Laparoscopic vs open resection of pancreatic endocrine neoplasms: single institution’s experience over 14 years

Updated Meta-analysis of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Surgery for Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) with those of open pancreas surgery (OPS) for the treatment of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (pNENs).

METHODS

Studies reporting the effects of MIS and OPS for pNENs, published on PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library before May 2020 were reviewed.

RESULTS

Seventeen cohort studies with a total of 1853 patients were eligible for analysis, including 655 patients in the MIS group and 1198 patients in the OPS group. The estimated blood loss, postoperative hospitalization time, overall complications, severe complications, spleen preservation, mortality, and recurrence in the MIS group were lower than those in the OPS group. The R0 rate, 3-year overall survival (OS), and 5-year OS in the MIS group were higher than those in the OPS group. There were no significant differences in operative time, postoperative pancreatic fistula, clinical postoperative pancreatic fistula, postoperative bleeding, reoperation, readmission, and 1-year OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive surgery can reach lower recurrence rate, higher long-term survival rate, and better outcomes in terms of estimated blood loss, postoperative hospitalization time, R0 rate, mortality, overall complications, and severe complications for pNENs. More high quality studies need to be conducted for further verification.

Minimally invasive vs open pancreatectomy for nonfunctioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

BACKGROUND

The mainstay of treating nonfunctioning-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors(NF-PNETs) is surgical resection. However, minimally invasive approaches to pancreatic resection for treating NF-PNETs are not widely accepted, and the long-term oncological outcomes of such approaches remain unknown.

AIM

To determine the short- and long-term outcomes of minimally invasive pancreatic resection conducted in patients with NF-PNETs.

METHODS

Prospective databases from Severance Hospital were searched for 110 patients who underwent curative resection for NF-PNETs between January 2003 and August 2018.

RESULTS

The proportion of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) procedures performed for NF-PNET increased to more than 75% after 2013. There was no significant difference in post-operative complications (P = 0.654), including pancreatic fistula (P = 0.890) and delayed gastric emptying (P = 0.652), between MIS and open approaches. No statistically significant difference was found in disease-free survival between the open approach group and the MIS group (median follow-up period, 28.1 mo; P = 0.428). In addition, the surgical approach (MIS vs open) was not found to be an independent prognostic factor in treating NF-PNET patients [Exp(β) = 1.062; P = 0.929].

CONCLUSION

Regardless of the type of surgery, a minimally invasive approach can be safe and feasible for select NF-PNET patients.

Short-term and long-term outcomes after robot-assisted versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs): a multicenter comparative study

PURPOSE

Minimally invasive surgery has increasingly gained popularity as a treatment of choice for pancreatectomy with encouraging initial results in robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP). However, few data are available on the comparison between RDP and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs). Our aim, thus, is to compare perioperative and long-term outcomes as well as total costs of RDP and LDP for pNETs.

METHODS

All RDPs and LDPs for pNETs performed in four referral centers from 2008 to 2016 were included. Perioperative outcomes, histopathological results, overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), and total costs were evaluated.

RESULTS

Ninety-six RDPs and 85 LDPs were included. Demographic and clinical characteristics were comparable between the two cohorts. Operative time was 36.5 min longer in the RDP group (p = 0.009) but comparable to LDP after removing the docking time (247.9 vs 233.7 min; p = 0.6). LDP related to a lower spleen preservation rate (44.7% vs 65.3%; p < 0.0001) and higher blood loss (239.7 ± 112 vs 162.5 ± 98 cc; p < 0.0001). Advantages in operative time for RDP were documented in case of the spleen preservation procedures (265 ± 41.52 vs 291 ± 23 min; p = 0.04). Conversion rate, postoperative morbidity, and pancreatic fistula rate were similar between the two groups, as well as histopathological data, OS, and DFS. Significant advantages were evidenced for LDP regarding mean total costs (9235 (± 1935) € vs 11,226 (± 2365) €; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Both RDP and LDP are safe and efficacious for pNETs treatment. However, RDP offers advantages with a higher spleen preservation rate and lower blood loss. Costs still remain the main limitation of the robotic approach.

