla Z, Deakin M, Aroori S, Ammori B, Gomez D, Marangoni G, Abu Hilal M. Splenic preservation versus splenectomy in laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a propensity score-matched study. Surg Endosc 2019; 34:1301-1309. [PMID: 31236723 PMCID: PMC7012970 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-019-06901-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/11/2018] [Accepted: 06/06/2019] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
Background The laparoscopic approach in distal pancreatectomy is associated with higher rates of splenic preservation compared to open surgery. Although favorable postoperative short-term outcomes have been reported in open spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy when compared to distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy, it is unclear whether this observation applies to the laparoscopic approach. The aim of this study is to compare laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP) with laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (LDPS). Study design This is a UK wide, propensity score-matched study, including patients who underwent LSPDP or LDPS between 2006 and 2016. Short-term outcomes were compared between LSPDP and LDPS according to intention to treat. Additionally, risk factors for unplanned splenectomy were explored. Results A total of 456 patients were included from eleven centers (229 LSPDP and 227 LDPS). We were able to match 173 LSPDP cases to 173 LDPS cases, according to intention to treat. No differences were seen in postoperative morbidity between the groups. The only identified risk factor for unplanned splenectomy was tumor size ≥ 30 mm. Conclusions Preserving the spleen during laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is not associated with a lower postoperative morbidity compared to sacrificing the spleen. Tumor size is a risk factor for unplanned splenectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alma L Moekotte
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 2YD, UK.
| | - Sanne Lof
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 2YD, UK
| | - Steve A White
- Department of Surgery, Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK
| | - Ravi Marudanayagam
- Department of Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK
| | | | - Sakhanat Rahman
- Department of Surgery, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Zahir Soonawalla
- Department of Surgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK
| | - Mark Deakin
- Department of Surgery, Royal Stoke University Hospital, Stoke, UK
| | - Somaiah Aroori
- Department of Surgery, Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Plymouth, UK
| | - Basil Ammori
- Department of Surgery, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Dhanny Gomez
- Department of Surgery, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK
| | - Gabriele Marangoni
- Department of Surgery, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UK
| | - Mohammed Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 2YD, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
27
|
Xourafas D, Cloyd JM, Clancy TE, Pawlik TM, Ashley SW. Identifying Hospital Cost Savings Opportunities by Optimizing Surgical Approach for Distal Pancreatectomy. J Gastrointest Surg 2019; 23:1172-1179. [PMID: 30334179 DOI: 10.1007/s11605-018-4002-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2018] [Accepted: 10/04/2018] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The economic implications of relevant clinicopathologic factors on the surgical approach to distal pancreatectomy (DP) should be clearly defined and understood to potentially allow the implementation of cost reduction strategies. METHODS Administrative and clinical datasets of patients undergoing a DP between 2012 and 2016 were merged and queried. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify clinicopathologic predictors of cost differentials for minimally invasive DP (MIDP) relative to open DP (ODP). Time trends in cost were also assessed to identify opportunities for cost containment. RESULTS Among two hundred and twenty five patients, 128 underwent an ODP (57%) and 97 a MIDP (43%). The DP groups were comparable with regard to relevant perioperative and disease characteristics. Total hospitalization and total OR costs for MIDP were significantly lower (- 12%, P = 0.0048) and higher (+ 16%, P < 0.0001) respectively, compared to ODP. On univariate analysis, age > 60 (- 12%, P = 0.0262), BMI > 25 (- 10%, P = 0.0222), ASA class ≥ 3 (- 11%, P = 0.0045), OpTime > 230 min (- 16%, P = 0.0004), and T stage ≥ 3 (- 8%, P = 0.0452) were associated with decreased total costs after MIDP compared to ODP. Linear regression analysis revealed that BMI > 25 (Estimate - 0.31, SE 0.15, P = 0.0482), ASA class ≥ 3 (Estimate - 0.36, SE 0.17, P = 0.0344), and T stage ≥ 3 (Estimate - 0.57, SE 0.26, P = 0.0320) were associated with decreased hospitalization costs after MIDP compared to ODP. Overtime, total hospitalization cost for MIDP increased from - 21 to 1% (P = 0.0197), while OR costs for MIDP decreased from + 41% to - 2% (P = 0.0049), nearly equalizing the cost differences between ODP and MIDP. CONCLUSIONS Relevant clinicopathologic factors predicted decreased hospitalization costs after MIDP relative to ODP. In equivalent stages of disease, optimizing the surgical approach to DP based on specific clinicopathologic characteristics may afford significant cost-saving opportunities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dimitrios Xourafas
- Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis St., Boston, MA, 02115, USA. .,Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
| | - Jordan M Cloyd
- Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Thomas E Clancy
- Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis St., Boston, MA, 02115, USA
| | - Timothy M Pawlik
- Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Stanley W Ashley
- Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis St., Boston, MA, 02115, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
28
|
Eguia E, Kuo PC, Sweigert P, Nelson M, Aranha GV, Abood G, Godellas CV, Baker MS. The laparoscopic approach to distal pancreatectomy is a value-added proposition for patients undergoing care in moderate-volume and high-volume centers. Surgery 2019; 166:166-171. [PMID: 31160061 DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2019.04.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/22/2019] [Revised: 04/19/2019] [Accepted: 04/24/2019] [Indexed: 01/25/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Little is known regarding the impact of the minimally invasive approach to distal pancreatectomy on the aggregate costs of care for patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy. METHODS We queried the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Database to identify patients undergoing elective laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy or open distal pancreatectomy between 2012 and 2014. Multivariable regression was used to evaluate postoperative outcomes including readmissions to 90 days after distal pancreatectomy. RESULTS A total of 267 (11%) patients underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy, and a total of 2,214 (89%) underwent open distal pancreatectomy. On multivariable regression, patients undergoing laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy had a decreased odds risk of having any severe adverse outcome (odds ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval [0.54-0.97]), prolonged length of stay (odds ratio 0.49, 95% confidence interval [0.30-0.79]), and of being in the highest quartile for aggregate costs of care (odds ratio 0.46, 95% confidence interval [0.32-0.66]) relative to those undergoing open distal pancreatectomy. Patients undergoing laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy had a lower average 90-day aggregate cost of care than those undergoing open distal pancreatectomy when procedures were performed in high-volume (-$16,153, 95% CI: [-$23,342 to -$8,964]) centers. CONCLUSION Patients undergoing laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy have a lower risk of severe adverse outcomes, prolonged overall length of stay, and lower associated costs of care relative to those undergoing open distal pancreatectomy. This association is independent of hospital volume.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emanuel Eguia
- Department of Surgery, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL.
