1
|
Zhun Hong Wong N, Wei Ting Yap D, Lei Ng S, Yu Ning Ng J, James JJ, Wei Chieh Kow A. Oncological outcomes in minimally invasive vs. open distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Front Surg 2024; 11:1369169. [PMID: 38933652 PMCID: PMC11203400 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2024.1369169] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2024] [Accepted: 05/08/2024] [Indexed: 06/28/2024] Open
Abstract
Background Advancements in surgical techniques have improved outcomes in patients undergoing pancreatic surgery. To date there have been no meta-analyses comparing robotic and laparoscopic approaches for distal pancreatectomies (DP) in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to explore the oncological outcomes of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP), robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) and open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). Methods A systematic search was conducted for studies reporting laparoscopic, robotic or open surgery for DP. Frequentist network meta-analysis of oncological outcomes (overall survival, resection margins, tumor recurrence, examined lymph nodes, administration of adjuvant therapy) were performed. Results Fifteen studies totalling 9,301 patients were included in the network meta-analysis. 1,946, 605 and 6,750 patients underwent LDP, RDP and ODP respectively. LDP (HR: 0.761, 95% CI: 0.642-0.901, p = 0.002) and RDP (HR: 0.757, 95% CI: 0.617-0.928, p = 0.008) were associated with overall survival (OS) benefit when compared to ODP. LDP (HR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.793-1.27, p = 0.968) was not associated with OS benefit when compared to RDP. There were no significant differences between LDP, RDP and ODP for resection margins, tumor recurrence, examined lymph nodes and administration of adjuvant therapy. Conclusion This study highlights the longer OS in both LDP and RDP when compared to ODP for patients with PDAC. Systematic Review Registration https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/, PROSPERO (CRD42022336417).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicky Zhun Hong Wong
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Dominic Wei Ting Yap
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Sherryl Lei Ng
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Junie Yu Ning Ng
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Juanita Jaslin James
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Alfred Wei Chieh Kow
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
- National University Centre for Organ Transplantation, National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, National University Hospital Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Annabi HM, Adhikari PB, Davis CH. The current status of minimally invasive pancreatectomy and implications of the Brescia guidelines. Gland Surg 2024; 13:590-595. [PMID: 38720679 PMCID: PMC11074655 DOI: 10.21037/gs-23-508] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/12/2023] [Accepted: 03/13/2024] [Indexed: 05/12/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Hani M. Annabi
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | | | - Catherine H. Davis
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
- Texas A&M University School of Medicine, Dallas, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Surendran AK, Girish S, Vijayakumar C. Laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy: Outcomes and the need for patient-centred evaluation. Cir Esp 2024; 102:237-238. [PMID: 38278213 DOI: 10.1016/j.cireng.2024.01.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/20/2023] [Accepted: 01/02/2024] [Indexed: 01/28/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Adwaith Krishna Surendran
- Medical Student, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry, India.
| | - Srisanjith Girish
- Medical Student, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry, India
| | - Chellappa Vijayakumar
- Department of Surgery, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry, India
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Acciuffi S, Hilal MA, Ferrari C, Al-Madhi S, Chouillard MA, Messaoudi N, Croner RS, Gumbs AA. Study International Multicentric Pancreatic Left Resections (SIMPLR): Does Surgical Approach Matter? Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:1051. [PMID: 38473411 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16051051] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2023] [Revised: 02/21/2024] [Accepted: 02/24/2024] [Indexed: 03/14/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Minimally invasive surgery is increasingly preferred for left-sided pancreatic resections. The SIMPLR study aims to compare open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches using propensity score matching analysis. METHODS This study included 258 patients with tumors of the left side of the pancreas who underwent surgery between 2016 and 2020 at three high-volume centers. The patients were divided into three groups based on their surgical approach and matched in a 1:1 ratio. RESULTS The open group had significantly higher estimated blood loss (620 mL vs. 320 mL, p < 0.001), longer operative time (273 vs. 216 min, p = 0.003), and longer hospital stays (16.9 vs. 6.81 days, p < 0.001) compared to the laparoscopic group. There was no difference in lymph node yield or resection status. When comparing open and robotic groups, the robotic procedures yielded a higher number of lymph nodes (24.9 vs. 15.2, p = 0.011) without being significantly longer. The laparoscopic group had a shorter operative time (210 vs. 340 min, p < 0.001), shorter ICU stays (0.63 vs. 1.64 days, p < 0.001), and shorter hospital stays (6.61 vs. 11.8 days, p < 0.001) when compared to the robotic group. There was no difference in morbidity or mortality between the three techniques. CONCLUSION The laparoscopic approach exhibits short-term benefits. The three techniques are equivalent in terms of oncological safety, morbidity, and mortality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sara Acciuffi
