|
1
|
Shahbaz NK, Verhoeff K, Wees T, Jatana S, Quan D, Glinka J, Skaro A, Tang ES. Laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy outcomes in patients ≥ 75 years old: an NSQIP analysis of 4343 patients. HPB (Oxford) 2025; 27:696-705. [PMID: 39965982 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2025.01.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/01/2024] [Revised: 01/19/2025] [Accepted: 01/28/2025] [Indexed: 02/20/2025]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The benefits of MIS in older adults are conflicting. This study evaluates demographics and early outcomes, for older patients (≥75) undergoing minimally invasive (MIS) versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). METHOD We categorized elderly patients who underwent PD from 2017 to 2021 NSQIP databases by surgical approach (open vs MIS). Baseline characteristics were examined with bivariate analysis, and multivariate logistic regression assessed the independent effect of minimally invasive surgery on 30-day serious complications and mortality. RESULTS Amongst 4137 patients, 150 (3.63 %) underwent MIS PD. Patients demographics were similar. Open cohorts were older (79.1 vs 78.4 years; p = 0.011) with greater tumor invasion (36.6 % vs. 27.0 %; p = 0.018). MIS had longer operations (133.1 vs 119.6 min; p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that MIS approach was associated with increased serious complications (OR 2.21; p < 0.001), but not mortality (OR 2.11; p = 0.173). Post hoc analysis excluding cases converted to open demonstrated no difference in serious complications (OR 1.94; p = 0.070) or mortality (OR 3.58; p = 0.094). PSM analysis estimated a 14.7 % higher rate of serious complications in MIS but similar mortality (p = 0.291). CONCLUSIONS MIS PD uptake in elderly patients remains limited, with early findings indicating longer operations and higher complications. Further research on patient selection differences, technique modifications, and center expertise is required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nazgol K Shahbaz
- Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, Ontario, Canada
| | - Kevin Verhoeff
- Department of Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
| | - Tyrell Wees
- Department of Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - Sukhdeep Jatana
- Department of Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | | | - Juan Glinka
- Department of Surgery, London, Ontario, Canada
| | - Anton Skaro
- Department of Surgery, London, Ontario, Canada
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
2
|
Xu WY, Xin J, Yang Y, Wang QW, Yuan BH, Peng FX. A comprehensive analysis of robotic assisted vs. laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy using propensity score matching. J Robot Surg 2025; 19:86. [PMID: 40014153 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-025-02249-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: 09/21/2024] [Accepted: 02/16/2025] [Indexed: 02/28/2025]
Abstract
Using the propensity-matched methodology, this meta-analysis and comprehensive review aimed to compare robotic distal pancreatectomy with laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy in terms of perioperative and short-term oncologic outcomes. Within the scope of this investigation, complete and total adherence to the PRISMA guidelines for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses was established. The search we conducted in PubMed, Google Scholar, and EMBASE was automated to find relevant papers that matched the tendency up to July 1, 2024. The length of time spent while operating, the rate of conversion, and the collection of lymph nodes were the primary factors that were considered. Other metrics that were taken into consideration were the approximate amount of blood loss, the length of time spent in the hospital, the need for transfusions, and the occurrence of major adverse events. In the end, there were 8 studies that involved 1649 patients. Of those patients, 758 had robotic assisted distal pancreatectomy, whereas 891 underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. In comparison to laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy, the robotic assisted technique did result in higher anticipated blood loss and conversion rates; however, it also required longer durations of operation due to its lengthier duration. In terms of lymph node retrieval, the duration of hospital stay, the need for blood transfusions, and the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula, there were no distinctions that could be considered statistically significant between the two techniques. A realistic and risk-free surgical alternative is a distal pancreatectomy that is performed with the aid of robotic technology. When compared to laparoscopic surgery, the outcomes of robot-assisted surgery were superior in terms of conversion rates to laparotomy and less anticipated intraoperative blood loss. However, the operation took longer to complete than laparoscopic surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wan-Yu Xu
- North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, China
- Department of General Surgery, 404 Hospital, Mianyang City, Sichuan Province, China
| | - Jiang Xin
- North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, China
| | - Young Yang
- North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, China
| | | | | | - Fang-Xing Peng
- Department of General Surgery, 404 Hospital, Mianyang City, Sichuan Province, China.
| |
Collapse
|
|
3
|
Shyr BU, Shyr BS, Shih MS, Chen SC, Wang SE, Shyr YM. Combined robotic/open pancreaticoduodenectomy in the young aged < 50 years. Updates Surg 2025:10.1007/s13304-025-02082-8. [PMID: 39815049 DOI: 10.1007/s13304-025-02082-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/25/2024] [Accepted: 01/07/2025] [Indexed: 01/18/2025]
Abstract
Impact of age on surgical and survival outcomes after combined robotic/open pancreaticoduodenectomy (CR/OPD) has not been extensively studied. This study aimed to evaluate the surgical and survival outcomes of patients aged < 50 years who underwent CR/OPD. A comparative study was conducted on patients who underwent CR/OPD divided into two groups: the young (age < 50 years) and the old (age ≥ 50 years). A total of 555 patients were included in this study, with 53 (9.5%) in the young group and 502 (90.5%) in the old group. Periampullary adenocarcinomas were less common in the young group (32.1% vs. 76.5%), whereas solid and pseudopapillary tumors (9.4% vs. 1.0%) and neuroendocrine tumors (15.1% vs. 3.6%) were more common. Soft pancreatic parenchyma (77.4% vs. 76.5%) and non-dilated (≤ 3 mm) pancreatic ducts (77.4% vs. 62.5%) were more prevalent in the young group. The young group had a shorter length of stay (median, 16 vs. 20 days). No significant differences were observed in the other surgical outcomes and risks, including postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) (7.5% vs. 8.0%). Survival outcomes for overall periampullary adenocarcinoma favored the young group, with a 5-year survival rate of 76.4% vs. 46.7% in the old group. In conclusion, RPD in the young patients (< 50 years) is associated with comparable surgical outcomes and favorable survival outcomes for periampullary adenocarcinoma compared with the older patients (≥ 50 years). These findings highlight the feasibility and safety of RPD in the young population, although the prevalence of soft pancreatic parenchyma and non-dilated pancreatic ducts was higher in the young group.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bor-Uei Shyr
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery and Therapeutic and Research Center of Pancreatic Cancer, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, 10 Floor 201 Section 2 Shipai Road, Taipei, 112, Taiwan, ROC.
- National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC.
| | - Bor-Shiuan Shyr
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery and Therapeutic and Research Center of Pancreatic Cancer, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, 10 Floor 201 Section 2 Shipai Road, Taipei, 112, Taiwan, ROC
- National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
| | - Mu-Shan Shih
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery and Therapeutic and Research Center of Pancreatic Cancer, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, 10 Floor 201 Section 2 Shipai Road, Taipei, 112, Taiwan, ROC
- National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
| | - Shih-Chin Chen
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery and Therapeutic and Research Center of Pancreatic Cancer, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, 10 Floor 201 Section 2 Shipai Road, Taipei, 112, Taiwan, ROC
- National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
| | - Shin-E Wang
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery and Therapeutic and Research Center of Pancreatic Cancer, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, 10 Floor 201 Section 2 Shipai Road, Taipei, 112, Taiwan, ROC
- National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
| | - Yi-Ming Shyr
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery and Therapeutic and Research Center of Pancreatic Cancer, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, 10 Floor 201 Section 2 Shipai Road, Taipei, 112, Taiwan, ROC
- National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
| |
Collapse
|
|
4
|
Emmen AMLH, Jones LR, Wei K, Busch O, Shen B, Fusai GK, Shyr YM, Khatkov I, White S, Boggi U, Kerem M, Molenaar IQ, Koerkamp BG, Saint-Marc O, Dokmak S, van Dieren S, Rozzini R, Festen S, Liu R, Jang JY, Besselink MG, Hilal MA. Impact of patient age on outcome of minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy: a propensity score matched study. HPB (Oxford) 2025; 27:102-110. [PMID: 39500707 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2024.10.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/24/2024] [Revised: 08/28/2024] [Accepted: 10/13/2024] [Indexed: 01/06/2025]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pancreatoduodenectomy in elderly patients may be associated with increased postoperative mortality, but studies in minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) are scarce. METHODS International multicenter retrospective study including patients aged >60 years undergoing MIPD (robot-assisted and laparoscopic) and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD), were categorized by age: 60-69, 70-79, and 80+ years. In each category, propensity score matching (PSM) was performed (1:1 ratio) between MIPD and OPD. Primary outcome was 30-day/in-hospital mortality. RESULTS Among 3820 patients, we matched 1468 patients aged 60-69, 1154 patients aged 70-79, and 196 patients aged 80+ years. In patients aged 60-69 and 70-79 years, MIPD was associated with longer operative time, less blood loss and a longer length of stay. Major morbidity was higher after MIPD with similar 30-day/in-hospital mortality. The R0 resection rate was higher after MIPD. In patients aged 80+ years, besides a longer operative time in MIPD, outcomes were comparable between both groups. CONCLUSION This study found no evidence that increasing age worsens mortality of MIPD. MIPD was associated with longer operative time, higher rate of major morbidity, prolonged length of stay versus less blood loss and a higher R0 resection in patients aged 60-69 and 70-79 years. These differences continue in patients aged 80+ years, but became less evident.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anouk M L H Emmen
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy; Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Leia R Jones
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy; Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Kongyuan Wei
- Department of Surgery, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Olivier Busch
- Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Baiyong Shen
- Department of Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| | | | - Yi-Ming Shyr
- Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Igor Khatkov
- Department of Surgery, Moscow Clinical Scientific Center, Rusland, Moscow, Russia
| | | | - Ugo Boggi
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy
| | - Mustafa Kerem
- Department of General Surgery, Gazi University, School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - I Q Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital and University Medical Center, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Bas G Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Safi Dokmak
- Department of Surgery, Department of HPB Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Beaujon Hospital, University Paris Cité, Clichy, France
| | - Susan van Dieren
- Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Renzo Rozzini
- Geriatric Department, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Sebastiaan Festen
- Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Rong Liu
- Department of Surgery, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Jin-Young Jang
- Department of Surgery and Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Mohammed A Hilal
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
|
5
|
Giani A, Mazzola M, Paterno M, Zironda A, Calcagno P, Zuppi E, De Martini P, Ferrari G. Oncological Outcomes of Open Versus Minimally Invasive Surgery for Ductal Adenocarcinomas of Pancreatic Head: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis. Curr Oncol 2024; 31:6096-6109. [PMID: 39451759 PMCID: PMC11506721 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol31100455] [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: 08/26/2024] [Revised: 10/05/2024] [Accepted: 10/07/2024] [Indexed: 10/26/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Minimally invasive pancreatic resections (MIPRs) have been shown to be safe and feasible, but there is still a lack of high-level evidence on oncological outcomes for cephalic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The aim of this study was to compare the oncological outcomes of patients undergoing MIPR and open pancreatic resection (OPR) for pancreatic head cancer in a single high-volume center. METHODS Data from a prospectively collected database of patients who underwent radical-intent surgery for resectable and borderline resectable PDAC of the head at our institution between January 2013 and May 2023 were retrieved and analyzed, comparing the surgical and oncological outcomes of MIPR and OPR, using a propensity score matching analysis. RESULTS In the study period, 220 patients were selected. After matching, a total of 81 MIPRs and 81 OPRs were compared. No difference was found regarding R0 rate (OPR 83.9% vs. MIPR 74.1%, p = 0.122). Median overall survival (24 and 31 months for the OPR and MIPR groups, respectively; log rank p = 0.665) and disease-free survival (12 and 21 months for the OPR and MIPR groups, respectively; log rank p = 0.118) did not differ between the groups. The MIPR group was associated with a greater number of harvested lymph nodes (22 vs. 16, p = 0.0008), longer operative time (565 vs. 420 min, p < 0.0001), and shorter length of stay (12 vs. 18 days; p = 0.0001). No differences between the groups were found regarding all other postoperative and pathological outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Regarding oncological outcomes, MIPR appeared to be comparable to OPR for treating patients with PDAC of the head. Despite an increased operative time, MIPR was associated with a greater number of LNs harvested and a shorter length of stay.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Michele Mazzola
- Division of Minimally-Invasive Surgical Oncology, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, 20162 Milano, Italy; (A.G.); (M.P.); (A.Z.); (P.C.); (E.Z.); (P.D.M.); (G.F.)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
|
6
|
Hariri HM, Perez SB, Turner KM, Wilson GC. Minimally Invasive Pancreas Surgery: Is There a Benefit? Surg Clin North Am 2024; 104:1083-1093. [PMID: 39237165 DOI: 10.1016/j.suc.2024.04.013] [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] [Indexed: 09/07/2024]
Abstract
Minimally invasive procedures minimize trauma to the human body while maintaining satisfactory therapeutic results. Minimally invasive pancreas surgery (MIPS) was introduced in 1994, but questions regarding its efficacy compared to an open approach were widespread. MIPS is associated with several perioperative advantages while maintaining oncological standards when performed by surgeons with a robust training regimen and frequent practice. Future research should focus on addressing learning curve discrepancies while identifying factors associated with shortening the time needed to attain technical proficiency.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hussein M Hariri
- Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA; Department of Surgical Oncology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, 231 Albert Sabin Way, Cincinnati, OH 45229, USA
| | - Samuel B Perez
- Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA; Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208, USA
| | - Kevin M Turner
- Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA; Cincinnati Research on Outcomes and Safety in Surgery (CROSS); Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, 231 Albert Sabin Way, Cincinnati, OH 45229, USA
| | - Gregory C Wilson
- Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA; Cincinnati Research on Outcomes and Safety in Surgery (CROSS); Department of Surgical Oncology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, 231 Albert Sabin Way ML 0558, Cincinnati, OH 45229, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
|
7
|
Keller DS, Curtis N, Burt HA, Ammirati CA, Collings AT, Polk HC, Carrano FM, Antoniou SA, Hanna N, Piotet LM, Hill S, Cuijpers ACM, Tejedor P, Milone M, Andriopoulou E, Kontovounisios C, Leeds IL, Awad ZT, Barber MW, Al-Mansour M, Nassif G, West MA, Pryor AD, Carli F, Demartines N, Bouvy ND, Passera R, Arezzo A, Francis N. EAES/SAGES evidence-based recommendations and expert consensus on optimization of perioperative care in older adults. Surg Endosc 2024; 38:4104-4126. [PMID: 38942944 PMCID: PMC11289045 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-024-10977-7] [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: 05/21/2024] [Accepted: 05/30/2024] [Indexed: 06/30/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND As the population ages, more older adults are presenting for surgery. Age-related declines in physiological reserve and functional capacity can result in frailty and poor outcomes after surgery. Hence, optimizing perioperative care in older patients is imperative. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways and Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS) may influence surgical outcomes, but current use and impact on older adults patients is unknown. The aim of this study was to provide evidence-based recommendations on perioperative care of older adults undergoing major abdominal surgery. METHODS Expert consensus determined working definitions for key terms and metrics related to perioperative care. A systematic literature review and meta-analysis was performed using the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases for 24 pre-defined key questions in the topic areas of prehabilitation, MIS, and ERAS in major abdominal surgery (colorectal, upper gastrointestinal (UGI), Hernia, and hepatopancreatic biliary (HPB)) to generate evidence-based recommendations following the GRADE methodology. RESULT Older adults were defined as 65 years and older. Over 20,000 articles were initially retrieved from search parameters. Evidence synthesis was performed across the three topic areas from 172 studies, with meta-analyses conducted for MIS and ERAS topics. The use of MIS and ERAS was recommended for older adult patients particularly when undergoing colorectal surgery. Expert opinion recommended prehabilitation, cessation of smoking and alcohol, and correction of anemia in all colorectal, UGI, Hernia, and HPB procedures in older adults. All recommendations were conditional, with low to very low certainty of evidence, with the exception of ERAS program in colorectal surgery. CONCLUSIONS MIS and ERAS are recommended in older adults undergoing major abdominal surgery, with evidence supporting use in colorectal surgery. Though expert opinion supported prehabilitation, there is insufficient evidence supporting use. This work has identified evidence gaps for further studies to optimize older adults undergoing major abdominal surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deborah S Keller
- Department of Digestive Surgery, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, FR, USA
| | - Nathan Curtis
- Surgical Unit, Dorset County Hospital, Dorchester, Dorset, UK
| | | | | | - Amelia T Collings
- Department of Surgery, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, KY, USA
| | - Hiram C Polk
- Department of Surgery, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, KY, USA
| | - Francesco Maria Carrano
- Department of General and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Busto Arsizio Circolo Hospital, ASST-Valle Olona, Varese, Italy
| | - Stavros A Antoniou
- Department of General Surgery, Papageorgiou General Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece
| | - Nader Hanna
- Department of Surgery, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada
| | | | - Sarah Hill
- Department of Surgery, The University of Toledo College of Medicine and Life Sciences, Toledo, OH, USA
| | - Anne C M Cuijpers
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Patricia Tejedor
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, University Hospital Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, Spain
| | - Marco Milone
- Department of Clinical and Surgical Gastrointestinal Diseases, University of Naples "Federico II", Via Pansini 5, Naples, Italy
| | - Eleni Andriopoulou
- Department of Surgery, Hellenic Red Cross Korgialeneio Benakeio NHS, Athens, Greece
| | - Christos Kontovounisios
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, Chelsea and Westminster Campus and the Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK
| | - Ira L Leeds
- Department of Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Ziad T Awad
- Department of Surgery, University of Florida, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Meghan Wandtke Barber
- Department of Surgery, The University of Toledo College of Medicine and Life Sciences, Toledo, OH, USA
| | - Mazen Al-Mansour
- Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - George Nassif
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, AdventHealth, Orlando, FL, USA
| | - Malcolm A West
- Cancer Sciences Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
- Complex Cancer and Exenterative Service, University Hospitals Southampton, Southampton, UK
- NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, Perioperative and Critical Care Theme, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Aurora D Pryor
- Long Island Jewish Medical Center and System Chief for Bariatric Surgery, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell Health, Great Neck, NY, USA
| | - Franco Carli
- Department of Anesthesia, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
| | | | - Nicole D Bouvy
- Innovative Surgical Techniques, Endoscopic and Endocrine Surgery, Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Roberto Passera
- Division of Nuclear Medicine, University of Torino, Turin, Italy
| | - Alberto Arezzo
- Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Turin, Italy
| | - Nader Francis
- Department of Surgery, Yeovil District Hospital, Higher Kingston, Yeovil, UK.