| | - Paul C Kuo
- Department of Surgery, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL
| | - Patrick Sweigert
- Department of Surgery, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL
| | - Marc Nelson
- Department of Surgery, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL
| | - Gerard V Aranha
- Department of Surgery, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL
| | - Gerard Abood
- Department of Surgery, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL
| | | | - Marshall S Baker
- Department of Surgery, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL
| |
Collapse
|
|
29
|
Chikhladze S, Makowiec F, Küsters S, Riediger H, Sick O, Fichtner-Feigl S, Hopt UT, Wittel UA. The rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy is independent of the pancreatic stump closure technique - A retrospective analysis of 284 cases. Asian J Surg 2019; 43:227-233. [PMID: 30982560 DOI: 10.1016/j.asjsur.2019.03.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2019] [Revised: 02/06/2019] [Accepted: 03/07/2019] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many techniques have been developed to prevent postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after distal pancreatectomy, but POPF rates remain high. The aim of our study was to analyze POPF occurrence after closure of the pancreatic remnant by different operative techniques. METHODS Between 2006 and 2017, 284 patients underwent distal pancreatectomy in our institution. For subgroup analysis the patients were divided into hand-sewn (n = 201) and stapler closure (n = 52) groups. The hand-sewn closure was performed in three different ways (fishmouth-technique, n = 27; interrupted transpancreatic U-suture technique, n = 77; common interrupted suture, n = 97). All other techniques were summarized in a separate group (n = 31). Results were gained by analysis of our prospective pancreatic database. RESULTS The median age was 63 (range 23-88) years. 74 of 284 patients (26%) were operated with spleen preservation (similar rates in subgroups). ASA-classes, median BMI as well as frequencies of malignant diseases, chronic pancreatitis, alcohol and nicotine abuse were also comparable in the subgroups. Neither the rates of overall POPF (fishmouth-technique 30%, common interrupted suture 40%, stapler closure 33% and interrupted U-suture 38%) nor the rates of POPF grades B and C showed significant differences in the subgroups. However is shown to be associated with pancreatic function and parenchymal texture. CONCLUSION In our experience the technique of pancreatic stump closure after distal resection did not influence postoperative pancreatic fistula rate. As a consequence patient specific reasons rather than surgical techniques may be responsible for POPF formation after distal pancreatectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Chikhladze
- Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Center for Surgery, Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Germany.
| | - F Makowiec
- Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Center for Surgery, Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Germany
| | - S Küsters
- Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Center for Surgery, Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Germany
| | - H Riediger
- Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Center for Surgery, Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Germany
| | - O Sick
- Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Center for Surgery, Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Germany
| | - S Fichtner-Feigl
- Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Center for Surgery, Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Germany
| | - U T Hopt
- Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Center for Surgery, Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Germany
| | - U A Wittel
- Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Center for Surgery, Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
|
30
|
Fisher AV, Fernandes-Taylor S, Schumacher JR, Havlena JA, Wang X, Lawson EH, Ronnekleiv-Kelly SM, Winslow ER, Weber SM, Abbott DE. Analysis of 90-day cost for open versus minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy. HPB (Oxford) 2019; 21:60-66. [PMID: 30076011 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2018.07.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/23/2018] [Revised: 04/19/2018] [Accepted: 07/03/2018] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is associated with improved peri-operative outcomes compared to the open approach, though cost-effectiveness of MIDP remains unclear. METHODS Patients with pancreatic tumors undergoing open (ODP), robotic (RDP), or laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) between 2012-2014 were identified through the Truven Health MarketScan® Database. Median costs (payments) for the index operation and 90-day readmissions were calculated. Multivariable regression was used to predict associations with log 90-day payments. RESULTS 693 patients underwent ODP, 146 underwent LDP, and 53 RDP. Compared to ODP, LDP and RDP resulted in shorter median length of stay (6 d. ODP vs. 5 d. RDP vs. 4 d. LDP, p<0.01) and lower median payments ($38,350 ODP vs. $34,870 RDP vs. $32,148 LDP, p<0.01) during the index hospitalization. Total median 90-day payments remained significantly lower for both minimally invasive approaches ($40,549 ODP vs. $35,160 RDP vs. $32,797 LDP, p<0.01). On multivariable analysis, LDP and RDP resulted in 90-day cost savings of 21% and 25% relative to ODP, equating to an amount of $8,500-$10,000. CONCLUSION MIDP is associated with >$8,500 in lower cost compared to the open approach. Quality improvement initiatives in DP should ensure that lack of training and technical skill are not barriers to MIDP.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander V Fisher
- University of Wisconsin Institute for Surgical Outcomes Research (WiSOR), 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, 53792, United States; University of Wisconsin, Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, H4/710 Clinical Science Center, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI, 53792, United States
| | - Sara Fernandes-Taylor
- University of Wisconsin Institute for Surgical Outcomes Research (WiSOR), 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, 53792, United States
| | - Jessica R Schumacher
- University of Wisconsin Institute for Surgical Outcomes Research (WiSOR), 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, 53792, United States
| | - Jeffrey A Havlena
- University of Wisconsin Institute for Surgical Outcomes Research (WiSOR), 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, 53792, United States
| | - Xing Wang
- University of Wisconsin Institute for Surgical Outcomes Research (WiSOR), 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, 53792, United States
| | - Elise H Lawson
- University of Wisconsin Institute for Surgical Outcomes Research (WiSOR), 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, 53792, United States
| | - Sean M Ronnekleiv-Kelly
- University of Wisconsin Institute for Surgical Outcomes Research (WiSOR), 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, 53792, United States; University of Wisconsin, Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, H4/710 Clinical Science Center, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI, 53792, United States
| | - Emily R Winslow
- University of Wisconsin Institute for Surgical Outcomes Research (WiSOR), 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, 53792, United States; University of Wisconsin, Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, H4/710 Clinical Science Center, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI, 53792, United States
| | - Sharon M Weber
- University of Wisconsin Institute for Surgical Outcomes Research (WiSOR), 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, 53792, United States; University of Wisconsin, Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, H4/710 Clinical Science Center, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI, 53792, United States
| | - Daniel E Abbott
- University of Wisconsin Institute for Surgical Outcomes Research (WiSOR), 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI, 53792, United States; University of Wisconsin, Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, H4/710 Clinical Science Center, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI, 53792, United States.