- Department of General-, Visceral-, Vascular- and Transplantation Surgery, University of Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany
| | - Mohammed Abu Hilal
- Hepatobiliopancreatic, Robotic and Minimally Invasive Surgery Unit, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Via Bissolati 57, 25124 Brescia, Italy
| | - Clarissa Ferrari
- Research and Clinical Trials Office, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Via Bissolati 57, 25124 Brescia, Italy
| | - Sara Al-Madhi
- Department of General-, Visceral-, Vascular- and Transplantation Surgery, University of Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany
| | - Marc-Anthony Chouillard
- Hepatobiliopancreatic Surgery, Université de Paris Cité, 85 boulevard Saint-Germain, 75006 Paris, France
| | - Nouredin Messaoudi
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel and Europe Hospitals, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090 Brussels, Belgium
| | - Roland S Croner
- Department of General-, Visceral-, Vascular- and Transplantation Surgery, University of Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany
| | - Andrew A Gumbs
- Department of General-, Visceral-, Vascular- and Transplantation Surgery, University of Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120 Magdeburg, Germany
- Department of Advanced & Minimally Invasive Surgery, American Hospital of Tbilisi, 17 Ushangi Chkheidze Street, Tbilisi 0102, Georgia
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Huang JM, Chen SH, Chen TH. Short-Term Outcomes of Conventional Laparoscopic versus Robot-Assisted Distal Pancreatectomy for Malignancy: Evidence from US National Inpatient Sample, 2005-2018. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:1003. [PMID: 38473361 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16051003] [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: 01/15/2024] [Revised: 02/20/2024] [Accepted: 02/23/2024] [Indexed: 03/14/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The primary treatment for pancreatic cancer is surgical resection, and laparoscopic resection offers benefits over open surgery. This study aimed to compare the short-term outcomes of robot-assisted vs. conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. METHODS Data of adults ≥ 20 years old with pancreatic cancer who underwent conventional laparoscopic or robot-assisted laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy were extracted from the United States (US) Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) 2005-2018 database. Comorbidities and complications were identified through the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes. Short-term outcomes were compared using logistic regression and included length of hospital stay (LOS), perioperative complications, in-hospital mortality, unfavorable discharge, and total hospital costs. RESULTS A total of 886 patients were included; 27% received robot-assisted, and 73% received conventional laparoscopic surgery. The mean age of all patients was 65.3 years, and 52% were females. Multivariable analysis revealed that robot-assisted surgery was associated with a significantly reduced risk of perioperative complications (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.45-0.83) compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery. Specifically, robot-assisted surgery was associated with a significantly decreased risk of VTE (aOR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.14-0.83) and postoperative blood transfusion (aOR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.23-0.61). Robot-assisted surgery was associated with a significantly shorter LOS (0.76 days shorter, 95% CI: -1.43--0.09) but greater total hospital costs (18,284 USD greater, 95% CI: 4369.03-32,200.70) than conventional laparoscopic surgery. CONCLUSIONS Despite the higher costs, robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy is associated with decreased risk of complications and shorter hospital stays than conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jyun-Ming Huang
- Department of Surgery, China Medical University Hospital, No. 2, Yude Rd., North Dist., Taichung City 404327, Taiwan
- School of Medicine, China Medical University, No. 2, Yude Rd., North Dist., Taichung City 404, Taiwan
| | - Sheng-Hsien Chen
- Department of Surgery, China Medical University Hospital, No. 2, Yude Rd., North Dist., Taichung City 404327, Taiwan
- School of Medicine, China Medical University, No. 2, Yude Rd., North Dist., Taichung City 404, Taiwan
| | - Te-Hung Chen
- Department of Surgery, China Medical University Hospital, No. 2, Yude Rd., North Dist., Taichung City 404327, Taiwan
- School of Medicine, China Medical University, No. 2, Yude Rd., North Dist., Taichung City 404, Taiwan
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Liu R, Abu Hilal M, Besselink MG, Hackert T, Palanivelu C, Zhao Y, He J, Boggi U, Jang JY, Panaro F, Goh BKP, Efanov M, Nagakawa Y, Kim HJ, Yin X, Zhao Z, Shyr YM, Iyer S, Kakiashvili E, Han HS, Lee JH, Croner R, Wang SE, Marino MV, Prasad A, Wang W, He S, Yang K, Liu Q, Wang Z, Li M, Xu S, Wei K, Deng Z, Jia Y, van Ramshorst TME. International consensus guidelines on robotic pancreatic surgery in 2023. Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr 2024; 13:89-104. [PMID: 38322212 PMCID: PMC10839730 DOI: 10.21037/hbsn-23-132] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2023] [Accepted: 11/10/2023] [Indexed: 02/08/2024]
Abstract
