-
Cancers Sep 2023Parenchymal-sparing approaches to pancreatectomy are technically challenging procedures but allow for preserving a normal pancreas and decreasing the rate of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Parenchymal-sparing approaches to pancreatectomy are technically challenging procedures but allow for preserving a normal pancreas and decreasing the rate of postoperative pancreatic insufficiency. The robotic platform is increasingly being used for these procedures. We sought to evaluate robotic parenchymal-sparing pancreatectomy and assess its complication profile and efficacy.
METHODS
This systematic review consisted of all studies on robotic parenchymal-sparing pancreatectomy (central pancreatectomy, duodenum-preserving partial pancreatic head resection, enucleation, and uncinate resection) published between January 2001 and December 2022 in PubMed and Embase.
RESULTS
A total of 23 studies were included in this review ( = 788). Robotic parenchymal-sparing pancreatectomy is being performed worldwide for benign or indolent pancreatic lesions. When compared to the open approach, robotic parenchymal-sparing pancreatectomies led to a longer average operative time, shorter length of stay, and higher estimated intraoperative blood loss. Postoperative pancreatic fistula is common, but severe complications requiring intervention are exceedingly rare. Long-term complications such as endocrine and exocrine insufficiency are nearly nonexistent.
CONCLUSIONS
Robotic parenchymal-sparing pancreatectomy appears to have a higher risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula but is rarely associated with severe or long-term complications. Careful patient selection is required to maximize benefits and minimize morbidity.
PubMed: 37686648
DOI: 10.3390/cancers15174369 -
World Journal of Gastroenterology Jun 2015To identify the most effective treatment of duodenal stump fistula (DSF) after gastrectomy for gastric cancer. (Review)
Review
AIM
To identify the most effective treatment of duodenal stump fistula (DSF) after gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was performed. PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CILEA Archive, BMJ Clinical Evidence and UpToDate databases were analyzed. Three hundred eighty-eight manuscripts were retrieved and analyzed and thirteen studies published between 1988 and 2014 were finally selected according to the inclusion criteria, for a total of 145 cases of DSF, which represented our group of study. Only patients with DSF after gastrectomy for malignancy were selected. Data about patients' characteristics, type of treatment, short and long-term outcomes were extracted and analyzed.
RESULTS
In the 13 studies different types of treatment were proposed: conservative approach, surgical approach, percutaneous approach and endoscopic approach (3 cases). The overall mortality rate was 11.7% for the entire cohort. The more frequent complications were sepsis, abscesses, peritonitis, bleeding, pneumonia and multi-organ failure. Conservative approach was performed in 6 studies for a total of 79 patients, in patients with stable general condition, often associated with percutaneous approach. A complete resolution of the leakage was achieved in 92.3% of these patients, with a healing time ranging from 17 to 71 d. Surgical approach included duodenostomy, duodeno-jejunostomy, pancreatoduodenectomy and the use of rectus muscle flap. In-hospital stay of patients who underwent relaparotomy ranged from 1 to 1035 d. The percutaneous approach included drainage of abscesses or duodenostomy (32 cases) and percutaneous biliary diversion (13 cases). The median healing time in this group was 43 d.
CONCLUSION
Conservative approach is the treatment of choice, eventually associated with percutaneus drainage. Surgical approach should be reserved for severe cases or when conservative approaches fail.
Topics: Anastomotic Leak; Drainage; Duodenal Diseases; Duodenum; Gastrectomy; Humans; Intestinal Fistula; Length of Stay; Reoperation; Stomach Neoplasms; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Wound Healing
PubMed: 26140005
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i24.7571 -
The Surgeon : Journal of the Royal... Aug 2014Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) is a complex procedure, offered to selected patients at institutions highly experienced with the procedure. It is still... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) is a complex procedure, offered to selected patients at institutions highly experienced with the procedure. It is still not clear if this approach may enhance patient recovery and reduce postoperative complications comparing to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD), as demonstrated for other abdominal procedures.