International Summit on Laparoscopic Pancreatic Resection (ISLPR) "Coimbatore Summit Statements"

The International Summit on Laparoscopic Pancreatic Resection (ISLPR) was held in Coimbatore, India, on 7th and 8th of October 2016 and thirty international experts who regularly perform laparoscopic pancreatic resections participated in ISPLR from four continents, i.e., South and North America, Europe and Asia. Prior to ISLPR, the first conversation among the experts was made online on August 26th, 2016 and the structures of ISPLR were developed. The aims of ISPLR were; i) to identify indications and optimal case selection criteria for minimally invasive pancreatic resection (MIPR) in the setting of both benign and malignant diseases; ii) standardization of techniques to increase the safety of MIPR; iii) identification of common problems faced during MIPR and developing associated management strategies; iv) development of clinical protocols to allow early identification of complications and develop the accompanying management plan to minimize morbidity and mortality. As a process for interactive discussion, the experts were requested to complete an online questionnaire consisting of 65 questions about the various technical aspects of laparoscopic pancreatic resections. Two further web-based meetings were conducted prior to ISPLR. Through further discussion during ISPLR, we have created productive statements regarding the topics of Disease, Implementation, Patients, Techniques, and Instrumentations (DIPTI) and hereby publish them as "Coimbatore Summit Statements".

Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for nonfunctioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a large single-center study

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) account for 1-2% of all pancreatic neoplasms. Nonfunctioning PNETs (NF-PNETs) account for 60-90% of all PNETs. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is becoming the treatment of choice for benign lesions in the body and tail of the pancreas. However, LDP has not yet been widely accepted as the gold standard for NF-PNETs. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical and oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) for NF-PNETs.

METHODS

Between April 1995 and September 2016, 94 patients with NF-PNETs underwent open or laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy at Samsung Medical Center. Patients were divided into two groups: those who underwent LDP and those who underwent ODP. Both groups were compared in terms of clinical and oncologic variables.

RESULTS

LDP patients had a significantly shorter hospital stay compared with ODP patients, amounting to a mean difference of 2 days (p < 0.001). Overall complication rates did not differ significantly between the ODP and LDP groups (p = 0.379). The 3-year overall survival rates in the ODP and LDP groups were 93.7 and 100%, respectively (p = 0.069).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, LDP for NF-PNETs had similar oncologic outcomes compared with ODP. In addition, LDP was associated with a shorter hospital stay compared with ODP. Therefore, LDP is a safe and effective procedure for patients with NF-PNETs. A multicenter study and a randomized controlled trial are needed to better assess the clinical and oncologic outcomes.

Systematic review and meta-analysis on laparoscopic pancreatic resections for neuroendocrine neoplasms (PNENs)

The safety of laparoscopic resections (LPS) of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (PNENs) has been well established in the literature. Areas covered: Studies conducted between January 2003 and December 2015 that reported on LPS and open surgery (OPS) were reviewed. The primary outcomes were the rate of post-operative complications and the length of hospital stay (LoS) after laparoscopic and open surgical resection. The rate of recurrence was the secondary outcome. Eleven studies were included with a total of 907 pancreatic resections for PNENs, of whom, 298 (32.8%) underwent LPS and 609 (67.2%) underwent open surgery. LPS resulted in a significantly shorter LoS (p < 0.0001) and lower blood loss (p < 0.0001). The meta-analysis did not show any significant difference in the pancreatic fistula rate, recurrence rate or post-operative mortality between the two groups. Expert commentary: LPS is a safe approach even for PNENs and it is associated with a shorter LoS.