Background With the rapid development of robotic surgery, especially for the abdominal surgery, robotic pancreatic surgery (RPS) has been applied increasingly around the world. However, evidence-based guidelines regarding its application, safety, and efficacy are still lacking. To harvest robust evidence and comprehensive clinical practice, this study aims to develop international guidelines on the use of RPS. Methods World Health Organization (WHO) Handbook for Guideline Development, GRADE Grid method, Delphi vote, and the AGREE-II instrument were used to establish the Guideline Steering Group, Guideline Development Group, and Guideline Secretary Group, formulate 19 clinical questions, develop the recommendations, and draft the guidelines. Three online meetings were held on 04/12/2020, 30/11/2021, and 25/01/2022 to vote on the recommendations and get advice and suggestions from all involved experts. All the experts focusing on minimally invasive surgery from America, Europe and Oceania made great contributions to this consensus guideline. Results After a systematic literature review 176 studies were included, 19 questions were addressed and 14 recommendations were developed through the expert assessment and comprehensive judgment of the quality and credibility of the evidence. Conclusions The international RPS guidelines can guide current practice for surgeons, patients, medical societies, hospital administrators, and related social communities. Further randomized trials are required to determine the added value of RPS as compared to open and laparoscopic surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rong Liu
- Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Medical Center of Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Mohammed Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Poliambulanza Foundation Hospital, Brescia, Italy
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - Marc G. Besselink
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Thilo Hackert
- Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Chinnusamy Palanivelu
- Department of Minimal Invasive Hernia Surgery, GEM Hospital and Research Centre, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - Yupei Zhao
- Department of General Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital Beijing, Beijing, China
| | - Jin He
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Ugo Boggi
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Jin-Young Jang
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Fabrizio Panaro
- Department of Surgery/Division of HBP Surgery & Transplantation, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France
| | - Brian K. P. Goh
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital and National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore
| | - Mikhail Efanov
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Moscow Clinical Scientific Center, Moscow, Russia
| | - Yuichi Nagakawa
- Department of Gastrointestinal and Pediatric Surgery, Tokyo Medical University, Shinjuku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Hong-Jin Kim
- Department of Surgery, Yeungnam University College of Medicine, Daegu, Korea
| | - Xiaoyu Yin
- Department of Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Zhiming Zhao
- Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Medical Center of Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Yi-Ming Shyr
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei
| | - Shridhar Iyer
- Division of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic Surgery and Liver Transplantation, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Eli Kakiashvili
- Department of Surgery, Galilee Medical Center, Nahariya, Israel
| | - Ho-Seong Han
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam-si, Korea
| | - Jae Hoon Lee
- Division of Hepato-Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Roland Croner
- Department of General-, Vascular-, Visceral- and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
| | - Shin-E Wang
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei
| | - Marco Vito Marino
- General Surgery Department, Azienda Ospedaliera Ospedali Riuniti Villa Sofia-Cervello, Palermo, Italy
| | - Arun Prasad
- Department of General and Minimal Access Surgery and Robotic Surgery, Indraprastha Apollo Hospitals, New Delhi, India
| | - Wei Wang
- Department of Pancreatic Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China
| | - Songqing He
- Division of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, China
| | - Kehu Yang
- EvidenceBased Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
| | - Qu Liu
- Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Medical Center of Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Zizheng Wang
- Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Medical Center of Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Mengyang Li
- Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Medical Center of Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Shuai Xu
- Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Medical Center of Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Kongyuan Wei
- Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Medical Center of Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Zhaoda Deng
- Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Medical Center of Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Yuze Jia
- Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Medical Center of Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Tess M. E. van Ramshorst
- Department of Surgery, Poliambulanza Foundation Hospital, Brescia, Italy