| |
Collapse
|
|
31
|
van Hilst J, de Rooij T, Klompmaker S, Rawashdeh M, Aleotti F, Al-Sarireh B, Alseidi A, Ateeb Z, Balzano G, Berrevoet F, Björnsson B, Boggi U, Busch OR, Butturini G, Casadei R, Del Chiaro M, Chikhladze S, Cipriani F, van Dam R, Damoli I, van Dieren S, Dokmak S, Edwin B, van Eijck C, Fabre JM, Falconi M, Farges O, Fernández-Cruz L, Forgione A, Frigerio I, Fuks D, Gavazzi F, Gayet B, Giardino A, Groot Koerkamp B, Hackert T, Hassenpflug M, Kabir I, Keck T, Khatkov I, Kusar M, Lombardo C, Marchegiani G, Marshall R, Menon KV, Montorsi M, Orville M, de Pastena M, Pietrabissa A, Poves I, Primrose J, Pugliese R, Ricci C, Roberts K, Røsok B, Sahakyan MA, Sánchez-Cabús S, Sandström P, Scovel L, Solaini L, Soonawalla Z, Souche FR, Sutcliffe RP, Tiberio GA, Tomazic A, Troisi R, Wellner U, White S, Wittel UA, Zerbi A, Bassi C, Besselink MG, Abu Hilal M. Minimally Invasive versus Open Distal Pancreatectomy for Ductal Adenocarcinoma (DIPLOMA): A Pan-European Propensity Score Matched Study. Ann Surg 2019; 269:10-17. [PMID: 29099399 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000002561] [Citation(s) in RCA: 187] [Impact Index Per Article: 31.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to compare oncological outcomes after minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). BACKGROUND Cohort studies have suggested superior short-term outcomes of MIDP vs. ODP. Recent international surveys, however, revealed that surgeons have concerns about the oncological outcomes of MIDP for PDAC. METHODS This is a pan-European propensity score matched study including patients who underwent MIDP (laparoscopic or robot-assisted) or ODP for PDAC between January 1, 2007 and July 1, 2015. MIDP patients were matched to ODP patients in a 1:1 ratio. Main outcomes were radical (R0) resection, lymph node retrieval, and survival. RESULTS In total, 1212 patients were included from 34 centers in 11 countries. Of 356 (29%) MIDP patients, 340 could be matched. After matching, the MIDP conversion rate was 19% (n = 62). Median blood loss [200 mL (60-400) vs 300 mL (150-500), P = 0.001] and hospital stay [8 (6-12) vs 9 (7-14) days, P < 0.001] were lower after MIDP. Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications (18% vs 21%, P = 0.431) and 90-day mortality (2% vs 3%, P > 0.99) were comparable for MIDP and ODP, respectively. R0 resection rate was higher (67% vs 58%, P = 0.019), whereas Gerota's fascia resection (31% vs 60%, P < 0.001) and lymph node retrieval [14 (8-22) vs 22 (14-31), P < 0.001] were lower after MIDP. Median overall survival was 28 [95% confidence interval (CI), 22-34] versus 31 (95% CI, 26-36) months (P = 0.929). CONCLUSIONS Comparable survival was seen after MIDP and ODP for PDAC, but the opposing differences in R0 resection rate, resection of Gerota's fascia, and lymph node retrieval strengthen the need for a randomized trial to confirm the oncological safety of MIDP.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jony van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Thijs de Rooij
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Sjors Klompmaker
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Majd Rawashdeh
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom
| | | | - Bilal Al-Sarireh
- Department of Surgery, Morriston Hospital, Swansea, United Kingdom
| | - Adnan Alseidi
- Department of Surgery, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, United States
| | - Zeeshan Ateeb
- Department of Surgery, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
| | | | - Frederik Berrevoet
- Department of General and HPB surgery and liver transplantation, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | | | - Ugo Boggi
- Department of Surgery, Universitá di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Riccardo Casadei
- Department of Surgery, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy
| | | | - Sophia Chikhladze
- Department of Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Federica Cipriani
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom
| | - Ronald van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Isacco Damoli
- Department of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Susan van Dieren
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Safi Dokmak
- Department of Surgery, Hospital of Beaujon, Clichy, France
| | - Bjørn Edwin
- Department of Surgery, Oslo University Hospital and Institute for Clinical Medicine, Oslo, Norway
| | | | | | | | - Olivier Farges
- Department of Surgery, Hospital of Beaujon, Clichy, France
| | | | | | | | - David Fuks
- Department of Surgery, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France
| | | | - Brice Gayet
- Department of Surgery, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France
| | | | | | - Thilo Hackert
- Department of Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | - Irfan Kabir
- Department of Surgery, Oxford University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Tobias Keck
- Clinic for Surgery, UKSH Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Igor Khatkov
- Department of Surgery, Moscow Clinical Scientific Center, Moscow, Russian Federation
| | - Masa Kusar
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | | | - Giovanni Marchegiani
- Department of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Ryne Marshall
- Department of Surgery, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, United States
| | - Krish V Menon
- Department of Surgery, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Marco Montorsi
- Department of Surgery, Humanitas University Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Marion Orville
- Department of Surgery, Hospital of Beaujon, Clichy, France
| | - Matteo de Pastena
- Department of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | | | - Ignaci Poves
- Department of Surgery, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain
| | - John Primrose
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom
| | | | - Claudio Ricci
- Department of Surgery, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy
| | - Keith Roberts
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Bård Røsok
- Department of Surgery, Oslo University Hospital and Institute for Clinical Medicine, Oslo, Norway
| | - Mushegh A Sahakyan
- Department of Surgery, Oslo University Hospital and Institute for Clinical Medicine, Oslo, Norway
| | | | - Per Sandström
- Department of Surgery, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
| | - Lauren Scovel
- Department of Surgery, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, United States
| | - Leonardo Solaini
- Surgical Clinic, Department of clinical and experimental sciences, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| | - Zahir Soonawalla
- Department of Surgery, Oxford University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - F Régis Souche
- Department of Surgery, Hopital Saint Eloi, Montpellier, France
| | - Robert P Sutcliffe
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Guido A Tiberio
- Surgical Clinic, Department of clinical and experimental sciences, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| | - Aleš Tomazic
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Roberto Troisi
- Department of General and HPB surgery and liver transplantation, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | | | - Steven White
- Department of Surgery, The Freeman Hospital Newcastle Upon Tyne, Newcastle, United Kingdom
| | - Uwe A Wittel
- Department of Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Alessandro Zerbi
- Department of Surgery, Humanitas University Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Claudio Bassi
- Department of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Mohammed Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
|
32
|