- The Griffin Institute, Northwick Park and St Mark's Hospital, Y Block, Watford Rd, Harrow, HA1 3UJ, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
|
8
|
Luo YC, Yang TY, Li W, Yu QJ, Xia X, Lin ZY, Chen RD, Cheng L. Perioperative and oncologic outcomes of robot-assisted versus open surgery for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Robot Surg 2024; 18:288. [PMID: 39039276 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-024-02046-x] [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: 06/22/2024] [Accepted: 07/07/2024] [Indexed: 07/24/2024]
Abstract
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare perioperative and oncologic outcomes in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) treated with robotic-assisted surgery versus open laparotomy. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies up to June 15, 2024, were identified using PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar. Additionally, reference lists of included studies, relevant review articles, and clinical guidelines were manually searched. The primary outcomes evaluated were length of stay, 90-day mortality, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), and Post-pancreatectomy haemorrhage (PPH). Secondary outcomes included estimated blood loss, reoperation rate, lymph node yield, and operative time. The final analysis included 10 retrospective cohort studies involving 23,272 patients (2,179 robotic-assisted and 21,093 open surgery). There were no significant differences between the two procedures in terms of postoperative pancreatic fistula, Post-pancreatectomy haemorrhage, lymph node yield, and operative time. However, patients undergoing robotic-assisted surgery had shorter lengths of stay, lower 90-day mortality, and less estimated blood loss compared to those undergoing open surgery. The reoperation rate was higher for the robotic-assisted group. Robotic-assisted surgery for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is safe and feasible. Compared to open surgery, it offers better perioperative and short-term oncologic outcomes, but with a higher risk of reoperation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yu-Chuan Luo
- North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, China
- Department of General Surgery, The General Hospital of Western Theater Command, Chengdu, China
| | - Ting-Yu Yang
- North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, China
- Department of General Surgery, The General Hospital of Western Theater Command, Chengdu, China
| | - Wei Li
- North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong, China
| | - Qian-Jun Yu
- Department of General Surgery, The General Hospital of Western Theater Command, Chengdu, China
| | - Xin Xia
- Department of General Surgery, The General Hospital of Western Theater Command, Chengdu, China
| | - Zhi-Yu Lin
- Department of General Surgery, The General Hospital of Western Theater Command, Chengdu, China
| | - Ru-De Chen
- Department of General Surgery, The General Hospital of Western Theater Command, Chengdu, China
| | - Long Cheng
- Department of General Surgery, The General Hospital of Western Theater Command, Chengdu, China.
| |
Collapse
|
|
9
|
Qin T, Zhang H, Pan S, Liu J, Li D, Chen R, Huang X, Liu Y, Liu J, Cheng W, Chen X, Zhao W, Li J, Tan Z, Huang H, Li D, Zhu F, Yu G, Zhou B, Zheng S, Tang Y, Ke J, Liu X, Chen B, Chen W, Ma H, Xu J, Liu Y, Lin R, Dong Y, Yu Y, Wang M, Qin R. Effect of Laparoscopic and Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Pancreatic or Periampullary Tumors: Three-year Follow-up of a Randomized Clinical Trial. Ann Surg 2024; 279:605-612. [PMID: 37965767 PMCID: PMC10922659 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000006149] [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] [Indexed: 11/16/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study aimed to estimate whether the potential short-term advantages of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) could allow patients to recover in a more timely manner and achieve better long-term survival than with open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) in patients with pancreatic or periampullary tumors. BACKGROUND LPD has been demonstrated to be feasible and may have several potential advantages over OPD in terms of shorter hospital stay and accelerated recovery than OPD. METHODS This noninferiority, open-label, randomized clinical trial was conducted in 14 centers in China. The initial trial included 656 eligible patients with pancreatic or periampullary tumors enrolled from May 18, 2018, to December 19, 2019. The participants were randomized preoperatively in a 1:1 ratio to undergo either LPD (n=328) or OPD (n=328). The 3-year overall survival (OS), quality of life, which was assessed using the 3-level version of the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions, depression, and other outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS Data from 656 patients [328 men (69.9%); mean (SD) age: 56.2 (10.7) years] who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy were analyzed. For malignancies, the 3-year OS rates were 59.1% and 54.3% in the LPD and OPD groups, respectively ( P =0.33, hazard ratio: 1.16, 95% CI: 0.86-1.56). The 3-year OS rates for others were 81.3% and 85.6% in the LPD and OPD groups, respectively ( P =0.40, hazard ratio: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.30-1.63). No significant differences were observed in quality of life, depression and other outcomes between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION In patients with pancreatic or periampullary tumors, LPD performed by experienced surgeons resulted in a similar 3-year OS compared with OPD. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03138213.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tingting Qin
- Department of Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Affiliated Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei Province, China
| | - Hang Zhang
- Department of Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Affiliated Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei Province, China
| | - Shutao Pan
- Department of Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Affiliated Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei Province, China
| | - Jun Liu
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Shandong Provincial Hospital, Shandong, China
| | - Dewei Li
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Rufu Chen
- Department of Pancreas Center, Department of General Surgery, Guangdong Provincial People’s Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China
| | - Xiaobing Huang
- Department of Pancreatic-Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Army Medical University, PLA, Chongqing, China
| | - Yahui Liu
- Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Jilin, China
| | - Jianhua Liu
- Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery Department, The Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province, China
| | - Wei Cheng
- Xiangyue Hospital Affiliated to Hunan Institute of Parasitic Diseases, National Clinical Center for Schistosomiasis Treatment, Yueyang, Hunan Province, China
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Hunan Provincial People’s Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Hunan Normal University, Changsha, Hunan Province, China
| | - Xuemin Chen
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu Province, China
| | - Wenxing Zhao
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, The Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu Province, China
| | - Jingdong Li
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, Sichuan, China
| | - Zhijian Tan
- Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Guangdong Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China
| | - Heguang Huang
- Department of General Surgery, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, Fujian Province, China
| | - Deyu Li
- Department of Hepatobiliary Pancreatic Surgery, People’s Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Provincial People’s Hospital, Zhengzhou, Henan Province, China
| | - Feng Zhu
- Department of Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Affiliated Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei Province, China
| | - Guangsheng Yu
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Shandong Provincial Hospital, Shandong, China
| | - Baoyong Zhou
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
| | - Shangyou Zheng
- Department of Pancreas Center, Department of General Surgery, Guangdong Provincial People’s Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China
| | - Yichen Tang
- Department of Pancreatic-Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Army Medical University, PLA, Chongqing, China
| | - Jianji Ke
- Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Jilin, China
| | - Xueqing Liu
- Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery Department, The Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province, China
| | - Botao Chen
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Hunan Provincial People’s Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Hunan Normal University, Changsha, Hunan Province, China
| | - Weibo Chen
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu Province, China
| | - Hongqin Ma
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, The Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu Province, China
| | - Jian Xu
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College, Sichuan, China
| | - Yifeng Liu
- Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Guangdong Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China
| | - Ronggui Lin
- Department of General Surgery, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, Fujian Province, China
| | - Yadong Dong
- Department of Hepatobiliary Pancreatic Surgery, People’s Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Provincial People’s Hospital, Zhengzhou, Henan Province, China
| | - Yahong Yu
- Department of Hepatobiliary Pancreatic Surgery, People’s Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Provincial People’s Hospital, Zhengzhou, Henan Province, China
| | - Min Wang
- Department of Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Affiliated Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei Province, China
| | - Renyi Qin
- Department of Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Affiliated Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei Province, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
10
|
Shyr BS, Yu JH, Chen SC, Wang SE, Shyr YM, Shyr BU. Surgical Risks and Survival Outcomes in Robotic Pancreaticoduodenectomy for the Aged Over 80: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Clin Interv Aging 2023; 18:1405-1414. [PMID: 37645471 PMCID: PMC10461739 DOI: 10.2147/cia.s411391] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2023] [Accepted: 07/20/2023] [Indexed: 08/31/2023] Open
Abstract
Aim Whether to execute pancreaticoduodenectomy or not for older people could pose a dilemma. This study clarifies the safety and justification of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) for older individuals over 80. Methods A total of 500 patients undergoing RPD were divided into group O (≥ 80 y/o) and group Y (< 80 y/o) for comparison. Results There were 62 (12.4%) patients in group O. Surgical mortality was 1.6% for overall patients and higher in group O, 6.5% vs 0.9%; p = 0.001. The surgical complication was comparable between groups O and Y. Delayed gastric emptying and bile leakage were higher in group O, 9.7% vs 2.5%; p = 0.004, and 6.5% vs 0.9%; p = 0.001, respectively. Length of stay was also longer in group O, with a median of 26 vs 19 days; p = 0.001. Survival outcome after RPD was poorer in group O for overall periampullary adenocarcinomas, with a 5-year survival of 48.1% vs 51.2%; p = 0.025 and also for the subgroup of pancreatic head adenocarcinoma, with a 3-year survival of 27.4% vs 42.5%; p = 0.030. Conclusion RPD is safe and justified for the selected octogenarians and even nonagenarians, whoever is fit for a major operation. Nevertheless, pancreatic head cancer and higher mortality risk for the aged over 80 with advanced ASA score ≥ 3 should be informed as part of counselling in offering RPD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bor-Shiuan Shyr
- General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China
| | - Jwo-Huey Yu
- General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China
| | - Shih-Chin Chen
- General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China
| | - Shin-E Wang
- General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China
| | - Yi-Ming Shyr
- General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China
| | - Bor-Uei Shyr
- General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
|
11
|
Uijterwijk BA, Kasai M, Lemmers DHL, Chinnusamy P, van Hilst J, Ielpo B, Wei K, Song KB, Kim SC, Klompmaker S, Jang JY, Herremans KM, Bencini L, Coratti A, Mazzola M, Menon KV, Goh BKP, Qin R, Besselink MG, Abu Hilal M. The clinical implication of minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for non-pancreatic periampullary cancer: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2023; 408:311. [PMID: 37581763 PMCID: PMC10427526 DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-03047-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/12/2023] [Accepted: 08/03/2023] [Indexed: 08/16/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Most studies on minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) combine patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancers even though there is substantial heterogeneity between these tumors. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the role of MIPD compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) in patients with non-pancreatic periampullary cancer (NPPC). METHODS A systematic review of Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases was performed by two independent reviewers to identify studies comparing MIPD and OPD for NPPC (ampullary, distal cholangio, and duodenal adenocarcinoma) (01/2015-12/2021). Individual patient data were required from all identified studies. Primary outcomes were (90-day) mortality, and major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo 3a-5). Secondary outcomes were postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), blood-loss, length of hospital stay (LOS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS Overall, 16 studies with 1949 patients were included, combining 928 patients with ampullary, 526 with distal cholangio, and 461 with duodenal cancer. In total, 902 (46.3%) patients underwent MIPD, and 1047 (53.7%) patients underwent OPD. The rates of 90-day mortality, major morbidity, POPF, DGE, PPH, blood-loss, and length of hospital stay did not differ between MIPD and OPD. Operation time was 67 min longer in the MIPD group (P = 0.009). A decrease in DFS for ampullary (HR 2.27, P = 0.019) and distal cholangio (HR 1.84, P = 0.025) cancer, as well as a decrease in OS for distal cholangio (HR 1.71, P = 0.045) and duodenal cancer (HR 4.59, P < 0.001) was found in the MIPD group. CONCLUSIONS This individual patient data meta-analysis of MIPD versus OPD in patients with NPPC suggests that MIPD is not inferior in terms of short-term morbidity and mortality. Several major limitations in long-term data highlight a research gap that should be studied in prospective maintained international registries or randomized studies for ampullary, distal cholangio, and duodenum cancer separately. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION PROSPERO (CRD42021277495) on the 25th of October 2021.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bas A Uijterwijk
- Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy.