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Chen H, Weng Y, Zhao S, Wang W, Ji Y, Peng C, Deng X, Shen B. Robotic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy in patients with pancreatic duct adenocarcinoma after the learning curve: a propensity score-matched analysis. Surg Endosc 2024; 38:821-829. [PMID: 38066192 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-023-10530-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2023] [Accepted: 10/12/2023] [Indexed: 02/02/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Studies have demonstrated that the learning curve plays an important role in robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD). Although improved short-term outcomes of RPD after the learning curve have been reported compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD), there is a lack of long-term survival analyses. METHODS Patients who underwent curative intended RPD and OPD for pancreatic duct adenocarcinoma (PDAC) between January 2017 and June 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. A 1:2 propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to balance the baseline characteristics between the RPD and OPD groups. RESULTS Of the 548 patients (108 RPD and 440 OPD), 103 RPD patients were matched with 206 OPD patients after PSM. There were 194 (62.8%) men and 115 (37.2%) women, with a median age of 64 (58-69) years. The median overall survival (OS) in the RPD group was 33.2 months compared with 25.7 months in the OPD group (p = 0.058, log-rank). The median disease-free survival (DFS) following RPD was longer than the OPD (18.5 vs. 14.0 months, p = 0.011, log-rank). The RPD group has a lower incidence of local recurrence compared the OPD group (36.9% vs. 51.2%, p = 0.071). Multivariate Cox analysis demonstrated that RPD was independently associated with improved OS (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52-0.94, p = 0.019) and DFS (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.50-0.88, p = 0.005). CONCLUSION After the learning curve, RPD had improved oncologic outcomes in PDAC patients compared to OPD. Future prospective randomized clinical trials will be required to validate these findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Haoda Chen
- Department of General Surgery, Pancreatic Disease Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 197 Ruijin Er Road, Shanghai, 200025, China
| | - Yuanchi Weng
- Department of General Surgery, Pancreatic Disease Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 197 Ruijin Er Road, Shanghai, 200025, China
| | - Shulin Zhao
- Department of General Surgery, Pancreatic Disease Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 197 Ruijin Er Road, Shanghai, 200025, China
| | - Weishen Wang
- Department of General Surgery, Pancreatic Disease Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 197 Ruijin Er Road, Shanghai, 200025, China
| | - Yuchen Ji
- Department of General Surgery, Pancreatic Disease Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 197 Ruijin Er Road, Shanghai, 200025, China
| | - Chenghong Peng
- Department of General Surgery, Pancreatic Disease Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 197 Ruijin Er Road, Shanghai, 200025, China
| | - Xiaxing Deng
- Department of General Surgery, Pancreatic Disease Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 197 Ruijin Er Road, Shanghai, 200025, China.
| | - Baiyong Shen
- Department of General Surgery, Pancreatic Disease Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 197 Ruijin Er Road, Shanghai, 200025, China.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Abu Hilal M, van Ramshorst TM, Boggi U, Dokmak S, Edwin B, Keck T, Khatkov I, Ahmad J, Al Saati H, Alseidi A, Azagra JS, Björnsson B, Can FM, D’Hondt M, Efanov M, Espin Alvarez F, Esposito A, Ferrari G, Groot Koerkamp B, Gumbs AA, Hogg ME, Huscher CG, Ielpo B, Ivanecz A, Jang JY, Liu R, Luyer MD, Menon K, Nakamura M, Piardi T, Saint-Marc O, White S, Yoon YS, Zerbi A, Bassi C, Berrevoet F, Chan C, Coimbra FJ, Conlon KC, Cook A, Dervenis C, Falconi M, Ferrari C, Frigerio I, Fusai GK, De Oliveira ML, Pinna AD, Primrose JN, Sauvanet A, Serrablo A, Smadi S, Badran A, Baychorov M, Bannone E, van Bodegraven EA, Emmen AM, Giani A, de Graaf N, van Hilst J, Jones LR, Levi Sandri GB, Pulvirenti A, Ramera M, Rashidian N, Sahakyan MA, Uijterwijk BA, Zampedri P, Zwart MJ, Alfieri S, Berti S, Butturini G, Di Benedetto F, Ettorre GM, Giuliante F, Jovine E, Memeo R, Portolani N, Ruzzenente A, Salvia R, Siriwardena AK, Besselink MG, Asbun HJ. The Brescia Internationally Validated European Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery (EGUMIPS). Ann Surg 2024; 279:45-57. [PMID: 37450702 PMCID: PMC10727198 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000006006] [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: 07/18/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To develop and update evidence-based and consensus-based guidelines on laparoscopic and robotic pancreatic surgery. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA Minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS), including laparoscopic and robotic surgery, is complex and technically demanding. Minimizing the risk for patients requires stringent, evidence-based guidelines. Since the International Miami Guidelines on MIPS in 2019, new developments and key publications have been reported, necessitating an update. METHODS Evidence-based guidelines on 22 topics in 8 domains were proposed: terminology, indications, patients, procedures, surgical techniques and instrumentation, assessment tools, implementation and training, and artificial intelligence. The Brescia Internationally Validated European Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery (EGUMIPS, September 2022) used the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology to assess the evidence and develop guideline recommendations, the Delphi method to establish consensus on the recommendations among the Expert Committee, and the AGREE II-GRS tool for guideline quality assessment and external validation by a Validation Committee. RESULTS Overall, 27 European experts, 6 international experts, 22 international Validation Committee members, 11 Jury Committee members, 18 Research Committee members, and 121 registered attendees of the 2-day meeting were involved in the development and validation of the guidelines. In total, 98 recommendations were developed, including 33 on laparoscopic, 34 on robotic, and 31 on general MIPS, covering 22 topics in 8 domains. Out of 98 recommendations, 97 reached at least 80% consensus among the experts and congress attendees, and all recommendations were externally validated by the Validation Committee. CONCLUSIONS The EGUMIPS evidence-based guidelines on laparoscopic and robotic MIPS can be applied in current clinical practice to provide guidance to patients, surgeons, policy-makers, and medical societies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mohammad Abu Hilal