Magge DR, Zenati MS, Hamad A, Rieser C, Zureikat AH, Zeh HJ, Hogg ME. Comprehensive comparative analysis of cost-effectiveness and perioperative outcomes between open, laparoscopic, and robotic distal pancreatectomy. HPB (Oxford) 2018; 20:1172-1180. [PMID: 31217087 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2018.05.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/19/2018] [Revised: 05/08/2018] [Accepted: 05/18/2018] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND NSQIP data show that half of distal pancreatectomies (DP) are performed by a minimally invasive approach (MIS). Advantages have been demonstrated for MIS DP, yet comparative cost data are limited. Outcomes and cost were compared in patients undergoing open (ODP), laparoscopic (LDP), and robotic (RDP) approaches at a single institution. METHODS A retrospective review was performed on patients undergoing DP between 1/2010-5/2016. Analysis was intention-to-treat, and cost was available after 1/2013. RESULTS DP was performed in 374 patients: ODP = 85, LDP = 93, and RDP = 196. Operating time was lowest in the RDP cohort (p < 0.0001). ODP had higher estimated blood loss (p < 0.0001) and transfusions (p < 0.0001) than LDP and RDP. LDP had greater conversions to open procedures than RDP (p = 0.001). Postoperative outcomes were similar between groups. Length of stay was higher in the ODP group (p = 0.0001) than LDP and RDP. Overall cost for the ODP was higher than the RDP and LDP group (p = 0.002). On multivariate analysis, RDP reduced LOS (ODP: Odds = 6.5 [p = 0.0001] and LDP: Odds = 2.1 [p = 0.036]) and total cost (ODP: Odds = 5.7 [p = 0.002] and LDP: Odds = 2.8 [p = 0.042]) independently of all demographics and illness covariates. CONCLUSIONS A robotic approach is associated with reduced length of stay and cost compared to open and laparoscopic procedures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deepa R Magge
- Division of GI Surgical Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, USA
| | - Mazen S Zenati
- Division of GI Surgical Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, USA
| | - Ahmad Hamad
- Department of Surgery, Ohio State University, USA
| | - Caroline Rieser
- Division of GI Surgical Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, USA
| | - Amer H Zureikat
- Division of GI Surgical Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, USA
| | | | - Melissa E Hogg
- Division of GI Surgical Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
33
|
Raoof M, Nota CLMA, Melstrom LG, Warner SG, Woo Y, Singh G, Fong Y. Oncologic outcomes after robot-assisted versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: Analysis of the National Cancer Database. J Surg Oncol 2018; 118:651-656. [PMID: 30114321 DOI: 10.1002/jso.25170] [Citation(s) in RCA: 42] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/10/2018] [Accepted: 07/02/2018] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND How the oncologic outcomes after robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) compare to those after laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) remains unknown. METHODS Using the National Cancer Database (NCDB), we analyzed all patients undergoing LDP or RDP for resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma over a 4-year period (2010-2013). RESULTS Of the 704 eligible patients, 605 (86%) underwent LDP and 99 (14%) underwent RDP. The median follow-up for patients was 25 months. There were no differences in the two groups with respect to sociodemographic, clinicopathologic, or treatment characteristics. On comparing LDP versus RDP, there was no difference in the margin-positive rate (15% vs 16%; P = 0.84); lymph nodes examined (12 vs 11; P = 0.67); overall survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.1, 95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.7 to 1.7; 28 vs 25 months; P = 0.71); hospital stay (6 vs 5 days; P = 0.14); time to chemotherapy (50 vs 52 days; P = 0.65); 30-day readmission (9.4% vs 9.1%; P = 0.92); and mortality (1% vs 0%; P = 0.28). Patients undergoing LDP had a significantly higher conversion rate to open or minimally invasive pancreatic cancer resections compared with RDP (27% vs 10%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION The early national experience with RDP demonstrates similar oncologic outcomes to LDP, with a significantly lower conversion rate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mustafa Raoof
- Department of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California
| | - Carolijn L M A Nota
- Department of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California
| | - Laleh G Melstrom
- Department of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California
| | - Susanne G Warner
- Department of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California
| | - Yanghee Woo
- Department of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California
| | - Gagandeep Singh
- Department of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California
| | - Yuman Fong
- Department of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California
| |
Collapse
|
|
34
|
Joechle K, Conrad C. Cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive pancreatic resection. JOURNAL OF HEPATO-BILIARY-PANCREATIC SCIENCES 2018; 25:291-298. [DOI: 10.1002/jhbp.558] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Katharina Joechle
- Department of Surgical Oncology; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center; 1400 Pressler, Unit 1484 Houston TX 77030 USA
| | - Claudius Conrad
- Department of Surgical Oncology; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center; 1400 Pressler, Unit 1484 Houston TX 77030 USA
| |
Collapse
|
|
35
|
Lee CW, Namgoong JM, Kim DY, Kim SC, Lee SY, Cho Y, Kwon H. Perioperative Outcomes and Surgical Indications of Minimally Invasive Pancreatectomy for Solid Pseudopapillary Tumor in Pediatric Patients. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2018. [DOI: 10.13029/aps.2018.24.2.76] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Chong Won Lee
- Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jung-Man Namgoong
- Division of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center Children's Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Dae Yeon Kim
- Division of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center Children's Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Seong Chul Kim
- Division of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center Children's Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Soo Young Lee
- Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea
| | - Yujeong Cho
- Division of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center Children's Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Hyunhee Kwon
- Division of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center Children's Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
|
36
|
Postlewait LM, Ethun CG, Mcinnis MR, Merchant N, Parikh A, Idrees K, Isom CA, Hawkins W, Fields RC, Strand M, Weber SM, Cho CS, Salem A, Martin RC, Scoggins C, Bentrem D, Kim HJ, Carr J, Ahmad S, Abbott D, Wilson GC, Kooby DA, Maithel SK. The Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Approach to Resection of Pancreatic Mucinous Cystic Neoplasms: An Underused Technique?. Am Surg 2018. [DOI: 10.1177/000313481808400123] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Pancreatic mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCNs) are rare tumors typically of the distal pancreas that harbor malignant potential. Although resection is recommended, data are limited on optimal operative approaches to distal pancreatectomy for MCN. MCN resections (2000–2014; eight institutions) were included. Outcomes of minimally invasive and open MCN resections were compared. A total of 289 patients underwent distal pancreatectomy for MCN: 136(47%) minimally invasive and 153(53%) open. Minimally invasive procedures were associated with smaller MCN size (3.9 vs 6.8 cm; P = 0.001), lower operative blood loss (192 vs 392 mL; P = 0.001), and shorter hospital stay(5 vs 7 days; P = 0.001) compared with open. Despite higher American Society of Anesthesiologists class, hand-assisted (n = 46) had similar advantages as laparoscopic/robotic (n = 76). When comparing hand-assisted to open, although MCN size was slightly smaller (4.1 vs 6.8 cm; P = 0.001), specimen length, operative time, and nodal yield were identical. Similar to laparoscopic/robotic, hand-assisted had lower operative blood loss (161 vs 392 mL; P = 0.001) and shorter hospital stay (5 vs 7 days; P = 0.03) compared with open, without increased complications. Hand-assisted laparoscopic technique is a useful approach for MCN resection because specimen length, lymph node yield, operative time, and complication profiles are similar to open procedures, but it still offers the advantages of a minimally invasive approach. Hand-assisted laparoscopy should be considered as an alternative to open technique or as a successive step before converting from total laparoscopic to open distal pancreatectomy for MCN.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lauren M. Postlewait