Endovascular treatment of post-laparoscopic pancreatectomy splenic arteriovenous fistula with splenic vein aneurysm

Splenic arteriovenous fistulas (SAVFs) with splenic vein aneurysms are extremely rare entities. There have been no prior reports of SAVFs developing after laparoscopic pancreatectomy. Here, we report the first case. A 40-year-old man underwent a laparoscopic, spleen-preserving, distal pancreatectomy for an endocrine neoplasm of the pancreatic tail. Three months after surgery, a computed tomography (CT) scan demonstrated an SAVF with a dilated splenic vein. The SAVF, together with the splenic vein aneurysm, was successfully treated using percutaneous transarterial coil embolization of the splenic artery, including the SAVF and drainage vein. After the endovascular treatment, the patient’s recovery was uneventful. He was discharged on postoperative day 6 and continues to be well 3 mo after discharge. An abdominal CT scan performed at his 3-mo follow-up demonstrated complete thrombosis of the splenic vein aneurysm, which had decreased to a 40 mm diameter. This is the first reported case of SAVF following a laparoscopic pancreatectomy and demonstrates the usefulness of endovascular treatment for this type of complication.

Laparoscopic versus open pancreas resection for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Over the last decade laparoscopic pancreatic surgery (LPS) has emerged as an alternative to open pancreatic surgery (OPS) in selected patients with neuroendocrine tumours (NET) of the pancreas (PNET). Evidence on the safety and efficacy of LPS is available from non-comparative studies.

OBJECTIVES

This study was designed as a meta-analysis of studies which allow a comparison of LPS and OPS for resection of PNET.

METHODS

Studies conducted from 1994 to 2012 and reporting on LPS and OPS were reviewed. Studies considered were required to report on outcomes in more than 10 patients on at least one of the following: operative time; hospital length of stay (LoS); intraoperative blood loss; postoperative morbidity; pancreatic fistula rates, and mortality. Outcomes were compared using weighted mean differences and odds ratios.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included. These referred to 906 patients with PNET, of whom 22% underwent LPS and 78% underwent OPS. Laparoscopic pancreatic surgery was associated with a lower overall complication rate (38% in LPS versus 46% in OPS; P < 0.001). Blood loss and LoS were lower in LPS by 67 ml (P < 0.001) and 5 days (P < 0.001), respectively. There were no differences in rates of pancreatic fistula, operative time or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The nature of this meta-analysis is limited; nevertheless LPS for PNET appears to be safe and is associated with a reduced complication rate and shorter LoS than OPS.

Is laparoscopic approach for pancreatic insulinomas safe? Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

No consensus exists as to whether laparoscopic treatment for pancreatic insulinomas (PIs) is safe and feasible. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the feasibility, safety, and potential benefits of laparoscopic approach (LA) for PIs. The abovementioned approach is also compared with open surgery.

METHODS

A systematic literature search (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Science Citation Index, and Ovid journals) was performed to identify relevant articles. Articles that compare the use of LA and open approach to treat PI published on or before April 30, 2013, were included in the meta-analysis. The evaluated end points were operative outcomes, postoperative recovery, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Seven observational clinical studies that recruited a total of 452 patients were included. The rates of conversion from LA to open surgery ranged from 0%-41.3%. The meta-analysis revealed that LA for PIs is associated with reduced length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference, -5.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], -7.11 to -4.16; P < 0.00001). No significant difference was observed between LA and open surgery in terms of operation time (weighted mean difference, 2.57; 95% CI, -10.91 to 16.05; P = 0.71), postoperative mortality, overall morbidity (odds ratio [OR], 0.64; 95% CI, 0.35-1.17; P = 0.14], incidence of pancreatic fistula (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.51-1.44; P = 0.56), and recurrence of hyperglycemia (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 0.41-7.95; P = 0.43).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic treatment for PIs is a safe and feasible approach associated with reduction in length of hospital stay and comparable rates of postoperative complications in relation with open surgery.