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Tess M.E. van Ramshorst
- 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
| | - Ugo Boggi
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Safi Dokmak
- Department of HPB surgery and liver transplantation, AP-HP, Beaujon Hospital, DMU DIGEST, Clichy, France
| | - Bjørn Edwin
- The Intervention Centre, Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital and Institute of Medicine, Oslo University, Oslo, Norway
| | - Tobias Keck
- Clinic for Surgery, University of Schleswig-Holstein Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Igor Khatkov
- Department of Surgery, Moscow Clinical Scientific Center, Moscow, Russia
| | - Jawad Ahmad
- Department of Surgery, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire, West Midlands, UK
| | - Hani Al Saati
- Department of Surgery, Salmanyia Medical Complex, Manama, Bahrain
| | - Adnan Alseidi
- Department of Surgery, University of California - San Francisco, San Francisco, California
| | - Juan S. Azagra
- Department of General & Minimally Invasive Surgery (Laparoscopy & Robotic), Centre Hospitalier de Luxembourg, Luxembourg, Luxembourg
| | - Bergthor Björnsson
- Department of Surgery in Linköping and Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
| | - Fatih M. Can
- Department of General Surgery, Bayindir Sogutozu Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Mathieu D’Hondt
- Department of Digestive and Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgery, Groeninge Hospital, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - Mikhail Efanov
- Department of Surgery, Moscow Clinical Scientific Center, Moscow, Russia
| | - Francisco Espin Alvarez
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Alessandro Esposito
- Department of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Giovanni Ferrari
- Division of Minimally invasive Surgical Oncology, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy
| | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Andrew A. Gumbs
- Department of Visceral Surgery, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal de Poissy/Saint-Germain-en-Laye, Poissy, France
| | - Melissa E. Hogg
- Department of Surgery, Northshore University HealthSystem, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Cristiano G.S. Huscher
- Department of Oncologic Surgery, Casa di Cura Cobellis, Vallo Della Lucania, Salerno, Italy
| | - Benedetto Ielpo
- Hepato-Biliary and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Arpad Ivanecz
- Department of Abdominal and General Surgery, University Medical Center Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia
| | - Jin-Young Jang
- Departments of Surgery and Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Rong Liu
- Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Medical Center of Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Misha D.P. Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Krishna Menon
- Institute of Liver Studies, King’s College Hospital, London, UK
| | - Masafumi Nakamura
- Department of Surgery and Oncology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan
| | - Tullio Piardi
- Department of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic, and Digestive Oncological Surgery, Robert Debré University Hospital, Reims, France
| | - Olivier Saint-Marc
- Department of Surgery, Centre Hospitalier Regional Orleans, Orleans, France
| | - Steve White
- Department of HPB and Liver Transplant Surgery, The Freeman Hospital, Newcastle, United Kingdom
| | - Yoo-Seok Yoon
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Alessandro Zerbi
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, MI, Italy and IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy
| | - Claudio Bassi
- Department of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Frederik Berrevoet
- Department of General and HPB Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Carlos Chan
- Surgery Department, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Medicas y Nutricion Salvador Zubiran, Mexico, Mexico
| | - Felipe J. Coimbra
- Department of Abdominal Surgery, AC Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Kevin C.P. Conlon
- Department of Surgery, St. Vincent’s University Hospital Dublin, Ireland
| | - Andrew Cook
- Southampton Clinical Trials Unit, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | | | - Massimo Falconi
- Pancreas Translational & Clinical Research Center, San Raffaele IRCCS, Università Vita-Salute, Milan, Italy
| | - Clarissa Ferrari
- Unit of Statistics, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Isabella Frigerio
- Department of HPB Surgery, Pederzoli Hospital, Peschiera del Garda, Italy
| | | | - Michelle L. De Oliveira
- Department of Surgery and Transplantation, Swiss HPB Center, University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Antonio D. Pinna
- Department of Abdominal and Transplant Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida
| | - John N. Primrose
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom