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Cecilia G. Ethun
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Mia R. Mcinnis
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Nipun Merchant
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Miami, Miami, Florida
| | - Alexander Parikh
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Kamran Idrees
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Chelsea A. Isom
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - William Hawkins
- Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Ryan C. Fields
- Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Matthew Strand
- Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Sharon M. Weber
- Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin
| | - Clifford S. Cho
- Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin
| | - Ahmed Salem
- Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin
| | - Robert C.G. Martin
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky
| | - Charles Scoggins
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky
| | - David Bentrem
- Department of Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Hong J. Kim
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Jacquelyn Carr
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Syed Ahmad
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati, Ohio
| | - Daniel Abbott
- Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin
| | - Gregory C. Wilson
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati, Ohio
| | - David A. Kooby
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Shishir K. Maithel
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
| |
Collapse
|
|
37
|
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Laparoscopic and Open Distal Pancreatectomy of Nonductal Adenocarcinomatous Pancreatic Tumor (NDACPT) in the Pancreatic Body and Tail. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 2017; 27:206-219. [DOI: 10.1097/sle.0000000000000416] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
|
|
38
|
Lianos GD, Christodoulou DK, Katsanos KH, Katsios C, Glantzounis GK. Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Recent Trends. J Gastrointest Cancer 2017; 48:129-134. [PMID: 28326457 DOI: 10.1007/s12029-017-9934-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pancreatic resection for cancer represents a real challenge for every surgeon. Recent improvements in laparoscopic experience, minimally invasive surgical techniques and instruments make now the minimally invasive approach a real "triumph." There is no doubt that minimally invasive surgery has replaced with great success conventional surgery in many fields, including surgical oncology. METHODS AND RESULTS However, its progress in pancreatic resection for adenocarcinoma has been dramatically slow. Recent evidence supports the notion that minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy is safe and feasible and that is becoming the procedure of choice mainly for benign or low-grade malignant lesions in the distal pancreas. On the other side, minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy has not yet been widely accepted and there is enormous skepticism when applied for pancreatic head adenocarcinoma. In this review, we summarize the current evidence on the potential applications of minimally invasive surgical approaches for this aggressive, heterogeneous, and enigmatic type of cancer. CONCLUSIONS Moreover, the potential future applications of these approaches are discussed with the hope to improve the quality of life as well as the survival rates of pancreatic cancer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Georgios D Lianos
- Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, University of Ioannina, University Hospital of Ioannina, 451 10, Ioannina, Greece.
| | - Dimitrios K Christodoulou
- Department of Gastroenterology, School of Medicine, University of Ioannina, University Hospital of Ioannina, 451 10, Ioannina, Greece
| | - Konstantinos H Katsanos
- Department of Gastroenterology, School of Medicine, University of Ioannina, University Hospital of Ioannina, 451 10, Ioannina, Greece
| | - Christos Katsios
- Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, University of Ioannina, University Hospital of Ioannina, 451 10, Ioannina, Greece
| | - Georgios K Glantzounis
- Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, University of Ioannina, University Hospital of Ioannina, 451 10, Ioannina, Greece
| |
Collapse
|
|
39
|
de Rooij T, Cipriani F, Rawashdeh M, van Dieren S, Barbaro S, Abuawwad M, van Hilst J, Fontana M, Besselink MG, Hilal MA. Single-Surgeon Learning Curve in 111 Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomies: Does Operative Time Tell the Whole Story? J Am Coll Surg 2017; 224:826-832e1. [PMID: 28126547 DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2017.01.023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 48] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2016] [Revised: 01/03/2017] [Accepted: 01/04/2017] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is becoming the standard treatment for left-sided pancreatic disease. Learning curve identification is essential to ensure a safe and steady expansion. However, large (n > 30) single-surgeon learning curve series are lacking. STUDY DESIGN Data of all patients undergoing LDP between June 2007 and March 2016 by a single surgeon were collected prospectively. For learning curve analysis, the first 10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 LDPs were compared with LDPs performed thereafter. RESULTS In total, 111 LDPs were performed, of which 2 (2%) were converted. Median operative time was 200 minutes (interquartile range [IQR] 150 to 245 minutes) and median blood loss was 200 mL (IQR 100 to 300 mL). Learning curve analysis did not show improvements in operative time or blood loss. However, the number of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma increased after 30 cases and a significant reduction of Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher complications was seen; from 30% (n = 9) for cases 1 to 30 to 5% (n = 4) for cases 31 to 111 (p < 0.001). Similarly, the International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula grade B/C fistulas (33% [n = 10] vs 9% [n = 7]; p = 0.001) and percutaneous drainage rate (23% [n = 7] vs 4% [n = 3]; p = 0.001) were lower. Hospital stay was 7 days (IQR 5 to 13 days) for cases 1 to 30 vs 5 days (IQR 4 to 6 days) for cases 31 to 111 (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Operative outcomes of LDP remained stable with increasing surgical complexity over time. Postoperative outcomes, such as complications and length of hospital stay, improved after the first 30 cases. When describing learning curves, short- and long-term outcomes should be considered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs de Rooij
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton National Health Service Foundation Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
40
|
Kilburn DJ, Chiow AKH, Leung U, Siriwardhane M, Cavallucci DJ, Bryant R, O'Rourke NA. Early Experience with Laparoscopic Frey Procedure for Chronic Pancreatitis: a Case Series and Review of Literature. J Gastrointest Surg 2017; 21:904-909. [PMID: 28025771 DOI: 10.1007/s11605-016-3343-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/19/2016] [Accepted: 12/15/2016] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
The Frey procedure has been demonstrated to be an effective surgical technique to treat patients with painful large duct chronic pancreatitis. More commonly reported as an open procedure, we report our experience with a minimally invasive approach to the Frey procedure. Four consecutive patients underwent a laparoscopic Frey procedure at our institution from January 2012 to July 2015. We herein report our technique and describe short- and medium-term outcomes. The median age was 40 years old. The median duration of pancreatic pain prior to surgery was 12 years. Median operative time and intraoperative blood loss was 130 min (100-160 min) and 60 mL (50-100 mL), respectively. The median length of stay was 7 days (3-40 days) and median follow-up was 26 months (12-30 months). There was one major postoperative complication requiring reoperation. Within 6 months, in all four patients, frequency of pain and analgesic requirement reduced significantly. Two patients appeared to have resolution of pancreatic exocrine insufficiency. The Frey procedure is possible laparoscopically with acceptable short- and medium-term outcomes in well-selected patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel J Kilburn