200 consecutive laparoscopic pancreatic resections performed with a robotically controlled laparoscope holder

INTRODUCTION

Because of the potential benefit of robotics in pancreatic surgery, we review our experience at two minimally invasive pancreatic surgery centers that utilize a robotically controlled laparoscope holder to see if smaller robots that enable the operating surgeon to maintain contact with the patient may have a role in the treatment of pancreatic disease.

METHODS

From March 1994 to June 2011, a total of 200 laparoscopic pancreatic procedures utilizing a robotically controlled laparoscope holder were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 72 duodenopancreatectomies, 67 distal pancreatectomies, 23 enucleations, 20 pancreatic cyst drainage procedures, 5 necrosectomies, 5 atypical pancreatic resections, 4 total pancreatectomies, and 4 central pancreatectomies were performed. Fourteen patients required conversion to an open approach and eight a hand-assisted one. A total of 24 patients suffered a major complication. Sixteen patients developed a pancreatic leak and 19 patients required reoperation. Major complications occurred in 14 patients and pancreatic leaks occurred in 13 patients. Ten patients required conversion to a lap-assisted or open approach and six patients required reoperation.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, a robotically assisted approach using a camera holder seems the only way to incorporate some of the benefits of robotics in pancreatic surgery while maintaining haptics and contact with the patient.

Laparoscopic resection of pancreatic cystadenomas

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic pancreatic resections have become increasingly frequent with good results reported by several centers. However, few studies have focused on laparoscopic treatment of pancreatic cystic lesions.

AIM

To analyze the results of minimally invasive treatment of pancreatic cystic lesions.

METHODS

Were included all laparoscopic pancreatic resections performed at three centers. Surgical procedures included resection of the pancreas and left enucleations (with or without splenectomy). The post-operative complications were classified according to the classification proposed by Clavien and Dindo6. The diagnosis of pancreatic fistula was confirmed if the amylase dosage of the drainage liquid in the third postoperative day was more than three times the amount of serum amylase.

RESULTS

Were performed 44 laparoscopic pancreatic resections. Fifteen patients underwent surgery for suspected pancreatic cystadenoma and 13 had this diagnosis confirmed. There were 12 women (92%), and the average age of patients was 50 years. Six patients had minor postoperative complications. There were five (38%) pancreatic fistulas, neither considered as severe (C), and only one patient required hospital readmission and radiological drainage. In this series, there were no conversions, reoperations, or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The laparoscopic approach is a safe and effective option for the treatment of pancreatic cystic lesions. The incidence of pancreatic fistula has good evolution and not diminishes the benefits of minimally invasive surgery.

Laparoscopic minor pancreatic resections (enucleations/atypical resections). A long-term appraisal of a supposed mini-invasive approach

INTRODUCTION

A few retrospective, small, often multicentric studies show encouraging results of laparoscopic minor pancreatic surgery, but do not allow for an evaluation of feasibility and effectiveness.

AIM

Evaluation of the results of laparoscopic minor pancreatic resections (LMPR), including atypical resections and enucleations.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The outcome of all consecutive patients undergoing LMPR in a tertiary care university hospital specializing in the laparoscopic approach to solid organs (I.M.M., Paris - France) was retrospectively evaluated by the analysis of operating time, blood loss, conversion, morbidity, stay and late outcome.

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients underwent LMPR (29 enucleations and 4 atypical resections) for various diseases. The conversion rate was 21%, mean operating time 189 min, and mean blood loss 133 ml. Morbidity was 60%; 10 patients (30%) presented a pancreatic fistula. Pancreatic fistula was independent of type of resection, technique of pancreas section, management of enucleated surface and somatostatin administration. Median stay for enucleations was 18 days. Mean follow-up was 61 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic pancreatic enucleation is feasible and safe, with no mortality, no lengthening of operating time and a high success rate. Conversely, it does not imply a reduction in complications or hospital stay at the present state of the art.

