Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy in elderly patients

EAES/SAGES evidence-based recommendations and expert consensus on optimization of perioperative care in older adults

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.

Short‑ and long‑term outcomes after laparoscopic and open pancreatoduodenectomy for elderly patients: a propensity score‑matched study

BACKGROUND

The feasibility and safety of laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) in elderly patients is still controversial. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of LPD and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) in elderly patients.

METHODS

Clinical and follow-up data of elderly patients (≥ 65 years) who underwent LPD or OPD between 2015 and 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. A 1:1 propensity score-matching (PSM) analysis was performed to minimize differences between groups. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis were used to select independent prognostic factors for 90-day mortality.

RESULTS

Of the 410 elderly patients, 236 underwent LPD and 174 OPD. After PSM, the LPD group had a less estimated blood loss (EBL) (100 vs. 200 mL, P < 0.001), lower rates of intraoperative transfusion (10.4% vs. 19.0%, P = 0.029), more lymph node harvest (11.0 vs. 10.0, P = 0.014) and shorter postoperative length of stay (LOS) (13.0 vs. 16.0 days, P = 0.013). There were no significant differences in serious complications, reoperation, 90-day readmission and mortality rates (all P > 0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH) was an independent risk factor for 90-day mortality. Elderly patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) who underwent LPD or OPD had similar overall survival (OS) (22.5 vs.20.4 months, P = 0.672) after PSM.

CONCLUSIONS

It is safe and feasible for elderly patients to undergo LPD with less EBL and a shorter postoperative LOS. There was no statistically significant difference in long-term survival outcomes between elderly PDAC patients who underwent LPD or OPD.

The efficacy and safety of pure laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in super-elderly patients over 80 years: A multicenter propensity analysis

BACKGROUND

Very few reports have evaluated the safety of laparoscopic liver resection in super-elderly patients. We assessed the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma aged ≥80 years, using propensity score matching.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the data of 287 patients (aged ≥80 years) who underwent liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma at eight hospitals belonging to Hiroshima Surgical study group of Clinical Oncology, between January 2012 and December 2021. The perioperative outcomes were compared between laparoscopic and open liver resection, using propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Of the 287 patients, 83 and 204 were included in the laparoscopic and open liver resection groups, respectively. Propensity score matching was performed, and 52 patients were included in each group. The operation (p = .68) and pringle maneuver (p = .11) time were not different between the groups. There were no significant differences in the incidences of bile leakage or organ failure. The laparoscopic liver resection group had significantly less intraoperative bleeding and a lower incidence of cardiopulmonary complications (both p < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic liver resection can be safely performed in elderly patients aged ≥80 years.

Minimally Invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy in Elderly versus Younger Patients: A Meta-Analysis

(1) Background: With ageing, the number of pancreaticoduodenectomies (PD) for benign or malignant disease is expected to increase in elderly patients. However, whether minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) should be performed in the elderly is not clear yet and it is still debated. (2) Materials and Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted including seven published articles comparing the technical and post-operative outcomes of MIPD in elderly versus younger patients up to December 2022. (3) Results: In total, 1378 patients were included in the meta-analysis. In term of overall and Clavien-Dindo I/II complication rates, post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) grade > A rates and biliary leakage, abdominal collection, post-operative bleeding and delayed gastric emptying rates, no differences emerged between the two groups. However, this study showed slightly higher intraoperative blood loss [MD 43.41, (95%CI 14.45, 72.38) p = 0.003], Clavien-Dindo ≥ III complication rates [OR 1.87, (95%CI 1.13, 3.11) p = 0.02] and mortality rates [OR 2.61, (95%CI 1.20, 5.68) p = 0.02] in the elderly compared with the younger group. Interestingly, as a minor endpoint, no differences in terms of the mean number of harvested lymphnode and of R0 resection rates were found. (4) Conclusion: MIPD seems to be relatively safe; however, there are slightly higher major morbidity, lung complication and mortality rates in elderly patients, who potentially represent the individuals that may benefit the most from the minimally invasive approach.