METHODS
A systematic literature review was conducted to identify studies comparing MIPD and OPD. Perioperative outcomes (e.g., morbidity and mortality, pancreatic fistula rates, blood loss) constituted the study end points. Metaanalyses were performed using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
For the metaanalysis, 8 studies including 204 patients undergoing MIPD and 419 patients undergoing OPD were considered suitable. The patients in the two groups were similar with respect to age, sex and histological diagnosis, and different with respect to tumor size, rate of pylorus preservation, and type of pancreatic anastomosis. There were no statistically significant differences between MIPD and OPD regarding development of delayed gastric emptying (DGE), pancreatic fistula, wound infection, or rates of reoperation and overall mortality. MIDP resulted in lower post-operative complication rates, less intra-operative blood loss, shorter hospital stays, lower blood transfusion rates, higher numbers of harvested lymph nodes, and improved negative margin status rates. However, MIPD was associated with longer operating times when compared to OPD.
CONCLUSIONS
The MIPD procedure is feasible, safe, and effective in selected patients. MIPD may have some potential advantages over OPD, and should be performed and further developed by use in selected patients at highly experienced medical centers.
Topics: Duodenal Diseases; Humans; Laparotomy; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Pancreatic Diseases; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Robotics; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 24525404
DOI: 10.1016/j.surge.2014.01.006 -
Journal of Vascular Surgery May 2023Secondary aortoduodenal fistulae (SADF) are uncommon but life-threatening conditions that occur as complications of aortic reconstructive surgery. Data on the mortality... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Secondary aortoduodenal fistulae (SADF) are uncommon but life-threatening conditions that occur as complications of aortic reconstructive surgery. Data on the mortality and morbidity of procedures associated with SADF remain scarce.
METHODS
Comprehensive literature search was conducted on the MedLine, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Knowledge databases for cases of SADF. Data regarding patient demographics, fistula anatomy and treatment interventions performed were extracted for further analysis.
RESULTS
The study pool consisted of 127 case reports, 28 case series and 1 retrospective study published between 1973 and 2021. A total of 189 patients were operated for SADF. Among the 189 patients, 141 patients (74.6%) had aortic graft excision, 26 (13.8%) aortic primary repair, and 22 (11.6%) EVAR. Although patients undergoing EVAR were older with higher Charlson Comorbidity Index, compared with patients who had graft excision and primary aortic repair these differences were not statistically significant (P = .12 and P = .22, respectively). Primary bowel repair was performed in 145 patients (76.7%), duodenectomy in 25 (13.2%), and no bowel repair in 19 (10.1%). Additional omentoplasty was performed in 65 patients (34.6%). Mortality was comparable with respect to the type of aortic and bowel repair, with no statistically significant differences recorded (P = .54 and P = .77, respectively). Omentoplasty significantly decreased the risk of death (odds ratio, 0.4; 95% confidence interval, 0.2-0.8, P = .01).
CONCLUSIONS
Optimal operative management should address both the aortic and duodenal defects and be complemented with appropriate reconstructive procedures. Endovascular aortic approaches seem feasible in carefully select patients in whom duodenal repair may be omitted.
Topics: Humans; Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; Retrospective Studies; Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation; Endovascular Procedures; Intestinal Fistula; Treatment Outcome; Postoperative Complications; Risk Factors
PubMed: 36343874
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2022.10.055 -
International Journal of Clinical... Mar 2021It is well known that surgery is the mainstay treatment for duodenal adenocarcinoma. However, the optimal extent of surgery is still under debate. We aimed to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
It is well known that surgery is the mainstay treatment for duodenal adenocarcinoma. However, the optimal extent of surgery is still under debate. We aimed to systematically review and perform a meta-analysis of limited resection (LR) and pancreatoduodenectomy for patients with duodenal adenocarcinoma. A systematic electronic database search of the literature was performed using PubMed and the Cochrane Library. All studies comparing LR and pancreatoduodenectomy for patients with duodenal adenocarcinoma were selected. Long-term overall survival was considered as the primary outcome, and perioperative morbidity and mortality as the secondary outcomes. Fifteen studies with a total of 3166 patients were analyzed; 995 and 1498 patients were treated with limited resection and pancreatoduodenectomy, respectively. Eight and 7 studies scored a low and intermediate risk of publication bias, respectively. The LR group had a more favorable result than the pancreatoduodenectomy group in overall morbidity (odd ratio [OR]: 0.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.17-0.65) and postoperative pancreatic fistula (OR: 0.13, 95% CI 0.04-0.43). Mortality (OR: 0.96, 95% CI 0.70-1.33) and overall survival (OR: 0.61, 95% CI 0.33-1.13) were not significantly different between the two groups, although comparison of the two groups stratified by prognostic factors, such as T categories, was not possible due to a lack of detailed data. LR showed long-term outcomes equivalent to those of pancreatoduodenectomy, while the perioperative morbidity rates were lower. LR could be an option for selected duodenal adenocarcinoma patients with appropriate location or depth of invasion, although further studies are required.