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Meidai Kasai
- Department of Surgery, Meiwa Hospital, Hyogo, Japan
| | - Daniel H L Lemmers
- Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Palanivelu Chinnusamy
- Department of Surgical Gastroenterology and Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, GEM Hospital and Research Center, Ramanathapuram, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - Jony van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Benedetto Ielpo
- Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Hospital del Mar. Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Kongyuan Wei
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Ki Byung Song
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea
| | - Song C Kim
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea
| | - Sjors Klompmaker
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jin-Young Jang
- Department of Surgery and Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Kelly M Herremans
- Division of Surgical Oncology, General Surgery, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA
| | - Lapo Bencini
- Department of Surgery, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy
| | - Andrea Coratti
- Department of Surgery, Misericordia Hospital of Grosseto, Grosseto, Italy
| | - Michele Mazzola
- Division of Oncologic and Mini-Invasive General Surgery, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy
| | - Krishna V Menon
- Department of Liver Transplant and HPB Unit, King's College Hospital, London, UK
| | - Brian K P Goh
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Renyi Qin
- Department of Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Affiliated Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Mohammed Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
|
12
|
Li D, Du C, Xing Z, Wang W, Zhang J, Liu J. Perioperative Outcomes and Long-Term Survival of Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Retrospective Study of 653 Cases in a Single Institution. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2023; 33:375-380. [PMID: 36787467 DOI: 10.1089/lap.2022.0441] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/16/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction: Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) is gaining wide acceptance within pancreatic surgery. However, longitudinal data are lacking. The aim of this study was to analyze and assess the short-term outcomes and long-term survival of LPD over a duration of 8 years. Methods: Patients who underwent LPD in our institution between November 2013 and September 2021 were included in this study. The perioperative outcomes were statistically analyzed. The long-term survival was studied over a median follow-up duration of 13 months. Results: In total, 653 consecutive patients treated at our institution were included, of which 617 cases underwent standard LPD and 36 cases underwent LPD with vascular resection. The rate of death in hospital, reoperation, postpancreatectomy hemorrhage, postoperative pancreatic fistula, and delayed gastric emptying were 4.4%, 10.3%, 11.9%, 12.9%, and 6.1% respectively. There were statistical differences in the intraoperative blood loss and transfusion, operation time, and the R0 resection rate between the LPD cases and LPD with vascular resection cases. A total of 526 cases were pathologically diagnosed of cancer. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were 49.2%, 17.9%, and 17.9%, respectively, for pancreatic cancer with the median survival time of 12 months. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were 76.9%, 60.8%, and 52.5%, respectively, for bile duct cancer with the median survival time of 35 months. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were 80.2%, 62.2%, and 52.9%, respectively, for duodenal cancer with the median survival time of 53 months. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were 72.5%, 54.5%, and 50%, respectively, for ampullary cancer with the median survival time of 55 months. Conclusion: LPD is a feasible and oncologically acceptable procedure with satisfying perioperative outcomes and long-term survival in a high-volume institution.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dongrui Li
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, the Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China
| | - Chengxu Du
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, the Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China
| | - Zhongqiang Xing
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, the Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China
| | - Wenbin Wang
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, the Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China
| | - Jiansheng Zhang
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, the Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China
| | - Jianhua Liu
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, the Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
13
|
Yan Y, Hua Y, Chang C, Zhu X, Sha Y, Wang B. Laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic and periampullary tumor: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and non-randomized comparative studies. Front Oncol 2023; 12:1093395. [PMID: 36761416 PMCID: PMC9905842 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.1093395] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2022] [Accepted: 12/30/2022] [Indexed: 01/27/2023] Open
Abstract
Objective This meta-analysis compares the perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) to those of open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) for pancreatic and periampullary tumors. Background LPD has been increasingly applied in the treatment of pancreatic and periampullary tumors. However, the perioperative outcomes of LPD versus OPD are still controversial. Methods PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized comparative trials (NRCTs) comparing LPD versus OPD for pancreatic and periampullary tumors. The main outcomes were mortality, morbidity, serious complications, and hospital stay. The secondary outcomes were operative time, blood loss, transfusion, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), bile leak (BL), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), lymph nodes harvested, R0 resection, reoperation, and readmission. RCTs were evaluated by the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. NRCTs were assessed using a modified tool from the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies. Data were pooled as odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD). This study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022338832). Results Four RCTs and 35 NRCTs concerning a total of 40,230 patients (4,262 LPD and 35,968 OPD) were included. Meta-analyses showed no significant differences in mortality (OR 0.91, p = 0.35), serious complications (OR 0.97, p = 0.74), POPF (OR 0.93, p = 0.29), PPH (OR 1.10, p = 0.42), BL (OR 1.28, p = 0.22), harvested lymph nodes (MD 0.66, p = 0.09), reoperation (OR 1.10, p = 0.41), and readmission (OR 0.95, p = 0.46) between LPD and OPD. Operative time was significantly longer for LPD (MD 85.59 min, p < 0.00001), whereas overall morbidity (OR 0.80, p < 0.00001), hospital stay (MD -2.32 days, p < 0.00001), blood loss (MD -173.84 ml, p < 0.00001), transfusion (OR 0.62, p = 0.0002), and DGE (OR 0.78, p = 0.002) were reduced for LPD. The R0 rate was higher for LPD (OR 1.25, p = 0.001). Conclusions LPD is associated with non-inferior short-term surgical outcomes and oncologic adequacy compared to OPD when performed by experienced surgeons at large centers. LPD may result in reduced overall morbidity, blood loss, transfusion, and DGE, but longer operative time. Further RCTs should address the potential advantages of LPD over OPD. Systematic review registration PROSPERO, identifier CRD42022338832.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yong Yan
- Department of General Surgery, Guangzhou Red Cross Hospital, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Yinggang Hua
- Department of General Surgery, Guangzhou Red Cross Hospital, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Cheng Chang
- Department of General Surgery, Guangzhou Red Cross Hospital, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Xuanjin Zhu
- Department of General Surgery, Guangzhou Red Cross Hospital, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Yanhua Sha
- Department of Laboratory Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China
| | - Bailin Wang
- Department of General Surgery, Guangzhou Red Cross Hospital, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
14
|
Qiu H, Zhang L, Wang D, Miao H, Zhang Y. Comparisons of short-term and long-term results between laparoscopic between open pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic tumors: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Genet 2023; 13:1072229. [PMID: 36744174 PMCID: PMC9894883 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2022.1072229] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/17/2022] [Accepted: 12/07/2022] [Indexed: 01/22/2023] Open
Abstract
Objective: The efficacy of pancreaticoduodenectomy and open pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic tumors is controversial. The study aims to compare the efficacy of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) in the treatment of pancreatic tumors through systematic evaluation and meta-analysis. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of science databases were searched for clinical studies on the treatment of pancreatic tumors with LPD and OPD. The end time for the searches was 20 July 2022. Rigorous inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to screen the articles, the Cochrane manual was used to evaluate the quality of the included articles, and the stata15.0 software was used for statistical analysis of the indicators. Results: In total, 16 articles were included, including two randomized controlled trials and 14 retrospective studies. Involving a total of 4416 patients, 1275 patients were included in the LPD group and 3141 patients in the OPD group. The results of the meta-analysis showed that: the operation time of LPD was longer than that of OPD [WMD = 56.14,95% CI (38.39,73.89), p = 0.001]; the amount of intraoperative blood loss of LPD was less than that of OPD [WMD = -120.82,95% CI (-169.33, -72.30), p = 0.001]. No significant difference was observed between LPD and OPD regarding hospitalization time [WMD = -0.5,95% CI (-1.35, 0.35), p = 0.250]. No significant difference was observed regarding postoperative complications [RR = 0.96,95% CI (0.86,1.07, p = 0.463]. And there was no significant difference regarding 1-year OS and 3-year OS: 1-year OS [RR = 1.02,95% CI (0.97,1.08), p = 0.417], 3-year OS [RR = 1.10 95% CI (0.75, 1.62), p = 0.614%]. Conclusion: In comparison with OPD, LPD leads to less blood loss but longer operation time, therefore the bleeding rate per unit time of LPD is less than that of OPD. LPD has obvious advantages. With the increase of clinical application of LPD, the usage of LPD in patients with pancreatic cancer has very good prospect. Due to the limitations of this paper, in future studies, more attention should be paid to high-quality, multi-center, randomized controlled studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hongquan Qiu
- Department of Surgery, Liuqiao Central Hospital, Nantong, China
| | - Liang Zhang
- Department of General Surgery, Tengzhou Central People’s Hospital, Tengzhou, China
| | - Dongzhi Wang
- Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong, China
| | - Haiyan Miao
- Department of General Surgery, The Sixth People’s Hospital of Nantong, Nantong, China
| | - Yu Zhang
- Department of Laboratory Medicine, Haimen Hospital Affiliated to Xinglin College of Nantong University, Nantong, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
15
|
Bartos A, Mărgărit S, Bocse H, Krisboi I, Iancu I, Breazu C, Plesa-Furda P, Brînzilă S, Leucuta D, Iancu C, Puia C, Al Hajjar N, Ciobanu L. Laparoscopic Pancreatoduodenectomy in Elderly Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Life (Basel) 2022; 12:life12111810. [PMID: 36362961 PMCID: PMC9695297 DOI: 10.3390/life12111810] [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: 08/25/2022] [Revised: 10/31/2022] [Accepted: 10/31/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background and Aims: Recent single-center retrospective studies have focused on laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) in elderly patients, and compared the outcomes between the laparoscopic and open approaches. Our study aimed to determine the outcomes of LPD in the elderly patients, by performing a systematic review and a meta-analysis of relevant studies. Methods: A comprehensive literature review was conducted utilizing the Embase, Medline, PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane databases to identify all studies that compared laparoscopic vs. open approach for pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). Results: Five retrospective studies were included in the final analysis. Overall, 90-day mortality rates were significantly decreased after LPD in elderly patients compared with open approaches (RR = 0.56; 95%CI: 0.32−0.96; p = 0.037, I2 = 0%). The laparoscopic approach had similar mortality rate at 30-day, readmission rate in hospital, Clavien−Dindo complications, pancreatic fistula grade B/C, complete resection rate, reoperation for complications and blood loss as the open approach. Additionally, comparing with younger patients (<70 years old), no significant differences were seen in elderly cohort patients regarding mortality rate at 90 days, readmission rate to hospital, and complication rate. Conclusions: Based on our meta-analysis, we identify that LPD in elderly is a safe procedure, with significantly lower 90-day mortality rates when compared with the open approach. Our results should be considered with caution, considering the retrospective analyses of the included studies; larger prospective studies are required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adrian Bartos
- Medicine Faculty, Iuliu Hațieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
- Prof. Octavian Fodor Regional Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
- Correspondence: (A.B.); (S.M.)
| | - Simona Mărgărit
- Medicine Faculty, Iuliu Hațieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
- Prof. Octavian Fodor Regional Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
- Correspondence: (A.B.); (S.M.)