| | - Alain Sauvanet
- Department of HPB Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Hospital of Beaujon, Paris, France
| | - Alejandro Serrablo
- HPB Surgical Division, Miguel Servet University Hospital, Zaragoza, Spain
| | - Sameer Smadi
- Department of Surgery, King Hussein Medical Center, Amman, Jordan
| | - Ali Badran
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Magomet Baychorov
- Department of Surgery, Moscow Clinical Scientific Center, Moscow, Russia
| | - Elisa Bannone
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Eduard A. van Bodegraven
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Anouk M.L.H. Emmen
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Alessandro Giani
- Division of Minimally invasive Surgical Oncology, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy
| | - Nine de Graaf
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jony van Hilst
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Leia R. Jones
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Giovanni B. Levi Sandri
- Division of General Surgery and Liver Transplantation, S. Camillo Forlanini Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | - Alessandra Pulvirenti
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Marco Ramera
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Niki Rashidian
- Department of General and HPB Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Mushegh A. Sahakyan
- The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Research & Development, Division of Emergencies and Critical Care, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Surgery N1, Yerevan State Medical University, Yerevan, Armenia
| | - Bas A. Uijterwijk
- 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
| | - Pietro Zampedri
- Department of General Surgery, Istituto Ospedaliero Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Maurice J.W. Zwart
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Sergio Alfieri
- Department of Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Stefano Berti
- Department of General Surgery, “Sant’Andrea” Hospital La Spezia, La Spezia, Italy
| | - Giovanni Butturini
- Department of HPB Surgery, Pederzoli Hospital, Peschiera del Garda, Italy
| | - Fabrizio Di Benedetto
- Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplant Unit, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy
| | - Giuseppe M. Ettorre
- Division of General Surgery and Liver Transplantation, S. Camillo Forlanini Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | - Felice Giuliante
- Department of Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Elio Jovine
- Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, AOU Sant’Orsola Malpighi, IRCCS at Maggiore Hospital, Bologna, Italy
| | - Riccardo Memeo
- Department of Hepato-Pancreatic-Biliary Surgery, Miulli Hospital, Bari, Italy
| | - Nazario Portolani
- Department of Clinical and Experimental Sciences, Surgical Clinic, University of Brescia, Italy
| | - Andrea Ruzzenente
- Department of Surgery, General and Hepatobiliary Surgery, University Hospital G.B. Rossi, University and Hospital Trust of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Roberto Salvia
- Department of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Ajith K. Siriwardena
- Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Manchester University NHS FT, Manchester, UK
| | - Marc G. Besselink
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Horacio J. Asbun
- Hepato-Biliary and Pancreas Surgery, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, Florida, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis including patient subgroups. Surg Endosc 2023:10.1007/s00464-023-09894-y. [PMID: 36781467 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-023-09894-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/04/2022] [Accepted: 01/15/2023] [Indexed: 02/15/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy (RDP) has been suggested to hold some benefits over laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) but consensus and data on specific subgroups are lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis reports the surgical and oncological outcome and costs between RDP and LDP including subgroups with intended spleen preservation and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). METHODS Studies comparing RDP and LDP were included from PubMed, Cochrane Central Register, and Embase (inception-July 2022). Primary outcomes were conversion and unplanned splenectomy. Secondary outcomes were R0 resection, lymph node yield, major morbidity, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, in-hospital mortality, operative costs, total costs and hospital stay. RESULTS Overall, 43 studies with 6757 patients were included, 2514 after RDP and 4243 after LDP. RDP was associated with a longer operative time (MD = 18.21, 95% CI 2.18-34.24), less blood loss (MD = 54.50, 95% CI - 84.49-24.50), and a lower conversion rate (OR = 0.44, 95% CI 0.36-0.55) compared to LDP. In spleen-preserving procedures, RDP was associated with more Kimura procedures (OR = 2.23, 95% CI 1.37-3.64) and a lower rate of unplanned splenectomies (OR = 0.32, 95% CI 0.24-0.42). In patients with PDAC, RDP was associated with a higher lymph node yield (MD = 3.95, 95% CI 1.67-6.23), but showed no difference in the rate of R0 resection (OR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.67-1.37). RDP was associated with higher total (MD = 3009.31, 95% CI 1776.37-4242.24) and operative costs (MD = 3390.40, 95% CI 1981.79-4799.00). CONCLUSIONS RDP was associated with a lower conversion rate, a higher spleen preservation rate and, in patients with PDAC, a higher lymph node yield and similar R0 resection rate, as compared to LDP. The potential benefits of RDP need to be weighed against the higher total and operative costs in future randomized trials.
