1
|
Boggi U, Donisi G, Napoli N, Partelli S, Esposito A, Ferrari G, Butturini G, Morelli L, Abu Hilal M, Viola M, Di Benedetto F, Troisi R, Vivarelli M, Jovine E, Ferrero A, Bracale U, Alfieri S, Casadei R, Ercolani G, Moraldi L, Molino C, Dalla Valle R, Ettorre G, Memeo R, Zanus G, Belli A, Gruttadauria S, Brolese A, Coratti A, Garulli G, Romagnoli R, Massani M, Borghi F, Belli G, Coppola R, Falconi M, Salvia R, Zerbi A. Prospective minimally invasive pancreatic resections from the IGOMIPS registry: a snapshot of daily practice in Italy on 1191 between 2019 and 2022. Updates Surg 2023; 75:1439-1456. [PMID: 37470915 PMCID: PMC10435655 DOI: 10.1007/s13304-023-01592-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/27/2023] [Accepted: 07/11/2023] [Indexed: 07/21/2023]
Abstract
This retrospective analysis of the prospective IGOMIPS registry reports on 1191 minimally invasive pancreatic resections (MIPR) performed in Italy between 2019 and 2022, including 668 distal pancreatectomies (DP) (55.7%), 435 pancreatoduodenectomies (PD) (36.3%), 44 total pancreatectomies (3.7%), 36 tumor enucleations (3.0%), and 8 central pancreatectomies (0.7%). Spleen-preserving DP was performed in 109 patients (16.3%). Overall incidence of severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3) was 17.6% with a 90-day mortality of 1.9%. This registry analysis provided some important information. First, robotic assistance was preferred for all MIPR but DP with splenectomy. Second, robotic assistance reduced conversion to open surgery and blood loss in comparison to laparoscopy. Robotic PD was also associated with lower incidence of severe postoperative complications and a trend toward lower mortality. Fourth, the annual cut-off of ≥ 20 MIPR and ≥ 20 MIPD improved selected outcome measures. Fifth, most MIPR were performed by a single surgeon. Sixth, only two-thirds of the centers performed spleen-preserving DP. Seventh, DP with splenectomy was associated with higher conversion rate when compared to spleen-preserving DP. Eighth, the use of pancreatojejunostomy was the prevalent reconstruction in PD. Ninth, final histology was similar for MIPR performed at high- and low-volume centers, but neoadjuvant chemotherapy was used more frequently at high-volume centers. Finally, this registry analysis raises important concerns about the reliability of R1 assessment underscoring the importance of standardized pathology of pancreatic specimens. In conclusion, MIPR can be safely implemented on a national scale. Further analyses are required to understand nuances of implementation of MIPR in Italy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ugo Boggi
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
| | - Greta Donisi
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy
| | - Niccolò Napoli
- Division of General and Transplant Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Stefano Partelli
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, OSR ENETS Center of Excellence, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
- Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Alessandro Esposito
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Giovanni Ferrari
- Division of Minimally-Invasive Surgical Oncology, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Luca Morelli
- General Surgery, Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
- EndoCAS (Center for Computer Assisted Surgery), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Mohammad Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Poliambulanza Foundation Hospital, Brescia, Italy
| | - Massimo Viola
- Department of Surgery, Ospedale Card. G. Panico, Tricase, Italy
| | - Fabrizio Di Benedetto
- Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation Unit, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy
| | - Roberto Troisi
- Division of HPB Minimally Invasive and Robotic Surgery, Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, Federico II University Hospital, Naples, Italy
| | - Marco Vivarelli
- Hepatobiliary and Abdominal Transplantation Surgery, Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Riuniti Hospital, Polytechnic University of Marche, Ancona, Italy
| | - Elio Jovine
- Department of General Surgery, IRCCS, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Maggiore Hospital, Bologna, Italy
| | - Alessandro Ferrero
- Department of General and Oncological Surgery, "Umberto I" Mauriziano Hospital, Turin, Italy
| | - Umberto Bracale
- Department Clinical Medicine and Surgery, Federico II University of Naples, Via Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy
| | - Sergio Alfieri
- Digestive Surgery, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCCS, Catholic University, Rome, Italy
| | - Riccardo Casadei
- Division of Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Internal Medicine and Surgery (DIMEC), IRCCS, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Bologna Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Giorgio Ercolani