| | - Horea Bocse
- Prof. Octavian Fodor Regional Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| | - Iulia Krisboi
- Prof. Octavian Fodor Regional Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| | - Ioana Iancu
- Prof. Octavian Fodor Regional Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| | - Caius Breazu
- Medicine Faculty, Iuliu Hațieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
- Prof. Octavian Fodor Regional Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| | - Patricia Plesa-Furda
- Prof. Octavian Fodor Regional Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| | - Sandu Brînzilă
- Prof. Octavian Fodor Regional Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| | - Daniel Leucuta
- Medicine Faculty, Iuliu Hațieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
- Prof. Octavian Fodor Regional Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| | - Cornel Iancu
- Prof. Octavian Fodor Regional Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| | - Cosmin Puia
- Medicine Faculty, Iuliu Hațieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
- Prof. Octavian Fodor Regional Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| | - Nadim Al Hajjar
- Medicine Faculty, Iuliu Hațieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
- Prof. Octavian Fodor Regional Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| | - Lidia Ciobanu
- Medicine Faculty, Iuliu Hațieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
- Prof. Octavian Fodor Regional Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 400012 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
| |
Collapse
|
|
16
|
Vissers FL, van Hilst J, Burdío F, Sabnis SC, Busch OR, Dijkgraaf MG, Festen SF, Sanchez-Velázquez P, Senthilnathan P, Palanivelu C, Poves I, Besselink MG. Laparoscopic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy: an individual participant data meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. HPB (Oxford) 2022; 24:1592-1599. [PMID: 35641405 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2022.02.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2020] [Revised: 02/07/2022] [Accepted: 02/16/2022] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Randomized trials have compared laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) with conflicting results. An IPDMA may give more insight into the differences between LPD and OPD, and could identify high-risk subgroups. METHODS A systematic literature search was performed in the Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane library databases (October 2019). Out of 1410 studies, three randomized trials were identified. Primary outcome was major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III). Subgroup analyses were performed for high-risk subgroups including patients with BMI of ≥25 kg/m2, pancreatic duct <3 mm, age ≥70 years, and malignancy. RESULTS Data from 224 patients were collected. After LPD, major complications occurred in 33/114 (29%) patients compared to 34/110 (31%) patients after OPD (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.62; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.3-1.4, P = 0.257). No differences were seen for major complications and 90-day mortality LPD 8 (7%) vs OPD 4 (4%) (adjusted OR 0.2; 95% CI 0.02-1.3, P = 0.080). With LPD, operative time was longer (420 vs 318 min, p < 0.001) and hospital stay was shorter (mean difference -6.97 days). Outcomes remained stable in the high-risk subgroups. CONCLUSION LPD did not reduce the rate of major postoperative complications as compared to OPD. LPD increased operative time and shortened hospital stay with 7 days.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Frederique L Vissers
- Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jony van Hilst
- Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Sandeep C Sabnis
- Department of Surgical Gastroenterology and Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, GEM Hospital and Research Center, Ramanathapuram, Coimbatore, India
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marcel G Dijkgraaf
- Clinical Research Unit, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Palanisamy Senthilnathan
- Department of Surgical Gastroenterology and Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, GEM Hospital and Research Center, Ramanathapuram, Coimbatore, India
| | - Chinnusamy Palanivelu
- Department of Surgical Gastroenterology and Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, GEM Hospital and Research Center, Ramanathapuram, Coimbatore, India
| | - Ignasi Poves
- Department of Surgery, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
|
17
|
Zhao Y, Yu X, Wang W, Mou Y, Jiang C. Chinese expert consensus on minimally invasive radical surgery for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (version 2022). JOURNAL OF PANCREATOLOGY 2022; 5:111-117. [DOI: 10.1097/jp9.0000000000000097] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Various types of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery have been carried out in the last decades with promising outcomes reported by early explorers. Nevertheless, there are still controversies on oncologic outcomes and safety in the use of minimally invasive radical surgery for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This consensus, referring to Chinese expert opinions and worldwide researches, aimed to discuss the related issues on minimally invasive radical surgery for PDAC to ensure the perioperative and oncological outcomes. Quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were evaluated based on the GRADE approach. The 15 recommendations covered 5 topics: oncological outcomes and patient safety of laparoscopic and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy, left-side pancreatectomy for PDAC, learning curve, safety of neoadjuvant therapy, and vascular resection in minimally invasive radical surgery for PDAC. This consensus gives reference and guidance to surgeons on the use of minimally invasive radical surgery for PDAC. Although this consensus is not sufficient to answer all the questions about minimally invasive radical surgery for PDAC, it represents the current consensus on the application of the techniques in the treatment of PDAC on the Chinese mainland.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yupei Zhao
- Department of General Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
| | - Xianjun Yu
- Department of Pancreatic Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China
| | - Wei Wang
- Department of Pancreatic Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China
| | - Yiping Mou
- Department of Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People’s Hospital, Key Laboratory of Gastroenterology of Zhejiang Province, People’s Hospital of Hangzhou Medical College, Zhejiang, China
| | - Chongyi Jiang
- Department of General Surgery, Hepato-biliary-pancreatic Center, Huadong Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
18
|
Short-term outcomes of robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy in elderly patients: A multicenter retrospective cohort study. Int J Surg 2022; 104:106819. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2022.106819] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2022] [Revised: 07/14/2022] [Accepted: 07/20/2022] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
|
|
19
|
Zhang P, Gong S, Wu N, Zhang C, Zhang Y, Zhang X, Ren Z. Effect of total laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy on short-term and oncological outcomes: a single-institution comparative study. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2022; 407:2789-2799. [DOI: 10.1007/s00423-022-02478-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2021] [Accepted: 02/17/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
|
|
20
|
Paiella S, De Pastena M, Esposito A, Secchettin E, Casetti L, Malleo G, Montagnini G, Bannone E, Deiro G, Bampa B, Ramera M, Landoni L, Balduzzi A, Bassi C, Salvia R. Modified Frailty Index to Assess Risk in Elderly Patients Undergoing Distal Pancreatectomy: A Retrospective Single-Center Study. World J Surg 2022; 46:891-900. [PMID: 35024923 PMCID: PMC8885554 DOI: 10.1007/s00268-021-06436-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/10/2021] [Indexed: 12/02/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND To compare the postoperative course of elderly patients (≥70 years) submitted to minimally invasive (MIDP) versus open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) and to evaluate if the modified Frailty Index (mFI) predicts the surgical course of elderly patients submitted to DP. METHODS Data of patients aged ≥70 who underwent DP at a single institution between March 2011 and December 2019 were retrospectively retrieved. A 2:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was used to correct for differences in baseline characteristics. Then, postoperative complications were compared between the two groups (MIDP vs. ODP). Additionally, the entire cohort of DP elderly patients was stratified according to the mFI into three groups: non-frail (mFI = 0), mildly frail (mFI = 1/2), or severely frail (mFI = 3) and then compared. RESULTS A total of 204 patients were analyzed. After PSM, 40 MIDP and 80 ODP patients were identified. The complications considered stratified homogenously between the two groups, with no statistically significant differences. The severity of the postoperative course increased as mFI did among the three groups regarding any complication (p = 0.022), abdominal collection (p = 0.014), pulmonary complication (p = 0.001), postoperative confusion (p = 0.047), Clavien-Dindo severity ≥3 events (p = 0.036), and length of stay (p = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS Elderly patients can be safely submitted to MIDP. The mFI identifies frail elderly patients more prone to develop surgical and non-surgical complications after DP.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Salvatore Paiella
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Matteo De Pastena
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Alessandro Esposito
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital, Verona, Italy
- Referent of the Mini-Invasive Pancreatic Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgery of the General and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, P.le Scuro 10, 37134 Verona, Italy
| | - Erica Secchettin
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Luca Casetti
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Malleo
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Greta Montagnini
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Elisa Bannone
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Giacomo Deiro
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Beatrice Bampa
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Marco Ramera
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Luca Landoni
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Alberto Balduzzi
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Claudio Bassi
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Roberto Salvia
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital, Verona, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
21
|
Wang Q, Chen C, Li H. Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy in Elderly Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front Surg 2022; 9:807940. [PMID: 35310445 PMCID: PMC8931034 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.807940] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/02/2021] [Accepted: 02/02/2022] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Background The safety and efficacy of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) in elderly patients who often suffer from pre-existing conditions (e.g., cardiovascular diseases) and poor functional reserve remain unclear. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of LPD in elderly patients. Methods A systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. All studies published from their inception to January 2022 reporting perioperative outcomes after LPD in elderly patients were included in the search (Group 1, comparing the perioperative outcomes of LPD and OPD in elderly patients; Group 2, comparing the perioperative outcomes after LPD between elderly and non-elderly patients). The evaluated outcomes included perioperative mortality, postoperative complications, conversion, operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), postoperative hospital stay (POHS), and readmission. Results In total 8 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled analysis of Group 1 showed that EBL, 90-day mortality, major morbidity, bile leak, POH, abdominal infection, reoperation, POP, POCE, and readmission were not significantly different between the LPD and the OPD group. LPD was associated with longer operative time, lower POPF rate, lower DEG rate, and shorter POHS. Pooled analysis of Group 2 showed that mortality, major morbidity, POPF, DEG, bile leak, POH, abdominal infection, reoperation, conversion, operative time, EBL, and readmission were not significantly different between the elderly and the non-elderly group. The POHS of elderly group was significantly longer than non-elderly group. Conclusion LPD may be a safe and feasible procedure for elderly patients and is associated with short POHS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Qiang Wang
- School of Clinical Medicine, Guizhou Medical University, Guiyang, China
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Affiliated Hospital of Guizhou Medical University, Guiyang, China
| | - Chengxin Chen
- School of Clinical Medicine, Guizhou Medical University, Guiyang, China
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Affiliated Hospital of Guizhou Medical University, Guiyang, China
| | - Haiyang Li
- School of Clinical Medicine, Guizhou Medical University, Guiyang, China
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Affiliated Hospital of Guizhou Medical University, Guiyang, China
- *Correspondence: Haiyang Li
| |
Collapse
|
|
22
|
Zhang Z, Yin T, Qin T, Pan S, Wang M, Zhang H, Qin R. Comparison of laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: A propensity score-matching analysis of long-term survival. Pancreatology 2022; 22:317-324. [PMID: 34969601 DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2021.12.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2021] [Revised: 11/03/2021] [Accepted: 12/12/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many studies have shown the short-term feasibility and effectiveness of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) are comparable to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). However, the long-term oncological safety of LPD in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains to be elucidated. METHODS Patients who underwent LPD or OPD between July 2014 and July 2018 at our institution were identified, and those with resectable, pathologically diagnosed PDAC were analyzed. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Propensity score-matching (PSM) analysis was performed to balance the baseline characteristics between groups. Cox proportional hazards model was constructed to determine independent predictors of OS. RESULTS The original cohort consisted of 64 LPD and 80 OPD cases, in which, the laparoscopic group had a significantly longer median OS (25 vs. 17 months; P = 0.034). A higher proportion of laparoscopic patients received adjuvant therapy (51.6 vs. 32.5%; P = 0.021). PSM analysis identified 47 patient pairs. No significant differences in OS (21 vs. 17 months; P = 0.220) or adjuvant therapy utilization (53.2 vs. 38.3%; P = 0.248) were observed between the matched groups. Multivariate Cox analyses showed that receiving adjuvant therapy (HR = 0.44; 95% CI, 0.28-0.68), histopathological differentiation (poor vs. moderate-to-well differentiation; HR = 1.93; 95% CI, 1.26-2.95), and sex (female vs. male, HR = 0.47, 95% CI, 0.30-0.75) were independent predictors of OS. CONCLUSIONS LPD can be comparable to OPD in terms of long-term safety for patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma when performed in a high-volume center.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhenxiong Zhang
- Department of Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Affiliated Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China
| | - Taoyuan Yin
- Department of Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Affiliated Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China
| | - Tingting Qin
- Department of Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Affiliated Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China
| | - Shutao Pan
- Department of Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Affiliated Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China
| | - Min Wang
- Department of Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Affiliated Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China
| | - Hang Zhang
- Department of Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Affiliated Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
| | - Renyi Qin
- Department of Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Affiliated Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
| |
Collapse
|
|
23
|
Kim JS, Choi M, Kim SH, Choi SH, Kang CM. Safety and feasibility of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy in octogenarians. Asian J Surg 2022; 45:837-843. [PMID: 34649792 DOI: 10.1016/j.asjsur.2021.09.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/08/2021] [Revised: 09/27/2021] [Accepted: 09/30/2021] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION With continued technical advances in surgical instruments and growing surgical expertise, many laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomies (LPDs) have been safely performed with favorable outcomes, and this approach is being used more frequently. With an increase in the life expectancy, interest in treatments for elderly patients has increased. In this study, we investigated the safety and feasibility of LPD in octogenarians. METHODS From September 2005 to February 2020, resectable/borderline resectable periampullary tumors (PATs) were diagnosed in 71 octogenarians at Sincheon Severance Hospital and CHA Bundang Medical Center. Patients were divided into two groups: those who underwent surgery (PD, N = 38) and those who did not (NPD, N = 33). The group that underwent surgery was further divided into two groups: those who underwent open PD (OPD, N = 19), and those who underwent LPD (LPD, N = 19). Perioperative outcomes, including long-term survival, were retrospectively compared between these groups. RESULTS There was no significant difference in age, sex, comorbidities, diagnosis, and chemo-radiotherapy between the surgery and non-surgery groups. The PD group had a better survival rate than the NPD group (p < 0.05). The baseline characteristics and postoperative outcomes were not significantly different between the OPD and LPD groups. Only three and two patients in the OPD and LPD groups had a biochemical leak (p > 0.999). There was no significant difference in overall survival and disease-free survival between the OPD and LPD groups (p = 0.816, p = 0.446, respectively). CONCLUSIONS LPD is a good alternative for octogenarians with PAT requiring PD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ji Su Kim
- Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea; Pancreatobiliary Cancer Center, Yonsei Cancer Center, Severance Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Munseok Choi
- Department of Surgery, Yongin Severance Hospital, Yongin-si, Gyeonggi-do, South Korea
| | - Sung Hyun Kim
- Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea; Pancreatobiliary Cancer Center, Yonsei Cancer Center, Severance Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Sung Hoon Choi
- Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, CHA Bundang Medical Center, CHA University, Seongnam, South Korea.
| | - Chang Moo Kang
- Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea; Pancreatobiliary Cancer Center, Yonsei Cancer Center, Severance Hospital, Seoul, South Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
|
24
|
Vladimirov M, Bausch D, Stein HJ, Keck T, Wellner U. Hybrid Laparoscopic Versus Open Pancreatoduodenectomy. A Meta-Analysis. World J Surg 2022; 46:901-915. [PMID: 35043246 PMCID: PMC8885482 DOI: 10.1007/s00268-021-06372-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 10/07/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Hybrid laparoscopic techniques have been proposed as a good transition from open to complete minimally invasive approach especially in complex surgical procedures. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the outcomes of hybrid laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy versus open pancreatoduodenectomy. METHODS A systematic literature research was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. A broad search strategy with terms "laparoscopy" and "pancreatoduodenectomy" was used. Included studies were analyzed by quantitative meta-analysis using the metafor package for R software. RESULTS Of 655 identified articles, 627 were excluded and 28 articles fully assessed, including 14 comparative studies, 8 case series and 6 case reports. Extracted data included intraoperative variables and postoperative outcome parameters. The predefined inclusion criteria were met by 14 comparative studies, and 371 patients were pooled in the meta-analysis. Hybrid laparoscopic pacreatoduodenectomy was associated with significantly longer operative time (I2 0%, p = 0,01, Mean HPD 494,6 min, Mean OPD 421,6 min, WMD 67 min, 95% CI 14-120 min). For all other postoperative outcome parameters, no statistically significant differences were found. A nonsignificant reduction in intraoperative transfusion rate (I2 20%, p = 0,2, proportion HPD 2%, proportion OPD 1,6%, OR 0,44, 95% CI 0,16-1,27) and blood loss (I2 95%, p = 0,1, Mean HPD 397,2 ml, Mean OPD 1017,8 ml, MD - 601 ml, 95% CI - 1311-108) was observed for hybrid pancreatoduodenectomy in comparison to open surgery. CONCLUSIONS This meta-analysis demonstrates significantly increased operation time for hybrid laparoscopic compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy. Intraoperative variables as well as postoperative parameters and major morbidity were comparable for both techniques. Overall results of this meta-analysis demonstrated the hybrid technique as a safe procedure in high-volume centers offering aspects of a safe transition to fully laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Miljana Vladimirov
- Klinik für Allgemein, Viszeral- und Thoraxchirurgie, PMU Nürnberg, Nuremberg, Deutschland
| | - Dirk Bausch
- Klinik für Chirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Lübeck, Deutschland
| | - Hubert J Stein
- Klinik für Allgemein, Viszeral- und Thoraxchirurgie, PMU Nürnberg, Nuremberg, Deutschland
| | - Tobias Keck
- Klinik für Chirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Lübeck, Deutschland.