Collapse
|
10
|
Wei K, Cheng L, Zheng Q, Tian J, Liu R, Hackert T. Minimally invasive surgery versus open surgery for total pancreatectomy: a bibliometric review and meta-analysis. HPB (Oxford) 2023:S1365-182X(23)00025-4. [PMID: 37032259 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2023.01.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/23/2022] [Revised: 01/18/2023] [Accepted: 01/27/2023] [Indexed: 04/11/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Minimally invasive total pancreatectomy (MITP) is considered safe and feasible with limited evidence on this procedure. The aim of this study was to systematically analyze the current literature on MITP compared to open TP (OTP). METHOD Randomized controlled trials and prospective non-randomized comparative studies were sought systematically in MEDLINE, Web of Science and CENTRAL from their inception until December 2021. Outcome measures included operative time, length of hospital stay (LOH), spleen-preservation rate, estimated blood loss (EBL), need for transfusion, venous resection rate, delayed gastric emptying (DGE), biliary leakage, postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), reoperation rate, overall 30-day morbidity (Clavien-Dindo > IIIa), 90-day mortality, 90-day readmission, examined lymph nodes (ELN). Pooled results are presented as odds ratios (OR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS 7 observational studies with a total of 4212 patients were included. MITP had a decreased EBL and transfusion rate, lower 30-day morbidity and 90-day mortality with a longer LOH compared to OTP. There were no significant differences regarding operative time, spleen preservation rate, DGE, biliary leakage, venous resection rate, PPH, reoperation, 90-day readmission and ELN. DISCUSSION Based on the available studies, MITP is safe and feasible compared to OTP in highly experienced hands from high-volume centers. Further high-quality studies are needed to verify the conclusion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kongyuan Wei
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Medical Center of Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Luying Cheng
- School of Nursing, Evidence-based Nursing Center, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China; Evidence Based Medicine Centre, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
| | - Qingyong Zheng
- School of Nursing, Evidence-based Nursing Center, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China; Evidence Based Medicine Centre, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
| | - Jinhui Tian
- School of Nursing, Evidence-based Nursing Center, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China; Evidence Based Medicine Centre, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
| | - Rong Liu
- Faculty of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The First Medical Center of Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Thilo Hackert
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Dept. of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Glatz T, Brinkmann S, Thaher O, Driouch J, Bausch D. Robotische Pankreaschirurgie – Lernkurve und Etablierung. Zentralbl Chir 2022; 147:188-195. [DOI: 10.1055/a-1750-9779] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
ZusammenfassungMinimalinvasive Resektionstechniken zur Behandlung verschiedener Pathologien des Pankreas sind potenziell vorteilhaft für die behandelten Patienten in Bezug auf Rekonvaleszenzzeit und
postoperative Morbidität, stellen jedoch eine besondere technische Herausforderung für den behandelnden Chirurgen dar. Der Einzug der robotischen Technik in die Viszeralchirurgie bietet eine
prinzipielle Möglichkeit zur weitreichenden Verbreitung minimalinvasiver Verfahren in der Pankreaschirurgie.Ziel dieser Arbeit war es, die Entwicklungsmöglichkeiten der robotischen Pankreaschirurgie in Deutschland zu überprüfen. Datengrundlage sind die Qualitätsberichte der Krankenhäuser der
Jahre 2015–2019 kombiniert mit einer selektiven Literaturrecherche.Die Anzahl der vorliegenden Qualitätsberichte reduzierte sich von 2015 bis 2019 von 1635 auf 1594. Im Median führten 96 Kliniken 11–20, 56 Kliniken 21–50 und 15 Kliniken mehr als 50
Pankreaskopfresektionen jährlich durch. Bei den Linksresektionen waren es 35 Kliniken mit 11–20, 14 Kliniken mit 21–50 und 2 Kliniken mit mehr als 50 Eingriffen. Unter Berücksichtigung aller
Kliniken, die 5 oder mehr Linksresektionen pro Jahr durchführen, wurden an nur 29 Kliniken minimalinvasive Verfahren eingesetzt. Der Anteil an laparoskopischen Linksresektionen über 50%
wurde an nur 7 Kliniken beschrieben.Nach Datenlage in der Literatur divergieren die Lernkurven für die robotische Pankreaslinks- und Pankreaskopfresektion. Während die Lernkurve für die robotische Pankreaslinksresektion nach
etwa 20 Eingriffen durchlaufen ist, hat die Lernkurve für die robotische Pankreaskopfresektion mehrere Plateaus, die etwa nach 30, 100 und 250 Eingriffen erreicht werden.Aufgrund der dezentralen Struktur der Pankreaschirurgie in Deutschland scheint ein flächendeckendes Angebot robotischer Verfahren aktuell in weiter Ferne. Insbesondere die Etablierung der
robotischen Pankreaskopfresektion wird zunächst Zentren mit entsprechend hoher Fallzahl vorbehalten bleiben.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Torben Glatz
- Chirurgische Klinik, Marien Hospital Herne – Universitätsklinikum der Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Herne, Deutschland