Safety and feasibility of robotic surgery for old rectal cancer patients

Robotic surgery is widely utilized for rectal cancer. Older patients are associated with comorbidity and diminished cardiopulmonary reserve, resulting in uncertainty and reluctance to perform robotic surgery in older patients. The aim of the study was to assess the safety and feasibility of robotic surgery in older rectal cancer patients. We collected the data of patients diagnosed with rectal cancer and operated at our hospital from May 2015 to January 2021. All patients undergoing robotic surgery were classified into two groups: the old group (≥ 70 years) and young group (< 70 years). Perioperative outcomes were analyzed and compared between the two groups. Risk factors related to postoperative complications were also explored. A total of old N = 114 and young N = 324 rectal patients were enrolled in our study. Older patients were prone to exhibit comorbidity than the young and had lower body mass index and higher scores of American Society of Anesthesiologists than the young. No statistical difference was found in operative time, estimated blood loss, lymph nodes retrieved, tumor size, pathological TNM stage, hospital stay after surgery and total hospital cost between the two groups. The incidence of postoperative complications did not show difference between the two groups. On multivariate analyses, male sex and longer operative time could predict postoperative complications, whereas old age was not an independent factor for postoperative complications. After careful preoperative evaluation, robotic surgery is a technically feasible and safe procedure for older rectal cancer patients.

Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: Analysis of surgical outcomes and long-term prognosis in a high-volume center

BACKGROUND

Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) has been reported to be safe and feasible for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) of the pancreatic head. This study aimed to analyze the surgical outcomes and risk factors for poor long-term prognosis of these patients.

METHODS

Data from patients who underwent RPD for PDAC of pancreatic head were retrospectively analyzed. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to seek the independent prognostic factors for overall survival (OS), and an online nomogram calculator was developed based on the independent prognostic factors.

RESULTS

Of the 273 patients who met the inclusion criteria, the median operative time was 280.0 minutes, the estimated blood loss was 100.0 mL, the median OS was 23.6 months, and the median recurrence-free survival (RFS) was 14.4 months. Multivariate analysis showed that preoperative carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.607, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.560-4.354, P < 0.001], lymph node metastasis (HR = 1.429, 95% CI: 1.005-2.034, P = 0.047), tumor moderately (HR = 3.190, 95% CI: 1.813-5.614, P < 0.001) or poorly differentiated (HR = 5.114, 95% CI: 2.839-9.212, P < 0.001), and Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III (HR = 1.657, 95% CI: 1.079-2.546, P = 0.021) were independent prognostic factors for OS. The concordance index (C-index) of the nomogram constructed based on the above four independent prognostic factors was 0.685 (95% CI: 0.640-0.729), which was significantly higher than that of the AJCC staging (8th edition): 0.541 (95% CI: 0.493-0.589) (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This large-scale study indicated that RPD was feasible for PDAC of pancreatic head. Preoperative CA19-9, lymph node metastasis, tumor poorly differentiated, and Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III were independent prognostic factors for OS. The online nomogram calculator could predict the OS of these patients in a simple and convenient manner.

Laparoscopic Pancreatoduodenectomy in Elderly Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

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.

Comparison of safety and effectiveness between laparoscopic and open pancreatoduodenectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Validity of the laparoscopic approach in pancreatic head lesion remains debatable. This study aims to compare the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) and investigate the source of heterogeneity from surgeons' and patients' perspectives.

METHOD

We searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science for studies published before February 1, 2021. Of 6578 articles, 81 were full-text reviewed. The primary outcome was mortality. Three independent reviewers screened and extracted the data and resolved disagreements by consensus. Studies were evaluated for quality using ROB2.0 and ROBINS-I. According to different study designs, sensitivity and meta-regression analyses were conducted to explore the heterogeneity source. This meta-analyses was also conducted to explore the learning curve's heterogeneity. This study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021234579.

RESULTS

We analyzed 34 studies involving 46,729 patients (4705 LPD and 42,024 OPD). LPD was associated with lower (P = 0.025) in unmatched studies (P = 0.017). No differences in mortality existed in randomized controlled trials (P = 0.854) and matched studies (P = 0.726). Sensitivity analysis found no significant difference in mortality in elderly patients, patients with pancreatic cancer, and in high- and low-volume hospitals (all P > 0.05). In studies at the early period of LPD (<40 cases), higher mortality (P < 0.001) was found (all P < 0.05).LPD showed non-inferiority in length of stay, complications, and survival outcomes in all analyses.

CONCLUSION

In high-volume centers with adequate surgical experience, LPD in selected patients appears to be a valid alternative to LPD with comparable mortality, LOS, complications, and survival outcomes.

Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy in Elderly Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

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.

Safety and feasibility of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy in octogenarians

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.

Effect of Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy in Elderly People: A Meta-analysis

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.

Short-term outcomes after minimally invasive versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy in elderly patients: a propensity score-matched analysis

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.

Minimally Invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy in Elderly Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

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.

The Effect of Age on Short- and Long-Term Outcomes in Patients With Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Undergoing Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy

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.

Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy in elderly and younger patients: A retrospective cohort study

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.

International expert consensus on laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy

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.

Laparoscopic vs. open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a comparative study in elderly people

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.