Topics: Adenocarcinoma; Anastomosis, Surgical; Duodenal Neoplasms; Humans; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Pancreaticoduodenectomy
PubMed: 33386555
DOI: 10.1007/s10147-020-01840-5 -
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Aug 2023Most studies on minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) combine patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancers even though there is substantial heterogeneity... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The clinical implication of minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for non-pancreatic periampullary cancer: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.
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.
Topics: Humans; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Duodenal Neoplasms; Prospective Studies; Pancreas; Postoperative Complications; Laparoscopy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37581763
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-03047-4 -
Pancreatology : Official Journal of the... 2015Potential benefits of local extirpation of benign pancreatic head tumors are tissue conservation of pancreas, stomach, duodenum and common bile duct (CBD) and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Potential benefits of local extirpation of benign pancreatic head tumors are tissue conservation of pancreas, stomach, duodenum and common bile duct (CBD) and maintenance of pancreatic functions.
METHODS
Medline/PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched to identify studies applying duodenum-preserving total or partial pancreatic-head resection (DPPHRt/p) and reporting short- and long-term outcomes. Twenty-four studies, including 416 patients who underwent DPPHRt/p, were identified for systematic analysis. The meta-analysis was based on 10 prospective controlled and 4 retrospective controlled cohort studies, comparing 293 DPPHRt/p resections with 372 pancreato-duodenectomies (PD).
RESULTS, SYSTEMATIC ANALYSIS
Of 416 patients, 75.7% underwent total and 24.3% partial head resection, while 47.1% included segmentectomy of duodenum and CBD. The most common pathology was cystic neoplasm (65.8%) and endocrine tumors (13.4%). The frequencies of severe postoperative complications of 8.8%, pancreatic fistula of 19.2%, re-operation of 1.7% and hospital mortality of 0.48%, indicate a low level of early post-operative complications.
META-ANALYSIS
DPPHRt/p significantly preserved the level of exocrine (IV = -0.67, 95% CI -0.98 to -0.35, p = 0.0001) and endocrine (IV = 18.20, fixed, 95% CI -0.92 to 25.48, p = 0.0001) pancreatic functions compared to PD when the pre- and postoperative functional status in both groups are analyzed. There were no significant differences between DPPHRt/p and PD in frequency of pancreatic fistula, delayed gastric emptying or hospital mortality.
CONCLUSION
DPPHRt/p for benign neoplasms and neuro-endocrine tumors of the pancreatic head is associated with a low level of early-postoperative complications and a better conservation of exocrine and endocrine functions.
Topics: Common Bile Duct; Duodenum; Humans; Pancreas; Pancreatic Function Tests; Pancreatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 25732271
DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2015.01.009 -
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery :... Nov 2023Pancreatic benign, cystic, and neuroendocrine neoplasms are increasingly detected and recommended for surgical treatment. In multiorgan resection pancreatoduodenectomy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Pancreatic benign, cystic, and neuroendocrine neoplasms are increasingly detected and recommended for surgical treatment. In multiorgan resection pancreatoduodenectomy or parenchyma-sparing, local extirpation is a challenge for decision-making regarding surgery-related early and late postoperative morbidity.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Libraries were searched for studies reporting early surgery-related complications following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and duodenum-preserving total (DPPHRt) or partial (DPPHRp) pancreatic head resection for benign tumors. Thirty-four cohort studies comprising data from 1099 patients were analyzed. In total, 654 patients underwent DPPHR and 445 patients PD for benign tumors. This review and meta-analysis does not need ethical approval.