| | - Sebastian Brinkmann
- Chirurgische Klinik, Marien Hospital Herne – Universitätsklinikum der Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Herne, Deutschland
| | - Omar Thaher
- Chirurgische Klinik, Marien Hospital Herne – Universitätsklinikum der Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Herne, Deutschland
| | - Jamal Driouch
- Chirurgische Klinik, Marien Hospital Herne – Universitätsklinikum der Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Herne, Deutschland
| | - Dirk Bausch
- Chirurgische Klinik, Marien Hospital Herne – Universitätsklinikum der Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Herne, Deutschland
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Raghupathy J, Lee CY, Huan SKW, Koh YX, Tan EK, Teo JY, Cheow PC, Ooi LLPJ, Chung AYF, Chan CY, Goh BKP. Propensity-Score Matched Analyses Comparing Clinical Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Distal Pancreatectomies: A Single-Center Experience. World J Surg 2021; 46:207-214. [PMID: 34508282 DOI: 10.1007/s00268-021-06306-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/13/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is being adopted increasingly worldwide. This study aimed to compare the short-term outcomes of patients who underwent MIDP versus open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). METHODS A retrospective review of all patients who underwent a DP in our institution between 2005 and 2019 was performed. Propensity score matching based on relevant baseline factors was used to match patients in the ODP and MIDP groups in a 1:1 manner. Outcomes reported include operative duration, blood loss, postoperative length of stay, morbidity, mortality, postoperative pancreatic fistula rates, reoperation and readmission. RESULTS In total, 444 patients were included in this study. Of 122 MIDP patients, 112 (91.8%) could be matched. After matching, the median operating time for MIDP was significantly longer than ODP [260 min (200-346.3) vs 180 (135-232.5), p < 0.001], while postoperative stay for MIDP was significantly shorter [median 6 days (5-8) versus 7 days (6-9), p = 0.015]. There were no significant differences noted in any of the other outcomes measured. Over time, we observed a decrease in the operation times of MIDP performed at our institution. CONCLUSION Adoption of MIDP offers advantages over ODP in terms of a shorter postoperative hospital stay, without an increase in morbidity and/or mortality but at the expense of a longer operation time.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jaivikash Raghupathy
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Academia, Level 5, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore.,Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Chuan-Yaw Lee
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Academia, Level 5, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore.,Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Sarah K W Huan
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Academia, Level 5, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore
| | - Ye-Xin Koh
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Academia, Level 5, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore.,Duke-NUS Medical School, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.,Singhealth Duke-NUS Transplant Center, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Ek-Khoon Tan
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Academia, Level 5, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore.,Duke-NUS Medical School, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.,Singhealth Duke-NUS Transplant Center, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Jin-Yao Teo
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Academia, Level 5, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore.,Duke-NUS Medical School, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Peng-Chung Cheow
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Academia, Level 5, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore.,Duke-NUS Medical School, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.,Singhealth Duke-NUS Transplant Center, Singapore, Singapore
| | - London L P J Ooi
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Academia, Level 5, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore.,Duke-NUS Medical School, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Alexander Y F Chung
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Academia, Level 5, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore.,Duke-NUS Medical School, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.,Singhealth Duke-NUS Transplant Center, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Chung-Yip Chan
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Academia, Level 5, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore.,Duke-NUS Medical School, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.,Singhealth Duke-NUS Transplant Center, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Brian K P Goh
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Academia, Level 5, 20 College Road, Singapore, 169856, Singapore. .,Duke-NUS Medical School, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore. .,Singhealth Duke-NUS Transplant Center, Singapore, Singapore.
| |
Collapse
|