Laparoscopic Versus Open Pancreatoduodenectomy in Patients With Periampullary Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Laparoscopic Versus Open Pancreatoduodenectomy for Periampullary Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) has emerged as an alternative to open technique in treating periampullary tumors. However, the safety and efficacy of LPD compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) remain unclear. Thus, we conducted an updated meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LPD versus OPD in patients with periampullary tumors, with a particular focus on the pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patient subgroup.

METHODS

According to PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library in December 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that directly compare LPD versus OPD in patients with periampullary tumors. Endpoints and sensitive analysis were conducted for short-term endpoints. All statistical analysis was performed using R software version 4.3.1 with a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Five RCTs yielding 1018 patients with periampullary tumors were included, of whom 511 (50.2%) were randomized to the LPD group. Total follow-up time was 90 days. LPD was associated with a longer operation time (MD 66.75; 95% CI 26.59 to 106.92; p = 0.001; I2 = 87%; Fig. 1A), lower intraoperative blood loss (MD - 124.05; 95% CI - 178.56 to - 69.53; p < 0.001; I2 = 86%; Fig. 1B), and shorter length of stay (MD - 1.37; 95% IC - 2.31 to - 0.43; p = 0.004; I2 = 14%; Fig. 1C) as compared with OPD. In terms of 90-day mortality rates and number of lymph nodes yield, no significant differences were found between both groups.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis of RCTs suggests that LPD is an effective and safe alternative for patients with periampullary tumors, with lower intraoperative blood loss and shorter length of stay.

Extended pancreatic neck transection versus conventional pancreatic neck transection during laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPDEXCEPT): protocol for a multicentre superiority randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains one of the most severe complications of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD). Theoretically, transecting the pancreatic neck more distally has both advantages (more blood supply, and more central pancreatic duct) and disadvantages (maybe smaller the pancreatic duct) in preventing POPF. This theoretical contradiction pushed us to organise this trial to explore the impact of the level of pancreatic transection in clinical practice. We conduct this randomised trial with the hypothesis that extended pancreatic neck transection has superiority to conventional pancreatic neck transection.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The LPDEXCEPT (Extended pancreatic neck transection versus conventional pancreatic neck transection during laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy) trial is a multicentre, randomised-controlled, open-label, superiority trial in 4 centres whose annual surgical volume for LPD is more than 25 cases with pancreatic surgeons who had completed their learning curve. A total of 154 patients who meet the inclusive and exclusive criteria are randomly allocated to the extended pancreatic neck transection group or conventional pancreatic neck transection group in a 1:1 ratio. The stratified randomised block design will be applied, with stratified factors are surgical centre and the diameter of the main pancreatic duct measured by preoperative CT scan (preMPD). The primary outcome is the incidence of the clinically relevant pancreatic fistula.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics Committee on Biomedical Research of West China Hospital of Sichuan University has approved this trial in March 2023 (approval no. 2023-167). Results of this trial will be published in peer-reviewed journals and conference proceedings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05808894.

Impact of Unplanned Intra-Operative Conversions on Outcomes in Minimally Invasive Pancreatoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Minimally-invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) is fraught with the risk of complication-related deaths (LEOPARD-2), a significant volume-outcome relationship and a long learning curve. With rates of conversion for MIPD approaching 40%, the impact of these on overall patient outcomes, especially, when unplanned, are yet to be fully elucidated. This study aimed to compare peri-operative outcomes of (unplanned) converted MIPD against both successfully completed MIPD and upfront open PD.

METHODS

A systematic review of major reference databases was undertaken. The primary outcome of interest was 30-day mortality. Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to judge the quality of the studies. Meta-analysis was performed using pooled estimates, derived using random effects model.

RESULTS

Six studies involving 20,267 patients were included in the review. Pooled analysis demonstrated (unplanned) converted MIPD were associated with an increased 30-day (RR 2.83, CI 1.62- 4.93, p = 0.0002, I2 = 0%) and 90-day (RR 1.81, CI 1.16- 2.82, p = 0.009, I2 = 28%) mortality and overall morbidity (RR 1.41, CI 1.09; 1.82, p = 0.0087, I2 = 82%) compared to successfully completed MIPD. Patients undergoing (unplanned) converted MIPD experienced significantly higher 30-day mortality (RR 3.97, CI 2.07; 7.65, p < 0.0001, I2 = 0%), pancreatic fistula (RR 1.65, CI 1.22- 2.23, p = 0.001, I2 = 0%) and re-exploration rates (RR 1.96, CI 1.17- 3.28, p = 0.01, I2 = 37%) compared upfront open PD.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient outcomes are significantly compromised following unplanned intraoperative conversions of MIPD when compared to successfully completed MIPD and upfront open PD. These findings stress the need for objective evidence-based guidelines for patient selection for MIPD.