| | - Ulrich Wellner
- Klinik für Chirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Lübeck, Deutschland
| |
Collapse
|
|
25
|
Feng Q, Liao W, Xin Z, Jin H, Du J, Cai Y, Liao M, Yuan K, Zeng Y. Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy Versus Conventional Open Approach for Patients With Pancreatic Duct Adenocarcinoma: An Up-to-Date Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front Oncol 2021; 11:749140. [PMID: 34778064 PMCID: PMC8578898 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.749140] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/30/2021] [Accepted: 09/28/2021] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Background To compare perioperative and oncological outcomes of pancreatic duct adenocarcinoma (PDAC) after laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD vs. OPD), we performed a meta-analysis of currently available propensity score matching studies and large-scale retrospective cohorts to compare the safety and overall effect of LPD to OPD for patients with PDAC. Methods A meta-analysis was registered at PROSPERO and the registration number is CRD42021250395. PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched based on a defined search strategy to identify eligible studies before March 2021. Data on operative times, blood loss, 30-day mortality, reoperation, length of hospital stay (LOS), overall morbidity, Clavien-Dindo ≥3 complications, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), blood transfusion, delayed gastric emptying (DGE), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), and oncologic outcomes (R0 resection, lymph node dissection, overall survival, and long-term survival) were subjected to meta-analysis. Results Overall, we identified 10 retrospective studies enrolling a total of 11,535 patients (1,514 and 10,021 patients underwent LPD and OPD, respectively). The present meta-analysis showed that there were no significant differences in overall survival time, 1-year survival, 2-year survival, 30-day mortality, Clavien-Dindo ≥3 complications, POPF, DGE, PPH, and lymph node dissection between the LPD and OPD groups. Nevertheless, compared with the OPD group, LPD resulted in significantly higher rate of R0 resection (OR: 1.22; 95% CI 1.06-1.40; p = 0.005), longer operative time (WMD: 60.01 min; 95% CI 23.23-96.79; p = 0.001), lower Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III rate (p = 0.02), less blood loss (WMD: -96.49 ml; 95% CI -165.14 to -27.83; p = 0.006), lower overall morbidity rate (OR: 0.65; 95% CI 0.50 to 0.85; p = 0.002), shorter LOS (MD = -2.73; 95% CI -4.44 to -1.03; p = 0.002), higher 4-year survival time (p = 0.04), 5-year survival time (p = 0.001), and earlier time to starting adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery (OR: -10.86; 95% CI -19.42 to -2.30; p = 0.01). Conclusions LPD is a safe and feasible alternative to OPD for patients with PDAC, and compared with OPD, LPD seemed to provide a similar OS. Systematic Review Registration https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Qingbo Feng
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation Centre, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Wenwei Liao
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation Centre, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Zechang Xin
- Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery Unit I, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China
| | - Hongyu Jin
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation Centre, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Jinpeng Du
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation Centre, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Yunshi Cai
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation Centre, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Mingheng Liao
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation Centre, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Kefei Yuan
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation Centre, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Yong Zeng
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation Centre, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
26
|
Gumbs AA, Chouillard E, Abu Hilal M, Croner R, Gayet B, Gagner M. The experience of the minimally invasive (MI) fellowship-trained (FT) hepatic-pancreatic and biliary (HPB) surgeon: could the outcome of MI pancreatoduodenectomy for peri-ampullary tumors be better than open? Surg Endosc 2021; 35:5256-5267. [PMID: 33146810 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-020-08118-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/06/2020] [Accepted: 10/21/2020] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although early series focused on benign disease, minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) might be particularly suited for malignancy. Unlike their predecessors, fellowship-trained (FT) Hepatic-Pancreatic and Biliary (HPB) surgeons usually have equal skills in approaching peri-ampullary tumors (PT) either openly or via minimally invasive (MI) techniques. METHOD We retrospectively reviewed a MI-HPB-FT surgeon's 10-year experience with PD. A sub-analysis of malignant PT was also done (MIPD-PT vs. OPD-PT). The primary endpoint was to assess postoperative mortality and morbidity. Secondary endpoints included operative parameters, length of hospital stay, and survival analysis. Moreover, we addressed practice pattern changes for a surgeon straight out of training with no previous experience of independent surgery. RESULTS From December 2007-February 2018, one MI-HPB-FT performed a total of 100 PDs, including 57 MIPDs and 43 open PDs (OPDs). In both groups, over 70% of PDs were undertaken for malignancy. Eight patients with borderline resectable pancreatic ductal cancer (PDC) were in the OPD-PT group (as compared to only 2 in the MIPD-PT group) (p = 0.07). Estimated mean blood loss and length of stay were less in the MIPD-PT group (345 mL and 12 days) as compared to the OPD-PT group (971 mL and 16 days), p < 0.001 and p = 0.007, respectively. However, the mean operative time was longer for the MIPD-PT (456 min) as compared to the OPD-PT (371 min), p < 0.001. Thirty and 90-day mortality was 2.6%/5.1% after MIPD-PT compared to 0%/3.2% after OPD-PT, respectively, p = 1. Overall 30-/90-day morbidity rates were similar at 41.0%/43.6% after MIPD-PT and 35.5%/41.9% after OPD-PT, respectively, p = 0.8 and 1. Complete resection (R0) rates were not statistically different, 97.4% after MIPD-PT compared to 87.0% after OPD-PT (p = 0.2). After MIPD and OPD for malignant PT, overall 1, 3 and 5-year survival rates, and median survival were 82.5%, 59.6% and 46.3% and 38 months as compared to 52.5%, 15.7% and 10.5% and 13 months, respectively (p = 0.01). In the MIDP-PT group, recurrence free survival (RFS) at 1, 3 and 5 years and median RFS were 69.1%, 41.9% and 33.5% and 26 months as compared to 50.4%, 6.3% and 6.3% and 13 months, in the OPD-PT group, respectively (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION FT HPB Surgeons who begin their practice with the ability to do both MI and OPD may preferentially approach resectable peri-ampullary tumors minimally invasively. This may result in decreased blood loss decreased length of hospital stays. Despite longer operative time, the improved visualization of MI techniques may enable superior R0 rates when compared to historical open controls. Moreover, combined with quicker initiation of adjuvant chemotherapeutic treatments, this may eventually result in improved survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew A Gumbs
- Département de Chirurgie Digestive, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal de POISSY/SAINT-GERMAIN-EN-LAYE, 10, Rue du Champ Gaillard, 78300, Poissy, France
| | - Elie Chouillard
- Département de Chirurgie Digestive, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal de POISSY/SAINT-GERMAIN-EN-LAYE, 10, Rue du Champ Gaillard, 78300, Poissy, France
| | - Mohamed Abu Hilal
- Unità Chirurgia Epatobiliopancreatica, Robotica e Mininvasiva, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, via Bissolati, 57, Brescia, 25124, Italia
| | - Roland Croner
- Department of General-, Visceral-, Vascular- and Transplantation Surgery, University of Magdeburg, Haus 60a, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120, Magdeburg, Germany
| | - Brice Gayet
- Department of Digestive Diseases, Institut Mutaliste Montsouris, 42, Boulevard Jourdan, 75014, Paris, France
| | - Michel Gagner
- Clinique Michel Ganger, Inc, 1 Carré Westmount Suite 801, Westmount, QC, H3Z 2P9, Canada.
- Department of Surgery, Hôpital du Sacre Coeur, Montréal, QC, H4J 1C5, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
|
27
|
Abstract
ABSTRACT Pancreaticoduodenectomy is considered to be the most complicated operation in abdominal surgery. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) in elderly patients. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for relevant studies that were published before June 2020. Seven cohort studies were eligible with 3200 patients. The result of meta-analysis showed that, for the elderly, severe complications, clinical pancreas fistula, and delayed gastric emptying in the LPD group were significantly lower than those in the open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) group. There was no significant difference in postoperative bleeding, reoperation, and readmission between the 2 groups. For the LPD, the mortality, delayed gastric emptying, and severe complication in elder patients were significantly higher than those in young patients. There was no significant difference in postoperative bleeding, R0 rate, reoperation rate, and readmission rate between the aged and the young. Therefore, LPD can reduce postoperative complications in elderly patients compared with OPD, which can be used as a potential alternative to OPD in elderly patients. However, laparoscopic approach cannot eliminate the high risk of postoperative death and severe complications caused by age. More high-quality studies need to be done for further verification.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wei Zhang
- From the Department of Pancreatic and Gastric Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing
| | - Zhangkan Huang
- Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital and Shenzhen Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Shenzhen, China
| | - Jianwei Zhang
- From the Department of Pancreatic and Gastric Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
28
|
Feng Q, Xin Z, Zhu B, Liao M, Liao W, Zeng Y. Perioperative and short-term oncological outcomes following laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy after learning curve in the past 10 years: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gland Surg 2021; 10:1655-1668. [PMID: 34164310 DOI: 10.21037/gs-20-916] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
Background To compare perioperative and short-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) using data from large-scale retrospective cohorts and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the last 10 years. Methods A meta-analysis to assess the safety and feasibility of LDP and OPD registered with PROSPERO: (CRD42020218080) was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. Studies comparing LPD with OPD published between January 2010 and October 2020 were included; only clinical studies reporting more than 30 cases for each operation were included. Two authors performed data extraction and quality assessment independently. The primary endpoint was operative times, blood loss, and 90 days mortality. Secondary endpoints included reoperation, length of hospital stay (LOS), morbidity, Clavien-Dindo ≥3 complications, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), blood transfusion, delayed gastric emptying (DGE), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), and oncologic outcomes (R0-resection, lymph node dissection). Results Overall, the final analysis included 15 retrospective cohorts and 3 RCTs comprising 12,495 patients (2,037 and 10,458 patients underwent LPD and OPD). It seems OPD has more lymph nodes harvested but no significant differences [weighted mean difference (WMD): 1.08; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.02 to 2.14; P=0.05]. Nevertheless, compared with OPD, LPD was associated with a higher R0 resection rate [odds ratio (OR): 1.26; 95% CI: 1.10-1.44; P=0.0008] and longer operative time (WMD: 89.80 min; 95% CI: 63.75-115.84; P<0.00001), patients might benefit from lower rate of wound infection (OR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.33-0.59; P<0.0001), much less blood loss (WMD: -212.25 mL; 95% CI: -286.15 to -138.14; P<0.00001) and lower blood transfusion rate (OR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.43-0.77; P=0.0002) and shorter LOS (WMD: -1.63 day; 95% CI: -2.73 to -0.51; P=0.004). No significant differences in 90-day mortality, overall morbidity, Clavien-Dindo ≥3 complications, reoperation, POPF, DGE and PPH between LPD and OPD. Conclusions Our study suggests that after learning curve, LPD is a safe and feasible alternative to OPD as it provides similar perioperative and acceptable oncological outcomes when compared with OPD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Qingbo Feng
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation Centre, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Zechang Xin
- Department of General Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian, China
| | - Bo Zhu
- Department of hepatobiliary surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Mingheng Liao
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation Centre, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Wenwei Liao
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation Centre, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Yong Zeng
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation Centre, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
29
|
Huang Y, Damodaran Prabha R, Chua TC, Arena J, Kotecha K, Mittal A, Gill AJ, Samra JS. Safety and Efficacy of Pancreaticoduodenectomy in Octogenarians. Front Surg 2021; 8:617286. [PMID: 33604352 PMCID: PMC7884922 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2021.617286] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/14/2020] [Accepted: 01/08/2021] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Backgrounds: Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) remains the only hope of a cure in selected patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC). With an aging population, there will be an increasing number of very elderly patients being diagnosed with PAC of whom a selected proportion would be suitable for PD. However, the literature on outcomes of elderly patients after PD remains ambiguous. Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine the safety and efficacy of PD in octogenarians with PAC. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 304 patients with PAC undergoing PD. Patients were divided into two age groups using age of 80 years old as the cut-off. Results: Overall mortality and major morbidity rates were 0.5 and 18.5%, respectively. The octogenarian group had a higher rate of mortality (6.3%, n = 1, p < 0.001), a higher rate of major morbidity (37.5%, n = 6, p = 0.042) and a longer hospital stay (p = 0.035). However, median survival of octogenarians was 15.6 months. Multivariate analysis showed age was not identified as a prognostic factor for major morbidity and overall survival. Conclusion: Age alone should not be an exclusion criterion for consideration of PD. With careful selection, PD can be safely performed in octogenarians. Elderly patients should be referred to a specialized unit for an objective assessment to determine the suitability for this aggressive but potential curative approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yeqian Huang
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia.,Northern Clinical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,South Western Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Ramesh Damodaran Prabha
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia
| | - Terence C Chua
- Department of Surgery, QE II Jubilee Hospital, Metro South Health, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.,School of Medicine, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia.,Discipline of Surgery, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Jennifer Arena
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia
| | - Krishna Kotecha
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia
| | - Anubhav Mittal
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia
| | - Anthony J Gill
- Northern Clinical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Cancer Diagnosis and Pathology Group, Kolling Institute of Medical Research, St Leonards, NSW, Australia.,Deparment of Anatomical Pathology, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia
| | - Jaswinder S Samra
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia.,Macquarie University Hospital, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
|
30
|
Long-term survival after minimally invasive resection versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary cancers: a systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression. HPB (Oxford) 2021; 23:197-205. [PMID: 33077373 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2020.09.023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2020] [Accepted: 09/29/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND It remains unclear whether minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) influences long-term survival in periampullary cancers. This review aims evaluate long-term survival between MIPD and OPD for periampullary cancers. METHODS A systematic review was performed to identify studies comparing long-term survival after MIPD and OPD. The I2 test was used to test for statistical heterogeneity and publication bias using Egger test. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed for all-cause 5-year (main outcome) and 3-year survival, and disease-specific 5-year and 3-year survival. Meta-regression was performed for the 5-year and 3-year survival outcomes with adjustment for study (region, design, case matching), hospital (centre volume), patient (ASA grade, gender, age), and tumor (stage, neoadjuvant therapy, subtype (i.e. ampullary, distal bile duct, duodenal, pancreatic)). Sensitivity analyses performed on studies including pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) only. RESULTS The review identified 31 relevant studies. Among all 58,622 patients, 8716 (14.9%) underwent MIPD and 49,875 (85.1%) underwent OPD. Pooled analysis revealed similar 5-year overall survival after MIPD compared with OPD (HR: 0.78, 95% CI 0.50-1.22, p = 0.2). Meta-regression indicated case matching, and ASA Grade II and III as confounding covariates. The statistical heterogeneity was limited (I2 = 12, χ2 = 0.26) and the funnel plot was symmetrical both according to visual and statistical testing (Egger test = 0.32). Sensitivity subset analyses for PDAC demonstrated similar 5-year overall survival after MIPD compared with OPD (HR 0.69, 95% CI: 0.32-1.50, p = 0.3). CONCLUSION Long-term survival after MIPD is non-inferior to OPD. Thus, MIPD can be recommended as a standard surgical approach for periampullary cancers.