Minimalinvasive Chirurgie bei Malignomen des Gastrointestinaltrakts: Pankreas - Kontra-Position

<b><i>Hintergrund: </i></b>Für eine Vielzahl von Erkrankungen der Bauchspeicheldrüse gilt die chirurgische Resektion als die Therapie der Wahl. In den vergangenen Jahren wurden die offenen Operationsmethoden für Pankreaserkrankungen zunehmend standardisiert und können mittlerweile mit hoher Sicherheit durchgeführt werden. Unabhängig davon wird zunehmend über laparoskopische Pankreasresektionen berichtet. <b><i>Methode: </i></b>In diesem Artikel stellen wir die aktuelle Literatur zur minimalinvasiven Chirurgie der Bauchspeicheldrüse vor, um sie mit offenen Operationsverfahren zu vergleichen. Besondere Berücksichtigung finden laparoskopische und roboterassistierte Duodenopankreatektomien sowie laparoskopische Pankreasschwanzresektionen bei Patienten mit chronischer Pankreatitis sowie mit gutartigen und bösartigen Tumoren. <b><i>Ergebnisse: </i></b>Laparoskopische und roboterassistierte Pankreaskopfresektionen sollten nur in ausgewählten Fällen angewandt werden und gelten als technisch äußerst anspruchsvoll - mit einer erhöhten Inzidenz von Pankreasfisteln. Laparoskopische Pankreasschwanzresektionen sind sichere Verfahren mit einem Trend zu einer kürzeren Krankenhausaufenthaltsdauer, sollten jedoch nur für gutartige Tumoren in Betracht gezogen werden. Im Rahmen der onkologischen Chirurgie sollte die offene Pankreasresektion bevorzugt werden. Werden onkologische Eingriffe laparoskopisch durchgeführt, ist eine ausgezeichnete präoperative Diagnostik und gegebenenfalls der Einsatz eines intraoperativen laparoskopischen Ultraschalls notwendig. <b><i>Schlussfolgerungen: </i></b>Obwohl laparoskopische Pankreasresektionen in ausgewählten Fällen von Nutzen sein können, werden sie zukünftig wohl eher die Ausnahme darstellen. Eine allgemeine Umstellung auf laparoskopische Pankreasschwanzresektionen wird aufgrund des Mangels an eindeutigen Vorteilen gegenüber dem offenen Verfahren höchstwahrscheinlich nicht stattfinden.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for solid and cystic pancreatic neoplasms: outpatient postoperative management

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is a challenging procedure that has been reported in the last decade. The aim of this study is to describe our experience with laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and an outpatient postoperative management after an early hospital discharge.

METHODS

Retrospective study of 11 laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies carried out at our institution between November 2005 and June 2007 for cystic and solid pancreatic neoplasms. Mean age was 55.5 years and 10 patients were females. A splenopancreatectomy was carried out in 9 cases, and a spleen-preserving resection was carried out in 2 cases.

RESULTS

Mean blood loss was 73.6 mL and mean operative time was 238.3 minutes. Patients were able to tolerate regular diet after a mean of 1.2 days and were discharged with a drain after a mean of 2.3 days. Two patients developed a mild pancreatic fistula that resolved with conservative management. One patient developed a pancreatic pseudocyst that was followed up with an MRI.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is feasible with a fast postoperative recovery. We recommend close follow-up of the patient in the outpatient clinic and maintaining the intraabdominal drain until a pancreatic fistula can be ruled out based on biochemical analysis of the fluid.

Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy: a review of 285 published cases

BACKGROUND

Given the difficulty level of minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD), limited data exist for a comparison to open pancreatoduodenectomies. As the technique becomes more diffuse, issues regarding the adequacy of oncologic margins and lymph node retrieval need to be addressed.