- General and Oncology Surgery, Morgagni-Pierantoni Hospital, Forli, Italy
| | - Luca Moraldi
- Division of Oncologic Surgery and Robotics, Department of Oncology, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy
| | - Carlo Molino
- Department of Oncological Surgery Team 1, "Antonio Cardarelli" Hospital, Naples, Italy
| | - Raffaele Dalla Valle
- Hepatobiliary Surgery Unit Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Parma, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Ettorre
- Transplantation Department, S. Camillo-Forlanini Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | - Riccardo Memeo
- Department of Hepato-Pancreatic-Biliary Surgery, General Regional Hospital "F. Miulli", Acquaviva Delle Fonti, Bari, Italy
| | - Giacomo Zanus
- 4th Surgery Unit, Azienda ULSS2 Marca Trevigiana, Treviso, Italy
| | - Andrea Belli
- Division of Hepatobiliary Surgical Oncology, Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS Fondazione Pascale-IRCCS di Napoli, Naples, Italy
| | | | - Alberto Brolese
- Department of General Surgery and HPB Unit, Santa Chiara Hospital, Trento, Italy
| | - Andrea Coratti
- USL Toscana Sud Est, Misericordia Hospital, Grosseto, Italy
| | | | - Renato Romagnoli
- Liver Transplant Center-General Surgery 2U, University of Turin, AOU Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Turin, Italy
| | - Marco Massani
- Department of Surgery, Regional Hospital of Treviso, Treviso, Italy
| | | | | | - Roberto Coppola
- Department of Surgery, University Campus Bio-Medico of Rome, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy
| | - Massimo Falconi
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, OSR ENETS Center of Excellence, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Roberto Salvia
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Alessandro Zerbi
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Uijterwijk BA, Kasai M, Lemmers DHL, Chinnusamy P, van Hilst J, Ielpo B, Wei K, Song KB, Kim SC, Klompmaker S, Jang JY, Herremans KM, Bencini L, Coratti A, Mazzola M, Menon KV, Goh BKP, Qin R, Besselink MG, Abu Hilal M. The clinical implication of minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for non-pancreatic periampullary cancer: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2023; 408:311. [PMID: 37581763 PMCID: PMC10427526 DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-03047-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/12/2023] [Accepted: 08/03/2023] [Indexed: 08/16/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Most studies on minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) combine patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancers even though there is substantial heterogeneity between these tumors. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the role of MIPD compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) in patients with non-pancreatic periampullary cancer (NPPC). METHODS A systematic review of Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases was performed by two independent reviewers to identify studies comparing MIPD and OPD for NPPC (ampullary, distal cholangio, and duodenal adenocarcinoma) (01/2015-12/2021). Individual patient data were required from all identified studies. Primary outcomes were (90-day) mortality, and major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo 3a-5). Secondary outcomes were postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), blood-loss, length of hospital stay (LOS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS Overall, 16 studies with 1949 patients were included, combining 928 patients with ampullary, 526 with distal cholangio, and 461 with duodenal cancer. In total, 902 (46.3%) patients underwent MIPD, and 1047 (53.7%) patients underwent OPD. The rates of 90-day mortality, major morbidity, POPF, DGE, PPH, blood-loss, and length of hospital stay did not differ between MIPD and OPD. Operation time was 67 min longer in the MIPD group (P = 0.009). A decrease in DFS for ampullary (HR 2.27, P = 0.019) and distal cholangio (HR 1.84, P = 0.025) cancer, as well as a decrease in OS for distal cholangio (HR 1.71, P = 0.045) and duodenal cancer (HR 4.59, P < 0.001) was found in the MIPD group. CONCLUSIONS This individual patient data meta-analysis of MIPD versus OPD in patients with NPPC suggests that MIPD is not inferior in terms of short-term morbidity and mortality. Several major limitations in long-term data highlight a research gap that should be studied in prospective maintained international registries or randomized studies for ampullary, distal cholangio, and duodenum cancer separately. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION PROSPERO (CRD42021277495) on the 25th of October 2021.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bas A Uijterwijk
- Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy.