- Hepatopancreatobiliary Unit, Department of Surgery, Royal Brisbane Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, 4029, Australia.,School of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
| | - Adrian K H Chiow
- Hepatopancreatobiliary Unit, Department of Surgery, Changi General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Universe Leung
- Hepatopancreatobiliary Unit, Department of Surgery, Royal Brisbane Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, 4029, Australia
| | - Mehan Siriwardhane
- Hepatopancreatobiliary Unit, Department of Surgery, Royal Brisbane Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, 4029, Australia
| | - David J Cavallucci
- Hepatopancreatobiliary Unit, Department of Surgery, Royal Brisbane Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, 4029, Australia.,School of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
| | - Richard Bryant
- Hepatopancreatobiliary Unit, Department of Surgery, Royal Brisbane Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, 4029, Australia
| | - Nicholas A O'Rourke
- Hepatopancreatobiliary Unit, Department of Surgery, Royal Brisbane Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, 4029, Australia. .,School of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. .,, Wesley Medical Centre Suite 47, 40 Chasely Street, Auchenflower, Brisbane, Queensland, 4066, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
|
41
|
Conlon KC, de Rooij T, van Hilst J, Abu Hidal M, Fleshman J, Talamonti M, Vanounou T, Garfinkle R, Velanovich V, Kooby D, Vollmer CM, Barkun J, Besselink MG, Boggi U, Conlon KC, Han HS, Hansen PD, Kendrick ML, Kooby DA, Montagnini AL, Palanivelu C, Røsok BI, Shrikhande SV, Wakabayashi G, Zeh H, Vollmer CM. Minimally invasive pancreatic resections: cost and value perspectives. HPB (Oxford) 2017; 19:225-233. [PMID: 28268161 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2017.01.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/05/2017] [Accepted: 01/11/2017] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The number of minimally invasive pancreatic resections (MIPR) performed for benign or malignant disease, have increased in recent years. However, there is limited information regarding cost/value implications. METHODS An international conference evaluating MIPR was held during the 12th Bi-Annual International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (IHPBA) World Congress in Sao Paulo, Brazil, on April 20th, 2016. This manuscript summarizes the presentations that reviewed current topics in cost and value as they pertain to MIPR. RESULTS Compared to the open approach, MIPR's are associated with higher operative costs but lower postoperative costs. However, measurements of patient value (defined as improvement in both quantity and quality of life) and financial value (using incremental cost-effectiveness ratio) are required to determine the true value at societal level. CONCLUSION Challenges remain as to how the potential benefits, both to the patient and the healthcare system as a whole, are measured. Research comparing MIPR versus other techniques for pancreatectomy will require appropriate and valid measurement tools, some of which are yet to be refined. Nonetheless, the experience to date would support the continued development of MIPR by experienced surgeons in high-volume pancreatic centers, married with appropriate review and recalibration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kevin C Conlon
- Professorial Surgical Unit, Trinity College Dublin, The University of Dublin, Ireland.
| | - Thijs de Rooij
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jony van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Julie Fleshman
- Pancreatic Cancer Action Network, Manhattan Beach, CA, USA
| | - Mark Talamonti
- Department of Surgery, North Shore University Health System, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Tsafrir Vanounou
- Gerald Bronfman, Department of Oncology, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
| | - Richard Garfinkle
- Gerald Bronfman, Department of Oncology, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
| | - Vic Velanovich
- Division of General Surgery, The University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - David Kooby
- Department of Surgery, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Charles M Vollmer
- Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
42
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND The first International conference on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection was arranged in conjunction with the annual meeting of the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (IHPBA), in Sao Paulo, Brazil on April 19th 2016. The presented evidence and outcomes resulting from the session for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is summarized and addressed perioperative outcome, the outcome for cancer and patient selection for the procedure. METHODS A literature search was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to compare MIDP and open distal pancreatectomy. Patient selection was discussed based on plenary talks, panel discussions and a worldwide survey on MIDP. RESULTS Of 582 studies, 52 (40 observational and 12 case-matched) were included in the assessment for outcome for LDP (n = 5023) vs. ODP (n = 16,306) whereas 16 observational comparative studies were identified for cancer outcome. No randomized trials were identified. MIDP resulted in similar outcome to ODP with a tendency for lower blood loss and shorter hospital stay in the MIDP group. DISCUSSION Available evidence for comparison of MIDP to ODP is weak, although the number of studies is high. Observed outcomes of MIDP are promising. In the absence of randomized control trials, an international registry should be established.
Collapse
|
|
43
|
Laparoscopic surgery for pancreatic neoplasms: the European association for endoscopic surgery clinical consensus conference. Surg Endosc 2017; 31:2023-2041. [PMID: 28205034 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-017-5414-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 63] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/16/2016] [Accepted: 01/07/2017] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Introduced more than 20 years ago, laparoscopic pancreatic surgery (LAPS) has not reached a uniform acceptance among HPB surgeons. As a result, there is no consensus regarding its use in patients with pancreatic neoplasms. This study, organized by the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES), aimed to develop consensus statements and clinical recommendations on the application of LAPS in these patients. METHODS An international panel of experts was selected based on their clinical and scientific expertise in laparoscopic and open pancreatic surgery. Each panelist performed a critical appraisal of the literature and prepared evidence-based statements assessed by other panelists during Delphi process. The statements were further discussed during a one-day face-to-face meeting followed by the second round of Delphi. Modified statements were presented at the plenary session of the 24th International Congress of the EAES in Amsterdam and in a web-based survey. RESULTS LAPS included laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP), pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD), enucleation, central pancreatectomy, and ultrasound. In general, LAPS was found to be safe, especially in experienced hands, and also advantageous over an open approach in terms of intraoperative blood loss, postoperative recovery, and quality of life. Eighty-five percent or higher proportion of responders agreed with the majority (69.5%) of statements. However, the evidence is predominantly based on retrospective case-control studies and systematic reviews of these studies, clearly affected by selection bias. Furthermore, no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been published to date, although four RCTs are currently underway in Europe. CONCLUSIONS LAPS is currently in its development and exploration stages, as defined by the international IDEAL framework for surgical innovation. LDP is feasible and safe, performed in many centers, while LPD is limited to few centers. RCTs and registry studies are essential to proceed with the assessment of LAPS.