Collapse
|
|
31
|
Short-term outcomes after minimally invasive versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy in elderly patients: a propensity score-matched analysis. BMC Surg 2021; 21:60. [PMID: 33494734 PMCID: PMC7836577 DOI: 10.1186/s12893-021-01052-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2020] [Accepted: 01/06/2021] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND To date, the evidence on the safety and benefits of minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) in elderly patients is still controversy. This study aim to compare the risk and benefit between MIPD and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) in elderly patients. METHODS From 2016 to 2020, we retrospective enrolled 26 patients underwent MIPD and other 119 patients underwent OPD. We firstly compared the baseline characteristics, 90-day mortality and short-term surgical outcomes of MIPD and OPD. Propensity score matching was applied for old age patient (≥ 65-year-old vs. < 65-year-old) for detail safety and feasibility analysis. RESULTS Patients received MIPD is significantly older, had poor performance status, less lymph node harvest, longer operation time, less postoperative hospital stay (POHS) and earlier drain removal. After 1:2 propensity score matching analysis, elderly patients in MIPD group had significantly poor performance status (P = 0.042) compared to OPD group. Patients receiving MIPD had significantly shorter POHS (18 vs. 25 days, P = 0.028), earlier drain removal (16 vs. 21 days, P = 0.012) and smaller delay gastric empty rate (5.9 vs. 32.4% P = 0.036). There was no 90-day mortality (0% vs. 11.8%, P = 0.186) and pulmonary complications (0% vs. 17.6%, P = 0.075) in MIPD group, and the major complication rate is comparable to OPD group (17.6% vs. 29.4%, P = 0.290). CONCLUSION For elderly patients, MIPD is a feasible and safe option even in patients with inferior preoperative performance status. MIPD might also provide potential advantage for elderly patients in minimizing pulmonary complication and overall mortality over OPD.
Collapse
|
|
32
|
Zhu J, Wang G, Du P, He J, Li Y. Minimally Invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy in Elderly Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. World J Surg 2021; 45:1186-1201. [PMID: 33458781 DOI: 10.1007/s00268-020-05945-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/06/2020] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) for pancreatic head or periampullary lesions is being utilized with increasing frequency. However, few data are available for the elderly. The objective of this study is to assess the safety and feasibility of MIPD in elderly population, by making a comparison with conventional open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) and with non-elderly population. METHODS We conducted a systematic search to identify all eligible studies in Cochrane Library, Ovid, and PubMed from their inception up to April 2020. RESULTS Seven retrospective studies involving 2727 patients were included. Of these, 3 compared MIPD and OPD in elderly patients, 2 compared MIPD in elderly and non-elderly patients, and 2 included both outcomes. Compared to those with OPD, elderly patients who underwent MIPD were associated with less 90-day mortality (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.32-0.97; P = 0.04) and fewer delayed gastric emptying (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.33-0.88; P = 0.01). On the other hand, no significant difference was observed in terms of 30-day mortality, major morbidity, postoperative pancreatic fistula (grade B/C), postoperative hemorrhage, reoperation, 30-day readmission, and operative time. For patients who have treated with MIPD, elderly did not reveal worse outcomes than non-elderly. CONCLUSION MIPD is a safe and feasible procedure for select elderly patients if performed by experienced surgeons from high-volume pancreatic surgery centers. However, further randomized studies are required to confirm this.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jisheng Zhu
- Department of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, 330006, Jiangxi, China
| | - Guiyan Wang
- Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, 330006, Jiangxi, China
| | - Peng Du
- Department of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, 330006, Jiangxi, China
| | - Jianpeng He
- Department of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, 330006, Jiangxi, China
| | - Yong Li
- Department of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, 330006, Jiangxi, China.
| |
Collapse
|
|
33
|
Ishido K, Hakamada K, Kimura N, Miura T, Wakiya T. Essential updates 2018/2019: Current topics in the surgical treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Ann Gastroenterol Surg 2021; 5:7-23. [PMID: 33532676 PMCID: PMC7832965 DOI: 10.1002/ags3.12379] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/05/2020] [Revised: 06/23/2020] [Accepted: 06/25/2020] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is highly malignant. While cancers in other organs have shown clear improvements in 5-year survival, the 5-year survival rate of pancreatic cancer is approximately 10%. Early relapse and metastasis are not uncommon, making it difficult to achieve an acceptable prognosis even after complete surgical resection of the pancreas. Studies have been performed on various treatments to improve the prognosis of PDAC, and multidisciplinary approaches including non-surgical treatments have led to gradual improvement. In the present literature review, we have described the significance of anatomical and biological resectability criteria, the concept of R0 resection in surgical treatment, the feasibility of minimally invasive surgery, the remarkable development of perioperative chemotherapy, the effectiveness of conversion surgery for unresectable PDAC, and ongoing challenges in PDAC treatment. We also provide an essential update on these subjects by focusing on recent trends and topics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Keinosuke Ishido
- Department of Gastroenterological SurgeryHirosaki University Graduate School of MedicineHirosakiJapan
| | - Kenichi Hakamada
- Department of Gastroenterological SurgeryHirosaki University Graduate School of MedicineHirosakiJapan
| | - Norihisa Kimura
- Department of Gastroenterological SurgeryHirosaki University Graduate School of MedicineHirosakiJapan
| | - Takuya Miura
- Department of Gastroenterological SurgeryHirosaki University Graduate School of MedicineHirosakiJapan
| | - Taiichi Wakiya
- Department of Gastroenterological SurgeryHirosaki University Graduate School of MedicineHirosakiJapan
| |
Collapse
|
|
34
|
Aiolfi A, Lombardo F, Bonitta G, Danelli P, Bona D. Systematic review and updated network meta-analysis comparing open, laparoscopic, and robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Updates Surg 2020; 73:909-922. [PMID: 33315230 PMCID: PMC8184540 DOI: 10.1007/s13304-020-00916-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2020] [Accepted: 10/26/2020] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
The treatment of periampullary and pancreatic head neoplasms is evolving. While minimally invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) has gained worldwide interest, there has been a debate on its related outcomes. The purpose of this paper was to provide an updated evidence comparing short-term surgical and oncologic outcomes within Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy (OpenPD), Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy (LapPD), and Robotic Pancreaticoduodenectomy (RobPD). MEDLINE, Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Central Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were referred for systematic search. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was executed. Forty-one articles (56,440 patients) were included; 48,382 (85.7%) underwent OpenPD, 5570 (9.8%) LapPD, and 2488 (4.5%) RobPD. Compared to OpenPD, LapPD and RobPD had similar postoperative mortality [Risk Ratio (RR) = 1.26; 95%CrI 0.91–1.61 and RR = 0.78; 95%CrI 0.54–1.12)], clinically relevant (grade B/C) postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) (RR = 1.12; 95%CrI 0.82–1.43 and RR = 0.87; 95%CrI 0.64–1.14, respectively), and severe (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3) postoperative complications (RR = 1.03; 95%CrI 0.80–1.46 and RR = 0.93; 95%CrI 0.65–1.14, respectively). Compared to OpenPD, both LapPD and RobPD had significantly reduced hospital length-of-stay, estimated blood loss, infectious, pulmonary, overall complications, postoperative bleeding, and hospital readmission. No differences were found in the number of retrieved lymph nodes and R0. OpenPD, LapPD, and RobPD seem to be comparable across clinically relevant POPF, severe complications, postoperative mortality, retrieved lymphnodes, and R0. LapPD and RobPD appears to be safer in terms of infectious, pulmonary, and overall complications with reduced hospital readmission We advocate surgeons to choose their preferred surgical approach according to their expertise, however, the adoption of minimally invasive techniques may possibly improve patients’ outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alberto Aiolfi
- Department of Biomedical Science for Health, Division of General Surgery, Istituto Clinico Sant'Ambrogio, University of Milan, Via Luigi Giuseppe Faravelli, 16, 20149, Milan, Italy.
| | - Francesca Lombardo
- Department of Biomedical Science for Health, Division of General Surgery, Istituto Clinico Sant'Ambrogio, University of Milan, Via Luigi Giuseppe Faravelli, 16, 20149, Milan, Italy
| | - Gianluca Bonitta
- Department of Biomedical Science for Health, Division of General Surgery, Istituto Clinico Sant'Ambrogio, University of Milan, Via Luigi Giuseppe Faravelli, 16, 20149, Milan, Italy
| | - Piergiorgio Danelli
- Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, "Luigi Sacco" Hospital, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Davide Bona
- Department of Biomedical Science for Health, Division of General Surgery, Istituto Clinico Sant'Ambrogio, University of Milan, Via Luigi Giuseppe Faravelli, 16, 20149, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
35
|
Kang CM, Lee WJ. Is Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy Feasible for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma? Cancers (Basel) 2020; 12:3430. [PMID: 33218187 PMCID: PMC7699219 DOI: 10.3390/cancers12113430] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/20/2020] [Revised: 11/11/2020] [Accepted: 11/14/2020] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Margin-negative radical pancreatectomy is the essential condition to obtain long-term survival of patients with pancreatic cancer. With the investigation for early diagnosis, introduction of potent chemotherapeutic agents, application of neoadjuvnat chemotherapy, advancement of open and laparoscopic surgical techniques, mature perioperative management, and patients' improved general conditions, survival of the resected pancreatic cancer is expected to be further improved. According to the literatures, laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) is also thought to be good alternative strategy in managing well-selected resectable pancreatic cancer. LPD with combined vascular resection is also feasible, but only expert surgeons should handle these challenging cases. LPD for pancreatic cancer should be determined based on surgeons' proficiency to fulfil the goals of the patient's safety and oncologic principles.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chang Moo Kang
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul 03772, Korea;
- Pancreatobiliary Cancer Center, Yonsei Cancer Center, Severance Hospital, Seoul 03772, Korea
| | - Woo Jung Lee
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul 03772, Korea;
- Pancreatobiliary Cancer Center, Yonsei Cancer Center, Severance Hospital, Seoul 03772, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
|
36
|
Kamarajah SK, Abu Hilal M, White SA. Does center or surgeon volume influence adoption of minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy? A systematic review and meta-regression. Surgery 2020; 169:945-953. [PMID: 33183790 DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2020.09.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/02/2020] [Revised: 08/29/2020] [Accepted: 09/17/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND There has been increasing uptake of minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy during the past decade, but it remains a highly specialized procedure as benefits over open pancreatoduodenectomy remain contentious. This study aimed to evaluate current evidence on minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy versus open pancreatoduodenectomy in terms of impact of center volume on outcomes. METHODS A systematic review of articles on comparative cohort and registry studies on minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy versus open pancreatoduodenectomy published until 31st December 2019 were identified, and meta-analyses were performed. Primary endpoints were International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula and 30-day mortality. RESULTS After screening 7,390 studies, 43 comparative cohort studies (8,755 patients) with moderate methodological quality and 3 original registry studies (43,735 patients) were included. For the cohort studies, the median annual hospital minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy volume was 10. No significant differences were found in grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula (odds ratio: 0.98, 95% confidence interval: 0.78-1.23) or 30-day mortality (odds ratio: 1.14, 95% confidence interval: 0.65-2.01) between minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy when compared with open. No publication biases were present and meta-regression identified no confounding for grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula, center volume or 30-day mortality. Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy was only strongly associated with significantly lower rates of postoperative pulmonary complications and surgical site infection, shorter length of stay, and significantly higher rates of R0 margin resections. CONCLUSION Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy remains noninferior to open pancreatoduodenectomy for grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula but is strongly associated with significantly lower rates of postoperative pulmonary complications and surgical site infection. Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy can be adopted safely with good outcomes irrespective of annual center resection volume.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sivesh K Kamarajah
- Department of HPB and Transplant Surgery, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, Tyne and Wear, United Kingdom; Institute of Cellular Medicine, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, Tyne and Wear, United Kingdom.
| | - Mohammed Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom
| | - Steven A White
- Department of HPB and Transplant Surgery, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, Tyne and Wear, United Kingdom; Institute of Cellular Medicine, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, Tyne and Wear, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
|
37
|
Baltatzis M, Rodriquenz MG, Siriwardena AK, De Liguori Carino N. Contemporary management of pancreas cancer in older people. Eur J Surg Oncol 2020; 47:560-568. [PMID: 32950314 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2020.08.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2020] [Accepted: 08/10/2020] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
As the population of western countries is aging, the number of patients diagnosed with cancer is growing. Therefore older people, more susceptible to develop pancreatic malignancy, will likely represent the prototype of a pancreatic cancer patient in the near future. Diagnostic modalities utilised for younger patients are also applicable for older individuals. There is accumulative evidence that biological age is not an independent factor predicting poor outcome in elderly patients with resectable disease undergoing surgery, however increased postoperative morbidity and mortality within the elderly group has also been reported. Adjuvant chemotherapy should be offered in all patients with good performance status regardless of their age. Palliative measures for unresectable tumours including relief from biliary and duodenal obstruction as well as chemotherapy should be considered in non-frail patients with reasonable life expectancy. Palliative chemotherapy options are FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel for patients with good performance status (0-1) and gemcitabine alone for patients with performance status 2-3. The cornerstone for improving the outcomes of the elderly age group is careful patient selection and perioperative optimization of those who have indication for surgery. Patients and their carers should be involved in the decision making process with emphasis on the expected functional recovery after the proposed treatment modality. The presence of geriatricians in the multidisciplinary team meetings is crucial in order to identify the optimal treatment pathway for elderly patients. Geriatric input regarding peri-habilitation pathways to improve surgical outcomes, to decrease mortality and to expedite patients' functional recovery is highly recommended.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Minas Baltatzis
- Regional Hepato-Pancreatico-Biliary Unit, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
| | - Maria Grazia Rodriquenz
- Oncology Unit, Foundation IRCCS, Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza, San Giovanni Rotondo, Italy
| | - Ajith K Siriwardena
- Regional Hepato-Pancreatico-Biliary Unit, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Nicola De Liguori Carino
- Regional Hepato-Pancreatico-Biliary Unit, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
|
38
|
The Effect of Age on Short- and Long-Term Outcomes in Patients With Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Undergoing Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy. Pancreas 2020; 49:1063-1068. [PMID: 32769853 DOI: 10.1097/mpa.0000000000001620] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of age on outcomes with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) undergoing laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD). METHODS We retrospectively collected clinical data of consecutive patients with PDAC undergoing LPD from January 2012 to April 2019. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to age at admission for LPD: younger than 70 and 70 years or older. RESULTS A total of 147 patients were included (<70 years, n = 96; ≥70 years, n = 51). The elderly LPD patients had lower serum albumin levels (mean, 37.9 [standard deviation, 4.8] g/L vs 40.7 [standard deviation, 6.8] g/L, P = 0.004) and a larger frequency of comorbidities (62.7% vs 36.5%, P = 0.002) than younger patients. The short-term outcomes showed no significant differences. The median overall survival time of the younger patients was not significantly greater than that of the elderly patients (20.0 [95% confidence interval, 16.1-23.9] months vs 19.0 [95% confidence interval, 13.8-24.2] months, P = 0.902). CONCLUSIONS The short- and long-term outcomes of elderly patients with PDAC after LPD were similar to those of younger patients, despite a higher prevalence of multiple chronic illnesses and poorer nutritional conditioning among the elderly patients. These results show that LPD can be applied safely to elderly patients.