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Meidai Kasai
- Department of Surgery, Meiwa Hospital, Hyogo, Japan
| | - Daniel H L Lemmers
- Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Palanivelu Chinnusamy
- Department of Surgical Gastroenterology and Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, GEM Hospital and Research Center, Ramanathapuram, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - Jony van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Benedetto Ielpo
- Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Hospital del Mar. Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Kongyuan Wei
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Ki Byung Song
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea
| | - Song C Kim
- Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea
| | - Sjors Klompmaker
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jin-Young Jang
- Department of Surgery and Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Kelly M Herremans
- Division of Surgical Oncology, General Surgery, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA
| | - Lapo Bencini
- Department of Surgery, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy
| | - Andrea Coratti
- Department of Surgery, Misericordia Hospital of Grosseto, Grosseto, Italy
| | - Michele Mazzola
- Division of Oncologic and Mini-Invasive General Surgery, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy
| | - Krishna V Menon
- Department of Liver Transplant and HPB Unit, King's College Hospital, London, UK
| | - Brian K P Goh
- Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Renyi Qin
- Department of Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Affiliated Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Mohammed Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Uijterwijk BA, Wei K, Kasai M, Ielpo B, Hilst JV, Chinnusamy P, Lemmers DHL, Burdio F, Senthilnathan P, Besselink MG, Abu Hilal M, Qin R. Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: Individual patient data meta-analysis of randomized trials. Eur J Surg Oncol 2023; 49:1351-1361. [PMID: 37076411 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2023.03.227] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/14/2022] [Revised: 01/31/2023] [Accepted: 03/24/2023] [Indexed: 04/21/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Assessment of minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is scarce and limited to non-randomized studies. This study aimed to compare oncological and surgical outcomes after MIPD compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) for patients after resectable PDAC from published randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS A systematic review was performed to identify RCTs comparing MIPD and OPD including PDAC (Jan 2015-July 2021). Individual data of patients with PDAC were requested. Primary outcomes were R0 rate and lymph node yield. Secondary outcomes were blood-loss, operation time, major complications, hospital stay and 90-day mortality. RESULTS Overall, 4 RCTs (all addressed laparoscopic MIPD) with 275 patients with PDAC were included. In total, 128 patients underwent laparoscopic MIPD and 147 patients underwent OPD. The R0 rate (risk difference(RD) -1%, P = 0.740) and lymph node yield (mean difference(MD) +1.55, P = 0.305) were comparable between laparoscopic MIPD and OPD. Laparoscopic MIPD was associated with less perioperative blood-loss (MD -91ml, P = 0.026), shorter length of hospital stay (MD -3.8 days, P = 0.044), while operation time was longer (MD +98.5 min, P = 0.003). Major complications (RD -11%, P = 0.302) and 90-day mortality (RD -2%, P = 0.328) were comparable between laparoscopic MIPD and OPD. CONCLUSIONS This individual patient data meta-analysis of MIPD versus OPD in patients with resectable PDAC suggests that laparoscopic MIPD is non-inferior regarding radicality, lymph node yield, major complications and 90-day mortality and is associated with less blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and longer operation time. The impact on long-term survival and recurrence should be studied in RCTs including robotic MIPD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bas A Uijterwijk
- Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy; Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Kongyuan Wei
- Faculty of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, The First Medical Center of Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, Beijing, China; Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Meidai Kasai
- Department of Surgery, Meiwa Hospital, Hyogo, Japan
| | - Benedetto Ielpo
- Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Hospital del Mar, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Jony van Hilst
- Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Palanivelu Chinnusamy
- Department of Surgical Gastroenterology and Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, GEM Hospital and Research Center, Ramanathapuram, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - Daniel H L Lemmers
- Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy; Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Fernando Burdio
- Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Hospital del Mar, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Palanisamy Senthilnathan
- Department of Surgical Gastroenterology and Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, GEM Hospital and Research Center, Ramanathapuram, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Renyi Qin
- Faculty of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, The First Medical Center of Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Hospital, Beijing, China
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Cos H, LeCompte MT, Srinivasa S, Zarate Rodriguez J, Woolsey CA, Williams G, Patel S, Khan A, Fields RC, Majella Doyle MB, Chapman WC, Strasberg SM, Hawkins WG, Hammill CW, Sanford DE. Improved outcomes with minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with dilated pancreatic ducts: a prospective study. Surg Endosc 2021; 36:3100-3109. [PMID: 34235587 PMCID: PMC8262764 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-021-08611-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2021] [Accepted: 06/14/2021] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