Collapse
|
|
44
|
Cienfuegos JA, Salguero J, Núñez-Córdoba JM, Ruiz-Canela M, Benito A, Ocaña S, Zozaya G, Martí-Cruchaga P, Pardo F, Hernández-Lizoáin JL, Rotellar F. Short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic organ-sparing resection in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a single-center experience. Surg Endosc 2017; 31:3847-3857. [DOI: 10.1007/s00464-016-5411-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2016] [Accepted: 12/30/2016] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
|
|
45
|
Cucchetti A, Ercolani G, Pezzilli R, Cescon M, Frascaroli G, Pinna AD. The Health Gain Obtainable from Pancreatic Resection for Adenocarcinoma in the Elderly. World J Surg 2016; 41:1063-1072. [PMID: 27826771 DOI: 10.1007/s00268-016-3793-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In treating pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), age does not represent a contraindication to surgery, even if aging is known to increase postoperative mortality and morbidity. Furthermore, long-term outcome remains poor and there is much debate on whether to operate or not in elderly patients. The aim of this study was to provide a general framework to evaluate the health gain obtainable from surgery for PDAC in relationship with age and tumor stage. METHODS A Monte Carlo simulation model was built taking into consideration pertinent literature from population-based studies regarding surgical and non-surgical outcomes for stages I-II PDAC. The health gain obtainable from surgery, in comparison to the choice of not resecting patients, was measured through number needed-to-treat (NNT) calculation. RESULTS Considering the typical stage I-II PDAC characteristics, the model showed that the mean lifespan after surgery was 28.1 ± 3.9 months and 9.3 ± 1.5 months after non-surgical therapies. The NNT with surgery in order to prevent one death at 5 years was 6 (95% CI 4-10), indicating an overall high gain obtainable from surgery. Sensitivity analyses on patient age and tumor stage suggested that starting from 76 years onward, the NNT progressively increases, resulting in a low cure rate of surgery in the elderly and becoming potentially harmful for patients aged above 80 years. These figures were more pronounced for tumor stages IIA and IIB. CONCLUSIONS The present general framework suggests that the lifespan benefit obtainable from pancreatectomy in elderly patients is uncertain especially with the advancing of the tumor stage.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alessandro Cucchetti
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences - DIMEC, S.Orsola - Malpighi Hospital, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
- S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Via Massarenti 9, 40138, Bologna, Italy.
| | - Giorgio Ercolani
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences - DIMEC, S.Orsola - Malpighi Hospital, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
- Surgical Oncology Unit, General Hospital Morgagni - Pierantoni, Forlì, Italy
| | - Raffaele Pezzilli
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences - DIMEC, S.Orsola - Malpighi Hospital, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
- S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Via Massarenti 9, 40138, Bologna, Italy
| | - Matteo Cescon
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences - DIMEC, S.Orsola - Malpighi Hospital, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
- S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Via Massarenti 9, 40138, Bologna, Italy
| | - Giacomo Frascaroli
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences - DIMEC, S.Orsola - Malpighi Hospital, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
- S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Via Massarenti 9, 40138, Bologna, Italy
| | - Antonio Daniele Pinna
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences - DIMEC, S.Orsola - Malpighi Hospital, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
- S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Via Massarenti 9, 40138, Bologna, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
46
|
de Rooij T, van Hilst J, Boerma D, Bonsing BA, Daams F, van Dam RM, Dijkgraaf MG, van Eijck CH, Festen S, Gerhards MF, Koerkamp BG, van der Harst E, de Hingh IH, Kazemier G, Klaase J, de Kleine RH, van Laarhoven CJ, Lips DJ, Luyer MD, Molenaar IQ, Patijn GA, Roos D, Scheepers JJ, van der Schelling GP, Steenvoorde P, Vriens MR, Wijsman JH, Gouma DJ, Busch OR, Hilal MA, Besselink MG. Impact of a Nationwide Training Program in Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy (LAELAPS). Ann Surg 2016; 264:754-762. [PMID: 27741008 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000001888] [Citation(s) in RCA: 79] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To study the feasibility and impact of a nationwide training program in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA Superior outcomes of MIDP compared with open distal pancreatectomy have been reported. In the Netherlands (2005 to 2013) only 10% of distal pancreatectomies were in a minimally invasive fashion and 85% of surgeons welcomed MIDP training. The feasibility and impact of a nationwide training program is unknown. METHODS From 2014 to 2015, 32 pancreatic surgeons from 17 centers participated in a nationwide training program in MIDP, including detailed technique description, video training, and proctoring on-site. Outcomes of MIDP before training (2005-2013) were compared with outcomes after training (2014-2015). RESULTS In total, 201 patients were included; 71 underwent MIDP in 9 years before training versus 130 in 22 months after training (7-fold increase, P < 0.001). The conversion rate (38% [n = 27] vs 8% [n = 11], P < 0.001) and blood loss were lower after training and more pancreatic adenocarcinomas were resected (7 [10%] vs 28 [22%], P = 0.03), with comparable R0-resection rates (4/7 [57%] vs 19/28 [68%], P = 0.67). Clavien-Dindo score ≥III complications (15 [21%] vs 19 [15%], P = 0.24) and pancreatic fistulas (20 [28%] vs 41 [32%], P = 0.62) were not significantly different. Length of hospital stay was shorter after training (9 [7-12] vs 7 [5-8] days, P < 0.001). Thirty-day mortality was 3% vs 0% (P = 0.12). CONCLUSION A nationwide MIDP training program was feasible and followed by a steep increase in the use of MIDP, also in patients with pancreatic cancer, and decreased conversion rates. Future studies should determine whether such a training program is applicable in other settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs de Rooij
- *Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands †Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands ‡Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands §Department of Surgery, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands ||Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands ¶Clinical Research Unit, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands #Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands **Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands ††Department of Surgery, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands ‡‡Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands §§Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands ||||Department of Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands ¶¶Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands ##Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, The Netherlands ***Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands †††Department of Surgery, Isala Clincs, Zwolle, The Netherlands ‡‡‡Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Gasthuis, Delft, The Netherlands §§§Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands ||||||Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
47
|
Laparoscopic Left Pancreatectomy in the United Kingdom: Analysis of a Six-Year Experience in a Single Tertiary Center. Pancreas 2016; 45:1204-7. [PMID: 26784910 DOI: 10.1097/mpa.0000000000000605] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/13/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Laparoscopic techniques have been slow to establish a role in pancreatic surgery. Worldwide, laparoscopic left pancreatectomy (LLP) is gaining in popularity; however, there remains little published data from the United Kingdom.We aimed to evaluate the results of LLP performed in a single UK pancreatic unit. METHODS Patients undergoing LLP for lesions in the body and tail of the pancreas between April 2009 and April 2015 were identified. Patient records were reviewed retrospectively. RESULTS Laparoscopic left pancreatectomy was performed on 46 patients, median age, 62 years (range, 19-84). The spleen was preserved in 27 patients (93% of planned), and 6 (13%) operations were converted to open. The overall morbidity rate was 39%; 28 patients had no complications. Significant complications were seen in 7 (15%) patients; this included 3 pancreatic fistula (6.5%) and 1 mortality (2%). Median length of stay was 6 days (range, 3-28). Histology revealed 15 neuroendocrine tumors, 8 adenocarcinomas, 4 mucinous cystadenomas, 1 intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm, 2 metastases, and 16 other benign pathologies. CONCLUSIONS Laparoscopic pancreatic surgery has a low risk of significant complications. Our results offer encouragement to identify LLP as the gold standard approach for premalignant lesions. Further work should clarify the outcomes for malignant lesions.