METHODS

All published cases of MIPD were examined. Variables analyzed included conversion rates, operating room time, estimated blood loss, length of stay, follow-up, complications, mortality, lymph node retrieval, and margins.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven articles describing outcomes after MIPD were found, and a total of 285 cases were described. Main malignancy treated was pancreatic adenocarcinoma, accounting for 32% of all cases. Eighty-seven percent were performed totally laparoscopically, and 13% were performed with a hand-assisted approach to facilitate the reconstruction step of the procedure. The rate of conversion to an open procedure was 9%. Estimated blood loss had a weighted average (WA) of 189 mL. Average length of stay had a WA of 12 days, and average follow-up had a WA of 14 months. The overall complication rate was 48%, and the overall mortality rate was 2%. Average lymph nodes retrieved ranged from 7 to 36 nodes, with a WA of 15 nodes, and positive margins of resection were reported to be positive in 0.4% of patients with malignant disease.

CONCLUSIONS

This review found similar outcomes with respect to perioperative morbidity and mortality rates compared to open pancreatoduodenectomies. The oncologic goals of pancreatic resection may be able to be achieved by MIPD, but longer follow-up and larger series are still needed.

The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The lack of consensus on how to define and grade adverse postoperative events has greatly hampered the evaluation of surgical procedures. A new classification of complications, initiated in 1992, was updated 5 years ago. It is based on the type of therapy needed to correct the complication. The principle of the classification was to be simple, reproducible, flexible, and applicable irrespective of the cultural background. The aim of the current study was to critically evaluate this classification from the perspective of its use in the literature, by assessing interobserver variability in grading complex complication scenarios and to correlate the classification grades with patients', nurses', and doctors' perception.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Reports from the literature using the classification system were systematically analyzed. Next, 11 scenarios illustrating difficult cases were prepared to develop a consensus on how to rank the various complications. Third, 7 centers from different continents, having routinely used the classification, independently assessed the 11 scenarios. An agreement analysis was performed to test the accuracy and reliability of the classification. Finally, the perception of the severity was tested in patients, nurses, and physicians by presenting 30 scenarios, each illustrating a specific grade of complication.

RESULTS

We noted a dramatic increase in the use of the classification in many fields of surgery. About half of the studies used the contracted form, whereas the rest used the full range of grading. Two-thirds of the publications avoided subjective terms such as minor or major complications. The study of 11 difficult cases among various centers revealed a high degree of agreement in identifying and ranking complications (89% agreement), and enabled a better definition of unclear situations. Each grade of complications significantly correlated with the perception by patients, nurses, and physicians (P < 0.05, Kruskal-Wallis test).

CONCLUSIONS

This 5-year evaluation provides strong evidence that the classification is valid and applicable worldwide in many fields of surgery. No modification in the general principle of classification is warranted in view of the use in ongoing publications and trials. Subjective, inaccurate, or confusing terms such as "minor or major" should be removed from the surgical literature.

Surgical strategies for treatment of malignant pancreatic tumors: extended, standard or local surgery?

Tumor related pancreatic surgery has progressed significantly during recent years. Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) with lymphadenectomy, including vascular resection, still presents the optimal surgical procedure for carcinomas in the head of pancreas. For patients with small or low-grade malignant neoplasms, as well as small pancreatic metastases located in the mid-portion of pancreas, central pancreatectomy (CP) is emerging as a safe and effective option with a low risk of developing de-novo exocrine and/or endocrine insufficiency. Total pancreatectomy (TP) is not as risky as it was years ago and can nowadays safely be performed, but its indication is limited to locally extended tumors that cannot be removed by PD or distal pancreatectomy (DP) with tumor free surgical margins. Consequently, TP has not been adopted as a routine procedure by most surgeons. On the other hand, an aggressive attitude is required in case of advanced distal pancreatic tumors, provided that safe and experienced surgery is available. Due to the development of modern instruments, laparoscopic operations became more and more successful, even in malignant pancreatic diseases. This review summarizes the recent literature on the above mentioned topics.