Collapse
|
|
39
|
Liu Q, Zhao Z, Zhang X, Zhao G, Tan X, Gao Y, Lau WY, Liu R. Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy in elderly and younger patients: A retrospective cohort study. Int J Surg 2020; 81:61-65. [PMID: 32750491 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.07.049] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2020] [Revised: 06/27/2020] [Accepted: 07/19/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) has gradually been accepted as it has overcome some of the limitations of laparoscopic surgery. Outcomes following RPD in elderly patients are still uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of RPD in elderly patients. METHODS The demographics and perioperative outcomes of a consecutive series of patients who underwent RPD between January 2018 and September 2019, were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into 2 groups: elderly patients (≥75 years) and younger patients (<75 years). RESULTS Of 431 patients who were included in this study, 77 were elderly patients and 354 were younger patients. Elderly patients had a significantly higher ASA score than younger patients (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in operative time, estimated blood loss and blood transfusion rate between groups (P > 0.05). Elderly patients had significantly higher morbidity and longer postoperative hospital stay than younger patients (49.3% vs. 31.1%, P = 0.002; 22.8 vs. 13.3 days, P < 0.001, respectively). However, the reoperation, 90-day readmission and mortality rates were comparable in the two groups (P > 0.05). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that a higher ASA score was the only independent factor for postoperative morbidity (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.06-3.88, P = 0.03), while old age was not (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.36-1.81, P = 0.80). CONCLUSION This study demonstrated that RDP was safe and feasible in elderly patients. Age should not be a contraindication to RPD. Elderly patients with careful patient selection should be considered for RPD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Qu Liu
- Second Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Zhiming Zhao
- Second Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Xiuping Zhang
- Second Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Guodong Zhao
- Second Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Xianglong Tan
- Second Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Yuanxing Gao
- Second Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Wan Yee Lau
- Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong SAR, China
| | - Rong Liu
- Second Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, Beijing, China.
| |
Collapse
|
|
40
|
van der Heijde N, Balduzzi A, Alseidi A, Dokmak S, Polanco PM, Sandford D, Shrikhande SV, Vollmer C, Wang SE, Besselink MG, Asbun H, Abu Hilal M. The role of older age and obesity in minimally invasive and open pancreatic surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Pancreatology 2020; 20:1234-1242. [PMID: 32782197 DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2020.06.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/11/2020] [Revised: 06/14/2020] [Accepted: 06/18/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to assess the impact of older age (≥70 years) and obesity (BMI ≥30) on surgical outcomes of minimally invasive pancreatic resections (MIPR). Subsequently, open pancreatic resections or MIPR were compared for elderly and/or obese patients. METHODS A systematic review was conducted as part of the 2019 Miami International Evidence-Based Guidelines on MIPR (IG-MIPR). Study quality assessment was according to The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). A meta-analysis was performed to assess the impact of MIPR or open pancreatic resections in elderly patients. RESULTS After screening 682 studies, 13 observational studies with 4629 patients were included. Elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) had less blood loss (117 mL, p < 0.001) and a shorter hospital stay (3.5 days p < 0.001) than elderly patients undergoing open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) B/C, major complication and reoperation rate were not significantly different in elderly patients undergoing either laparoscopic or open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD). One study compared robot PD with OPD in obese patients, indicating that patients with robotic surgery had less blood loss (mean 250 ml vs 500 ml, p = 0.001), shorter operative time (mean 381 min vs 428 min, p = 0.003), and lower rate of POPF B/C (13% vs 28%, p = 0.039). CONCLUSION The current available limited evidence does not suggest that MIPR is contraindicated in elderly or obese patients. Additionally, outcomes in MIPR are equal or more beneficial compared to the open approach when applied in these patient groups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N van der Heijde
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital, Southampton, United Kingdom; Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - A Balduzzi
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - A Alseidi
- Department of Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, USA
| | - S Dokmak
- Department of Surgery, Beaujon Hospital, Paris, France
| | - P M Polanco
- Department of Surgery, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA
| | - D Sandford
- Department of Surgery, Washington University, St. Louis, USA
| | - S V Shrikhande
- Department of Surgery, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
| | - C Vollmer
- Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, USA
| | - S E Wang
- Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang Ming University, National Yang Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - H Asbun
- Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, FL, USA
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital, Southampton, United Kingdom.
| | | |
Collapse
|
|
41
|
Miyasaka Y, Ohtsuka T, Nakamura M. Minimally invasive surgery for pancreatic cancer. Surg Today 2020; 51:194-203. [PMID: 32857251 DOI: 10.1007/s00595-020-02120-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/22/2020] [Accepted: 06/29/2020] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
Pancreatic cancer is the most lethal malignancy of the digestive organs. Although pancreatic resection is essential to radically cure this refractory disease, the multi-organ resection involved, as well as sequelae such as glucose tolerance insufficiency and severe complications impose a heavy burden on these patients. Since the late twentieth century, minimally invasive surgery has become more popular for the surgical management of digestive disease and pancreatic cancer. Minimally invasive pancreatic resection (MIPR), including pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy, is now a treatment option for pancreatic cancer. Some evidence suggests that MIPR for pancreatic cancer provides comparable oncological outcomes to open surgery, with some advantages in perioperative outcomes. However, as this evidence is retrospective, prospective investigations, including randomized controlled trials, are necessary. Because neoadjuvant therapy for resectable or borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer and conversion surgery for initially unresectable pancreatic cancer has become more common, the feasibility of MIPR after neoadjuvant therapy or as conversion surgery requires further assessment. It is expected that progress in surgical techniques and devices, as well as the standardization of surgical procedures and widespread educational programs will improve the outcomes of MIPR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yoshihiro Miyasaka
- Department of Surgery and Oncology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, 3-1-1 Maidashi, Higashi-ku, Fukuoka, 812-8582, Japan
- Department of Surgery, Fukuoka University Chikushi Hospital, Chikushino, Japan
| | - Takao Ohtsuka
- Department of Surgery and Oncology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, 3-1-1 Maidashi, Higashi-ku, Fukuoka, 812-8582, Japan
- Digestive Surgery, Breast and Thyroid Surgery, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kagoshima University, Kagoshima, Japan
| | - Masafumi Nakamura
- Department of Surgery and Oncology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, 3-1-1 Maidashi, Higashi-ku, Fukuoka, 812-8582, Japan.
| |
Collapse
|
|
42
|
Qin R, Kendrick ML, Wolfgang CL, Edil BH, Palanivelu C, Parks RW, Yang Y, He J, Zhang T, Mou Y, Yu X, Peng B, Senthilnathan P, Han HS, Lee JH, Unno M, Damink SWMO, Bansal VK, Chow P, Cheung TT, Choi N, Tien YW, Wang C, Fok M, Cai X, Zou S, Peng S, Zhao Y. International expert consensus on laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr 2020; 9:464-483. [PMID: 32832497 PMCID: PMC7423539 DOI: 10.21037/hbsn-20-446] [Citation(s) in RCA: 47] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/24/2020] [Accepted: 07/15/2020] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE While laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) is being adopted with increasing enthusiasm worldwide, it is still challenging for both technical and anatomical reasons. Currently, there is no consensus on the technical standards for LPD. OBJECTIVE The aim of this consensus statement is to guide the continued safe progression and adoption of LPD. EVIDENCE REVIEW An international panel of experts was selected based on their clinical and scientific expertise in laparoscopic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy. Statements were produced upon reviewing the literature and assessed by the members of the expert panel. The literature search and its critical appraisal were limited to articles published in English during the period from 1994 to 2019. The Web of Science, Medline, and Cochrane Library and Clinical Trials databases were searched, The search strategy included, but was not limited to, the terms 'laparoscopic', 'pancreaticoduodenectomy, 'pancreatoduodenectomy', 'Whipple's operation', and 'minimally invasive surgery'. Reference lists from the included articles were manually checked for any additional studies, which were included when appropriate. Delphi method was used to establish expert consensus and the AGREE II-GRS Instrument was applied to assess the methodological quality and externally validate the final statements. The statements were further discussed during a one-day face-to-face meeting at the 1st Summit on Minimally Invasive Pancreatico-Biliary Surgery in Wuhan, China. FINDINGS Twenty-eight international experts from 8 countries constructed the expert panel. Sixteen statements were produced by the members of the expert panel. At least 80% of responders agreed with the majority (80%) of statements. Other than three randomized controlled trials published to date, most evidences were based on level 3 or 4 studies according to the AGREE II-GRS Instrument. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The Wuhan international expert consensus meeting on LPD has produced a set of clinical practice statements for the safe development and progression of LPD. LPD is currently in its development and exploration stages, as defined by the international IDEAL framework for surgical innovation. More robust randomized controlled trial and registry study are essential to proceed with the assessment of LPD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Renyi Qin
- Department of Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Affiliated Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | | | - Christopher L. Wolfgang
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The John Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Barish H. Edil
- Department of Surgery, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK, USA
| | - Chinnusamy Palanivelu
- Department of Surgical Gastroenterology and Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, GEM Hospital and Research Centre, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - Rowan W. Parks
- Clinical Surgery, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh and University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Yinmo Yang
- Department of General Surgery, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Jin He
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Taiping Zhang
- Department of General Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
| | - Yiping Mou
- Department of Gastroenterology and Pancreatic Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People’s Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, Hangzhou, China
| | - Xianjun Yu
- Department of Pancreatic Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
| | - Bing Peng
- Department of Pancreatic Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Palanisamy Senthilnathan
- Department of Surgical Gastroenterology and Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, GEM Hospital and Research Centre, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - Ho-Seong Han
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jae Hoon Lee
- Division of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea
| | - Michiaki Unno
- Department of Surgery, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan
| | - Steven W. M. Olde Damink
- Department of Surgery, NUTRIM School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Virinder Kumar Bansal
- Department of Surgical Disciplines, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
| | - Pierce Chow
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Tan To Cheung
- Department of Surgery, The University of Hong Kong, Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong, China
| | - Nim Choi
- Department of General Surgery, Hospital Conde S. Januário, Macau, China
| | - Yu-Wen Tien
- Department of Surgery, National Taiwan University Hospital and National Taiwan University College of Medicine, Taipei
| | - Chengfeng Wang
- Department of Pancreatic and Gastric Surgery, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
| | - Manson Fok
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital, Macau University of Science and Technology, Macau, China
| | - Xiujun Cai
- Department of General Surgery, Sir Run-Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
| | - Shengquan Zou
- Department of Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Affiliated Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Shuyou Peng
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China
| | - Yupei Zhao
- Department of General Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
43
|
Perioperative and oncological outcomes following minimally invasive versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic duct adenocarcinoma. Surg Endosc 2020; 35:2273-2285. [PMID: 32632485 PMCID: PMC8057975 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-020-07641-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/21/2019] [Accepted: 05/13/2020] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The outcomes of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy have not been adequately compared with those of open pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the perioperative and oncological outcomes of these two pancreaticoduodenectomy procedures specifically in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. METHODS Before this study was initiated, a specific protocol was designed and has been registered in PROSEPRO (ID: CRD42020149438). Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were systematically searched for studies published between January 1994 and October 2019. Overall survival, disease-free survival, and time to commencing adjuvant chemotherapy were the primary endpoint measurements, whereas perioperative and short-term outcomes were the secondary endpoints. RESULTS The final analysis included 9 retrospective cohorts comprising 11,242 patients (1377 who underwent minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy and 9865 who underwent open pancreaticoduodenectomy). There were no significant differences in the patients' overall survival, operative time, postoperative complications, 30-day mortality, rate of vein resection, number of harvested lymph nodes, or rate of positive lymph nodes between the two approaches. However, disease-free survival, time to starting adjuvant chemotherapy, length of hospital stay, and rate of negative margins in patients who underwent minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy showed improvements relative to those in patients who underwent open surgery. CONCLUSIONS Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy provides similar or even improved perioperative, short-term, and long-term oncological outcomes when compared with open pancreaticoduodenectomy for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.
Collapse
|
|
44
|
The Miami International Evidence-based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection. Ann Surg 2020; 271:1-14. [PMID: 31567509 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000003590] [Citation(s) in RCA: 310] [Impact Index Per Article: 62.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to develop and externally validate the first evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreas resection (MIPR) before and during the International Evidence-based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR) meeting in Miami (March 2019). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA MIPR has seen rapid development in the past decade. Promising outcomes have been reported by early adopters from high-volume centers. Subsequently, multicenter series as well as randomized controlled trials were reported; however, guidelines for clinical practice were lacking. METHODS The Scottisch Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology was used, incorporating these 4 items: systematic reviews using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to answer clinical questions, whenever possible in PICO style, the GRADE approach for assessment of the quality of evidence, the Delphi method for establishing consensus on the developed recommendations, and the AGREE-II instrument for the assessment of guideline quality and external validation. The current guidelines are cosponsored by the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Asian-Pacific Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery, Pancreas Club, the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgery, the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, and the Society of Surgical Oncology. RESULTS After screening 16,069 titles, 694 studies were reviewed, and 291 were included. The final 28 recommendations covered 6 topics; laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy, central pancreatectomy, pancreatoduodenectomy, as well as patient selection, training, learning curve, and minimal annual center volume required to obtain optimal outcomes and patient safety. CONCLUSION The IG-MIPR using SIGN methodology give guidance to surgeons, hospital administrators, patients, and medical societies on the use and outcome of MIPR as well as the approach to be taken regarding this challenging type of surgery.