Background Little is known about what factors predict better outcomes for patients who undergo minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). We hypothesized that patients with dilated pancreatic ducts have improved postoperative outcomes with MIPD compared to OPD. Methods All patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy were prospectively followed over a time period of 47 months, and perioperative and pathologic covariates and outcomes were compared. Ideal outcome after PD was defined as follows: (1) no complications, (2) postoperative length of stay < 7 days, and (3) negative (R0) margins on pathology. Patients with dilated pancreatic ducts (≥ 3 mm) who underwent MIPD were 1:3 propensity score-matched to patients with dilated ducts who underwent OPD and outcomes compared. Likewise, patients with non-dilated pancreatic ducts (< 3 mm) who underwent MIPD were 1:3 propensity score-matched to patients with non-dilated ducts who underwent OPD and outcomes were compared. Results 371 patients underwent PD—74 (19.9%) MIPD and 297 (80.1%) underwent OPD. Overall, patients who underwent MIPD had significantly less intraoperative blood loss. After 1:3 propensity score matching, patients with dilated pancreatic ducts who underwent MIPD (n = 45) had significantly lower overall complication and 90-day readmission rates compared to matched OPD patients (n = 135) with dilated ducts. Patients with dilated duct who underwent MIPD were more likely to have an ideal outcome than patients with OPD (29 vs 15%, p = 0.035). There were no significant differences in postoperative outcomes among propensity score-matched patients with non-dilated pancreatic ducts who underwent MIPD (n = 29) compared to matched patients undergoing OPD (n = 87) with non-dilated ducts. Conclusions MIPD is safe with comparable perioperative outcomes to OPD. Patients with pancreatic ducts ≥ 3 mm appear to derive the most benefit from MIPD in terms of fewer complications, lower readmission rates, and higher likelihood of ideal outcome. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-021-08611-x.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Heidy Cos
- Division of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic, and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Campus Box 8109, Saint Louis, MO, 63110, USA.,Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA
| | - Michael T LeCompte
- Department of Surgical Oncology, University of North Carolina and Rex Hospital, Raleigh, NC, USA
| | - Sanket Srinivasa
- Division of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic, and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Campus Box 8109, Saint Louis, MO, 63110, USA
| | - Jorge Zarate Rodriguez
- Division of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic, and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Campus Box 8109, Saint Louis, MO, 63110, USA.,Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA
| | - Cheryl A Woolsey
- Division of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic, and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Campus Box 8109, Saint Louis, MO, 63110, USA.,Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA
| | - Gregory Williams
- Division of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic, and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Campus Box 8109, Saint Louis, MO, 63110, USA.,Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA
| | - Siddarth Patel
- Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA
| | - Adeel Khan
- Division of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic, and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Campus Box 8109, Saint Louis, MO, 63110, USA.,Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA.,Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA
| | - Ryan C Fields
- Division of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic, and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Campus Box 8109, Saint Louis, MO, 63110, USA.,Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA.,Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA
| | - Maria B Majella Doyle
- Division of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic, and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Campus Box 8109, Saint Louis, MO, 63110, USA.,Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA.,Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA
| | - William C Chapman
- Division of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic, and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Campus Box 8109, Saint Louis, MO, 63110, USA.,Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA.,Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA
| | - Steven M Strasberg
- Division of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic, and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Campus Box 8109, Saint Louis, MO, 63110, USA.,Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA.,Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA
| | - William G Hawkins
- Division of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic, and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Campus Box 8109, Saint Louis, MO, 63110, USA.,Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA.,Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA
| | - Chet W Hammill
- Division of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic, and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Campus Box 8109, Saint Louis, MO, 63110, USA.,Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA.,Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA
| | - Dominic E Sanford
- Division of Hepatobiliary, Pancreatic, and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Campus Box 8109, Saint Louis, MO, 63110, USA. .,Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA. .,Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Yin SM, Liu YW, Liu YY, Yong CC, Wang CC, Li WF, Yeh CH. Short-term outcomes after minimally invasive versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy in elderly patients: a propensity score-matched analysis. BMC Surg 2021; 21:60. [PMID: 33494734 DOI: 10.1186/s12893-021-01052-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2020] [Accepted: 01/06/2021] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND To date, the evidence on the safety and benefits of minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) in elderly patients is still controversy. This study aim to compare the risk and benefit between MIPD and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) in elderly patients. METHODS From 2016 to 2020, we retrospective enrolled 26 patients underwent MIPD and other 119 patients underwent OPD. We firstly compared the baseline characteristics, 90-day mortality and short-term surgical outcomes of MIPD and OPD. Propensity score matching was applied for old age patient (≥ 65-year-old vs. < 65-year-old) for detail safety and feasibility analysis. RESULTS Patients received MIPD is significantly older, had poor performance status, less lymph node harvest, longer operation time, less postoperative hospital stay (POHS) and earlier drain removal. After 1:2 propensity score matching analysis, elderly patients in MIPD group had significantly poor performance status (P = 0.042) compared to OPD group. Patients receiving MIPD had significantly shorter POHS (18 vs. 25 days, P = 0.028), earlier drain removal (16 vs. 21 days, P = 0.012) and smaller delay gastric empty rate (5.9 vs. 32.4% P = 0.036). There was no 90-day mortality (0% vs. 11.8%, P = 0.186) and pulmonary complications (0% vs. 17.6%, P = 0.075) in MIPD group, and the major complication rate is comparable to OPD group (17.6% vs. 29.4%, P = 0.290). CONCLUSION For elderly patients, MIPD is a feasible and safe option even in patients with inferior preoperative performance status. MIPD might also provide potential advantage for elderly patients in minimizing pulmonary complication and overall mortality over OPD.