Collapse
|
|
48
|
Salman B, Yilmaz TU, Dikmen K, Kaplan M. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. J Vis Surg 2016; 2:141. [PMID: 29078528 DOI: 10.21037/jovs.2016.07.21] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/18/2016] [Accepted: 07/18/2016] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
After technological advances and increased experiences, more complicated surgeries including distal pancreatectomy can be easily performed with acceptable oncologic results, and decreased mortality and morbidity. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) has been shown to have several advantages including less blood loss, less hospital stay, less pain. Several studies comparing open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) and LDP resulted that both techniques have similar results according to pancreas fistulas, oncological results, costs and operation indications. Morbidity is very low in high volume centers, for this reason at least ten cases should be performed for the learning curve. Several authors remarked important technical points in LDP in order to perform safe and acceptable LDP in several studies. Here in this review, we aimed to overview the results of previous studies about LDP and discuss the technical points of LDP.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bulent Salman
- Department of General Surgery, Gazi University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Tonguc Utku Yilmaz
- Department of General Surgery, Kocaeli University School of Medicine, Kocaeli, Turkey
| | - Kursat Dikmen
- Department of General Surgery, Gazi University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Mehmet Kaplan
- Department of General Surgery, Bahcesehir University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
|
49
|
Sahakyan MA, Kazaryan AM, Rawashdeh M, Fuks D, Shmavonyan M, Haugvik SP, Labori KJ, Buanes T, Røsok BI, Ignjatovic D, Abu Hilal M, Gayet B, Kim SC, Edwin B. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: results of a multicenter cohort study on 196 patients. Surg Endosc 2016; 30:3409-3418. [PMID: 26514135 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-015-4623-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/26/2015] [Accepted: 10/14/2015] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopy is widely accepted as a feasible option for distal pancreatectomy. However, the experience in laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is limited to a small number of studies, reported by expert centers. The present study aimed to evaluate perioperative and oncological outcomes after LDP for PDAC in a large, multicenter cohort of patients. METHODS A retrospective analysis of the data on 196 patients with histologically verified PDAC, operated at Oslo University Hospital-Rikshospitalet (Oslo, Norway), Asan Medical Center (Seoul, Republic of Korea), Institut Mutualiste Montsouris (Paris, France) and University Hospital Southampton (Southampton, UK) between January 2002 and April 2015 was conducted. The patients with standard (SLDP) and extended (i.e., en bloc with adjacent organ, ELDP) resections were compared in terms of perioperative and oncological outcomes. RESULTS Out of 196 LDP procedures, 191 (97.4 %) were completed through laparoscopy, while five (2.6 %) were converted to open surgery. ELDP was performed in 30 (15.7 %) cases. Sixty-one (31.9 %) patients experienced postoperative complications, including 48 (25.1 %) with pancreatic fistula. The rate of clinically relevant fistula (grade B/C) was 15.7 %. Median postoperative hospital stay was 8 (2-63) days. Median follow-up was 16 months. Median survival was 31.3 months (95 % CI 22.9-39.6). Three- and 5-year actuarial survival rates were 42.4 and 30 %, respectively. SLDP was associated with significantly higher survival compared with ELDP (p = 0.032). CONCLUSIONS LDP seems to be a feasible and safe procedure, providing satisfactory oncological outcomes in patients with PDAC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mushegh A Sahakyan
- The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, 0027, Oslo, Norway.
- Institute of Clinical Medicine, Medical Faculty, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
- Department of Surgery No 1, Yerevan State Medical University After M. Heratsi, Yerevan, Armenia.
| | - Airazat M Kazaryan
- The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, 0027, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Surgery, Finnmark Hospital, Kirkenes, Norway
| | - Majd Rawashdeh
- University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - David Fuks
- Department of Digestive Diseases, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France
- Institut des Systèmes Intelligents et Robotique (ISIR), Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, France
| | - Mark Shmavonyan
- The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, 0027, Oslo, Norway
- Institute of Clinical Medicine, Medical Faculty, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Sven-Petter Haugvik
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Billiary Sugery, Oslo University Hospital-Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Surgery, Vestre Viken Hospital Trust, Drammen, Norway
| | - Knut Jørgen Labori
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Billiary Sugery, Oslo University Hospital-Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
| | - Trond Buanes
- Institute of Clinical Medicine, Medical Faculty, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Billiary Sugery, Oslo University Hospital-Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
| | - Bård Ingvald Røsok
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Billiary Sugery, Oslo University Hospital-Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
| | - Dejan Ignjatovic
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Akershus University Hospital, University of Oslo, Lørenskog, Norway
| | | | - Brice Gayet
- Department of Digestive Diseases, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France
- Institut des Systèmes Intelligents et Robotique (ISIR), Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, France
| | - Song Cheol Kim
- Division of Hepato-Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Bjørn Edwin
- The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, 0027, Oslo, Norway
- Institute of Clinical Medicine, Medical Faculty, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Billiary Sugery, Oslo University Hospital-Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
|
50
|
Goh BKP, Chan CY, Lee SY, Chan WH, Cheow PC, Chow PKH, Ooi LLPJ, Chung AYF. Factors associated with and consequences of open conversion after laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: initial experience at a single institution. ANZ J Surg 2016; 87:E271-E275. [DOI: 10.1111/ans.13661] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2016] [Revised: 04/29/2016] [Accepted: 05/15/2016] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Brian K. P. Goh
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplantation Surgery; Singapore General Hospital; Singapore
- Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School; Singapore
| | - Chung Yip Chan
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplantation Surgery; Singapore General Hospital; Singapore
| | - Ser Yee Lee
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplantation Surgery; Singapore General Hospital; Singapore
| | - Weng Hoong Chan
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Tract and Bariatric Surgery; Singapore General Hospital; Singapore
| | - Peng Chung Cheow
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplantation Surgery; Singapore General Hospital; Singapore
| | - Pierce K. H. Chow
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplantation Surgery; Singapore General Hospital; Singapore
- Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School; Singapore
| | - London L. P. J. Ooi
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplantation Surgery; Singapore General Hospital; Singapore
- Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School; Singapore
| | - Alexander Y. F. Chung
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplantation Surgery; Singapore General Hospital; Singapore
| |
Collapse
|