Collapse
|
|
45
|
Han SH, Kang CM, Hwang HK, Yoon DS, Lee WJ. The Yonsei experience of 104 laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomies: a propensity score-matched analysis with open pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surg Endosc 2020; 34:1658-1664. [PMID: 31286254 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-019-06942-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/20/2018] [Accepted: 06/26/2019] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND With continued technical advances in surgical instruments and growing expertise, several surgeons have performed laparoscopic pylorus preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (L-PPPD) safely with good results, and the laparoscopic approach is being performed more frequently. We performed over 100 cases of L-PPPD and compared their outcomes to those of open PPPD (O-PPPD) using the large sample size. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of L-PPPD compared with O-PPPD. METHODS From September 2012 to June 2017, PPPD was performed for 217 patients at Yonsei University Severance Hospital by a single surgeon. Patients were divided into two groups: those who underwent O-PPPD (n = 113) and those who underwent L-PPPD (n = 104). We performed a 1:1 propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis and retrospectively analyzed the demographic and surgical outcomes. We also reviewed all previous studies of more than 100 cases. RESULTS The L-PPPD group had lesser intraoperative blood loss than the O-PPPD group (548.1 ml vs. 244.7 ml; p < 0.001). Both groups showed similar rates of negative resection margins (99.1% vs. 96.2%; p = 0.196). Overall complication rates did not differ significantly between O-PPPD and L-PPPD (39.8% vs. 35.6%; p = 0.519). The clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) rates in the O-PPPD and L-PPPD groups were 18.8% and 13.5%, respectively (p = 0.311). There was no difference in 30- and 90-day mortality rates between the two groups (p = 0.479). Similar results were obtained after PSM analysis. CONCLUSIONS L-PPPD can be a good alternative option for well-selected patients with periampullary lesions requiring PPPD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sang Hyup Han
- Department of Surgery, Chuncheon Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Chuncheon, Korea
- Pharmacology, Kangwon National University, Chuncheon, Korea
| | - Chang Moo Kang
- Division of HBP Surgery, Department of Surgery, Severance Hospital, Pancreatobiliary Cancer Center, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Faculty Research Building #204 Ludlow 50 Yonsei-ro, Seoul, 120-752, Korea.
| | - Ho Kyoung Hwang
- Division of HBP Surgery, Department of Surgery, Severance Hospital, Pancreatobiliary Cancer Center, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Faculty Research Building #204 Ludlow 50 Yonsei-ro, Seoul, 120-752, Korea
| | - Dong Sup Yoon
- Division of HBP Surgery, Department of Surgery, Severance Hospital, Pancreatobiliary Cancer Center, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Faculty Research Building #204 Ludlow 50 Yonsei-ro, Seoul, 120-752, Korea
| | - Woo Jung Lee
- Division of HBP Surgery, Department of Surgery, Severance Hospital, Pancreatobiliary Cancer Center, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Faculty Research Building #204 Ludlow 50 Yonsei-ro, Seoul, 120-752, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
|
46
|
Tan Y, Tang T, Zhang Y, Zu G, An Y, Chen W, Wu D, Sun D, Chen X. Laparoscopic vs. open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a comparative study in elderly people. Updates Surg 2020; 72:701-707. [PMID: 32152962 DOI: 10.1007/s13304-020-00737-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/21/2019] [Accepted: 02/26/2020] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Abstract
The purpose of the study is to evaluate whether laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) is safe and feasible for elderly patients. From December 2015 to January 2019, 142 LPD surgeries and 93 OPD surgeries were performed by the same surgeon in the third affiliated hospital of Soochow University. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, we retrospectively collected the date of three defined groups: LPD aged < 70 years (group I, 84 patients), LPD aged ≥ 70 years (group II, 56 patients) and OPD aged ≥ 70 years (group III, 28 patients). Baseline characteristics and short-term surgical outcomes of group I and group II, group II and group III were compared. Totally, 168 patients were included in this study; 100 cases were men; 68 cases were women; mean age was 67.9 ± 9.5 years. LPD does not perform as well in elderly as it does in non-elderly patients in terms of intraoperative blood loss (300.0 (200.0-500.0) ml vs. 200.0 (100.0-300.0) ml, p = 0.003), proportion of intraoperative transfusion (17.9% vs. 6.0%, p = 0.026) and time to oral intake (5.0 (4.0-7.0) day vs. 5.0 (3.0-6.0) day, p = 0.036). Operative time, conversion rate, postoperative stay, and proportion of reoperation, Clavien-Dindo classification, 30-day readmission and 90-day mortality were similar in two groups. In elderly patients, when compared with OPD, LPD had the advantage of shorter time to start oral intake (5.0 (4.0-7.0) day vs. 7.0 (5.0-11.3) day, p = 0.005) but the disadvantage of longer operative time (380.0 (306.3-447.5) min vs. 292.5 (255.0-342.5) min, p < 0.001) and higher hospitalization cost (12447.3 (10,189.7-15,340.0) euros vs. 7251.9 (8994.0-11,717.4) euros, p < 0.001). There was no difference between the two groups in terms of postoperative stay, and proportion of reoperation, Clavien-Dindo classification, 30-day readmission and 90-day mortality. LPD is safe and feasible for elderly people, but we need to consider its high cost and long operative time over OPD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yuwei Tan
- The First People's Hospital of Changzhou, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China
| | - Tianyu Tang
- The First People's Hospital of Changzhou, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China
| | - Yue Zhang
- The First People's Hospital of Changzhou, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China
| | - Guangchen Zu
- The First People's Hospital of Changzhou, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China
| | - Yong An
- The First People's Hospital of Changzhou, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China
| | - Weibo Chen
- The First People's Hospital of Changzhou, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China
| | - Di Wu
- The First People's Hospital of Changzhou, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China
| | - Donglin Sun
- The First People's Hospital of Changzhou, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China
| | - Xuemin Chen
- The First People's Hospital of Changzhou, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China.
| |
Collapse
|
|
47
|
Choi M, Hwang HK, Rho SY, Lee WJ, Kang CM. Comparing laparoscopic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with pancreatic head cancer: oncologic outcomes and inflammatory scores. JOURNAL OF HEPATO-BILIARY-PANCREATIC SCIENCES 2020; 27:124-131. [PMID: 31705719 DOI: 10.1002/jhbp.697] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Both the technical and oncological safety of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) remain controversial in treating pancreatic head cancer. We evaluated the oncologic benefit of LPD and compared the inflammatory score between LPD and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). METHODS From January 2014 to March 2019, 61 patients with standard PD not combined with other organ resection were finally enrolled in this study. Among these patients, 27 underwent LPD and 34 underwent OPD (registered on 16 July 2019, and registration number is 2019-1411-001). RESULTS The estimated blood loss (EBL) for the LPD group was less than that of the OPD group (P = 0.003). The operation time was similar, as was the incidence of complications such as postoperative fistula, delayed gastric emptying. Overall survival was not different between LPD and OPD (44.62 vs. 45.29 months, P = 0.223). However, a significant improvement in disease-free survival (DFS) was seen in the LPD group (34.19 vs. 23.27 months, P = 0.027). No statistically significant differences were found in terms of the postoperative change in inflammatory scores and differentiated white blood cell counts. CONCLUSIONS LPD is not only safe and feasible in pancreatic head cancer patients but is associated with a reduced amount of EBL, favorable DFS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Munseok Choi
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- Department of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- Pancreatobiliary Cancer Center, Yonsei Cancer Center, Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Ho Kyoung Hwang
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- Department of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- Pancreatobiliary Cancer Center, Yonsei Cancer Center, Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Seoung Yoon Rho
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- Department of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- Pancreatobiliary Cancer Center, Yonsei Cancer Center, Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Woo Jung Lee
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- Department of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- Pancreatobiliary Cancer Center, Yonsei Cancer Center, Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Chang Moo Kang
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- Department of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- Pancreatobiliary Cancer Center, Yonsei Cancer Center, Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
|
48
|
Feng M, Cao Z, Sun Z, Zhang T, Zhao Y. Pancreatic head cancer: Open or minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy? Chin J Cancer Res 2020; 31:862-877. [PMID: 31949389 PMCID: PMC6955167 DOI: 10.21147/j.issn.1000-9604.2019.06.03] [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] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Pancreatic head cancer still represents an insurmountable barrier for patients and pancreatic surgeons. Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) continues to be the operative standard of care and potentially curative procedure for pancreatic head cancer. Despite the rapid development of minimally invasive techniques, whether the efficacy of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) is noninferior or superior to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) remains unclear. In this review, we summarized the history of OPD and MIPD and the latest staging and classification information for pancreatic head cancer as well as the proposed recommendations for MIPD indications for patients with pancreatic head cancer. By reviewing the MIPD- vs. OPD-related literature, we found that MIPD shows noninferiority or superiority to OPD in terms of safety, feasibility, enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) and several short-term and long-term outcomes. In addition, we analyzed and summarized the different MIPD outcomes in the USA, Europe and China. Certain debates over MIPD have continued, however, selection bias, the large number of low-volume centers, the steep MIPD learning curve, high conversion rate and administration of neoadjuvant therapy may limit the application of MIPD for pancreatic head cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mengyu Feng
- Department of General Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China
| | - Zhe Cao
- Department of General Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China
| | - Zhiwei Sun
- Department of General Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China
| | - Taiping Zhang
- Department of General Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China.,Clinical Immunology Center, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China
| | - Yupei Zhao
- Department of General Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China
| |
Collapse
|
|
49
|
Esposito A, Balduzzi A, De Pastena M, Fontana M, Casetti L, Ramera M, Bassi C, Salvia R. Minimally invasive surgery for pancreatic cancer. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2019; 19:947-958. [DOI: 10.1080/14737140.2019.1685878] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Alessandro Esposito
- Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - Alberto Balduzzi
- Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - Matteo De Pastena
- Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - Martina Fontana
- Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - Luca Casetti
- Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - Marco Ramera
- Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - Claudio Bassi
- Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - Roberto Salvia
- Department of General and Pancreatic Surgery, The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
|
50
|
Zhang H, Lan X, Peng B, Li B. Is total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy superior to open procedure? A meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol 2019; 25:5711-5731. [PMID: 31602170 PMCID: PMC6785520 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v25.i37.5711] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/15/2019] [Revised: 07/10/2019] [Accepted: 08/07/2019] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopy has been widely used in general surgical procedures, but total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (TLPD) is still a complex and challenging surgery that is only performed in a small number of patients at a few large academic medical centers. Although the safety and feasibility of TLPD have been established, few studies have compared it with open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) with regard to perioperative and oncological outcomes. Therefore, we carried out a meta-analysis to evaluate whether TLPD is superior to OPD. AIM To compare the treatment outcomes of TLPD and OPD in order to assess the safety and feasibility of TLPD. METHODS We conducted a systematic search of studies comparing TLPD with OPD that were published in the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases through December 31, 2018. The studies comparing TLPD and OPD with at least one of the outcomes we were interested in and with more than 10 cases in each group were included in this analysis. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess the quality of the nonrandomized controlled trials and the Jadad scale was used to assess the randomized controlled trials. Intraoperative data, postoperative complications, and oncologic outcomes were evaluated. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager Software version 5.3. Random or fixed-effects meta-analyses were undertaken to measure the pooled estimates. RESULTS A total of 4790 articles were initially identified for our study. After screening, 4762 articles were excluded and 28 studies representing 39771 patients (3543 undergoing TLPD and 36228 undergoing OPD) were eventually included. Patients who underwent TLPD had less intraoperative blood loss [weighted mean difference (WMD) = -260.08 mL, 95% confidence interval (CI): (-336.02, -184.14) mL, P < 0.00001], a lower blood transfusion rate [odds ratio (OR) = 0.51, 95%CI: 0.36-0.72, P = 0.0001], a lower perioperative overall morbidity (OR = 0.82, 95%CI: 0.73-0.92, P = 0.0008), a lower wound infection rate (OR = 0.48, 95%CI: 0.34-0.67, P < 0.0001), a lower pneumonia rate (OR = 0.72, 95%CI: 0.60-0.85, P = 0.0002), a shorter duration of intensive care unit (ICU) stay [WMD = -0.28 d, 95%CI (-2.88, -1.29) d, P < 0.00001] and a shorter length of hospital stay [WMD = -3.05 d, 95%CI (-3.93, -2.17), P < 0.00001], a lower rate of discharge to a new facility (OR = 0.55, 95%CI: 0.39-0.78, P = 0.0008), and a lower 30-d readmission rate (OR = 0.81, 95%CI: 0.68-0.95, P = 0.10) than those who underwent OPD. In addition, the TLPD group had a higher R0 rate (OR = 1.28, 95%CI: 1.13-1.44, P = 0.0001) and more lymph nodes harvested (WMD = 1.32, 95%CI: 0.57-2.06, P = 0.0005) than the OPD group. However, the patients who underwent TLPD experienced a significantly longer operative time (WMD = 77.92 min, 95%CI: 40.89-114.95, P < 0.0001) and had a smaller tumor size than those who underwent OPD [WMD = -0.32 cm, 95%CI: (-0.58, -0.07) cm, P = 0.01]. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the major morbidity, postoperative pancreatic fistula, delayed gastric emptying, postpancreatectomy hemorrhage, bile leak, gastroenteric anastomosis fistula, intra-abdominal abscess, bowel obstruction, fluid collection, reoperation, ICU admission, or 30-d and 90-d mortality rates. For malignant tumors, the 1-, 2-, 3-, 4- and 5-year overall survival rates were not significantly different between the two groups. CONCLUSION This meta-analysis indicates that TLPD is safe and feasible, and may be a desirable alternative to OPD, although a longer operative time is needed and only smaller tumors can be treated.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hua Zhang
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation Center, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan Province, China
| | - Xiang Lan
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation Center, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan Province, China
| | - Bing Peng
- Department of Pancreatic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan Province, China
| | - Bo Li
- Department of Liver Surgery and Liver Transplantation Center, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan Province, China
| |
Collapse
|