Collapse
|
6
|
Lianos GD, Christodoulou DK, Katsanos KH, Katsios C, Glantzounis GK. Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Recent Trends. J Gastrointest Cancer 2017; 48:129-134. [PMID: 28326457 DOI: 10.1007/s12029-017-9934-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pancreatic resection for cancer represents a real challenge for every surgeon. Recent improvements in laparoscopic experience, minimally invasive surgical techniques and instruments make now the minimally invasive approach a real "triumph." There is no doubt that minimally invasive surgery has replaced with great success conventional surgery in many fields, including surgical oncology. METHODS AND RESULTS However, its progress in pancreatic resection for adenocarcinoma has been dramatically slow. Recent evidence supports the notion that minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy is safe and feasible and that is becoming the procedure of choice mainly for benign or low-grade malignant lesions in the distal pancreas. On the other side, minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy has not yet been widely accepted and there is enormous skepticism when applied for pancreatic head adenocarcinoma. In this review, we summarize the current evidence on the potential applications of minimally invasive surgical approaches for this aggressive, heterogeneous, and enigmatic type of cancer. CONCLUSIONS Moreover, the potential future applications of these approaches are discussed with the hope to improve the quality of life as well as the survival rates of pancreatic cancer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Georgios D Lianos
- Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, University of Ioannina, University Hospital of Ioannina, 451 10, Ioannina, Greece.
| | - Dimitrios K Christodoulou
- Department of Gastroenterology, School of Medicine, University of Ioannina, University Hospital of Ioannina, 451 10, Ioannina, Greece
| | - Konstantinos H Katsanos
- Department of Gastroenterology, School of Medicine, University of Ioannina, University Hospital of Ioannina, 451 10, Ioannina, Greece
| | - Christos Katsios
- Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, University of Ioannina, University Hospital of Ioannina, 451 10, Ioannina, Greece
| | - Georgios K Glantzounis
- Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, University of Ioannina, University Hospital of Ioannina, 451 10, Ioannina, Greece
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Shrikhande SV, Sivasanker M. Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy: How far have we come and where are we headed? World J Gastrointest Surg 2015; 7:128-132. [PMID: 26328031 PMCID: PMC4550838 DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v7.i8.128] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2015] [Revised: 04/29/2015] [Accepted: 06/11/2015] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy is currently a feasible option in selected patients at high volume centers with available expertise. Although the procedure has been described two decades ago, laparoscopic surgeons have been reluctant to perform it since it is technically demanding. Currently there is no standardized training process for minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy and this is required to ensure the safety of the procedure. Even the open pancreatoduodenectomy can be a challenging procedure where the outcome depends much upon the patient volume and surgeon’s experience. In the minimally invasive setting, all the current evidence comes from retrospective data with inherent selection bias. Although the proposed benefits have been reported in many series, a randomized trial comparing with the open approach is highly unlikely to happen, given the complexity of pancreatic cancer and patient selection for complex surgery. Rather, in a disease for which cure is an utopian statement, perhaps the ultimate aim of minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy can be the improvement in the quality of life. Also further studies are needed to assess the immunologic role affecting the oncologic outcomes in patients undergoing minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy. The robotic platforms have got easily accepted since they can overcome some of the limitations of the laparoscopic platforms such as limited range of motion, two dimensional visualization and poor ergonomics. The main limitations of robotic procedures are related to the high costs associated with the system and disposable equipment. Currently evidence is lacking regarding the cost effectiveness of the procedure and also the push from the industry is on rise. All these minimally invasive techniques have a long learning curve and prior extensive experience in hepatopancreatobiliary surgery is mandatory for surgeons embarking on these endeavours.
Collapse
|