RESULTS
Comparing DPPHRt and PD, the need for blood transfusion (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.10-0.41, p<0.01), re-intervention for serious surgery-related complications (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.31-0.73, p<0.001), and re-operation for severe complications (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.26-0.95, p=0.04) were significantly less frequent following DPPHRt. Pancreatic fistula B+C (19.0 to 15.3%, p=0.99) and biliary fistula (6.3 to 4.3%; p=0.33) were in the same range following PD and DPPHRt. In-hospital mortality after DPPHRt was one of 350 patients (0.28%) and after PD eight of 445 patients (1.79%) (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.10-1.09, p=0.07). Following DPPHRp, there was no mortality among the 192 patients.
CONCLUSION
DPPHR for benign pancreatic tumors is associated with significantly fewer surgery-related, serious, and severe postoperative complications and lower in-hospital mortality compared to PD. Tailored use of DPPHRt or DPPHRp contributes to a reduction of surgery-related complications. DPPHR has the potential to replace PD for benign tumors and premalignant cystic and neuroendocrine neoplasms of the pancreatic head.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy; Pancreas; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Duodenum; Neuroendocrine Tumors; Pancreatic Cyst
PubMed: 37670106
DOI: 10.1007/s11605-023-05789-4 -
BMC Gastroenterology Jul 2018Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) remains to be established as a safe and effective alternative to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) for pancreatic-head and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) remains to be established as a safe and effective alternative to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) for pancreatic-head and periampullary malignancy. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare LPD with OPD for these malignancies regarding short-term surgical and long-term survival outcomes.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted before March 2018 to identify comparative studies in regard to outcomes of both LPD and OPD for the treatment of pancreatic-head and periampullary malignancies. Morbidity, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), mortality, operative time, estimated blood loss, hospitalization, retrieved lymph nodes, and survival outcomes were compared.
RESULTS
Among eleven identified studies, 1196 underwent LPD, and 8247 were operated through OPD. The pooled data showed that LPD was associated with less morbidity (OR = 0.57, 95%CI: 0.41~ 0.78, P < 0.01), less blood loss (WMD = - 372.96 ml, 95% CI, - 507.83~ - 238.09 ml, P < 0.01), shorter hospital stays (WMD = - 197.49 ml, 95% CI, - 304.62~ - 90.37 ml, P < 0.01), and comparable POPF (OR = 0.85, 95%CI: 0.59~ 1.24, P = 0.40), and overall survival (HR = 1.03, 95%CI: 0.93~ 1.14, P = 0.54) compared to OPD. Operative time was longer in LPD (WMD = 87.68 min; 95%CI: 27.05~ 148.32, P < 0.01), whereas R0 rate tended to be higher in LPD (OR = 1.17; 95%CI: 1.00~ 1.37, P = 0.05) and there tended to be more retrieved lymph nodes in LPD (WMD = 1.15, 95%CI: -0.16~ 2.47, P = 0.08), but these differences failed to reach statistical significance.
CONCLUSIONS
LPD can be performed as safe and effective as OPD for pancreatic-head and periampullary malignancy with respect to both surgical and oncological outcomes. LPD is associated with less intraoperative blood loss and postoperative morbidity and may serve as a promising alternative to OPD in selected individuals in the future.
Topics: Adenocarcinoma; Ampulla of Vater; Blood Loss, Surgical; Common Bile Duct Neoplasms; Humans; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Lymphatic Metastasis; Operative Time; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Postoperative Complications; Survival Analysis
PubMed: 29969999
DOI: 10.1186/s12876-018-0830-y -
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery :... Jan 2016Parenchyma-sparing local extirpation of benign tumors of the pancreatic head provides the potential benefits of preservation of functional tissue and low postoperative... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Parenchyma-sparing local extirpation of benign tumors of the pancreatic head provides the potential benefits of preservation of functional tissue and low postoperative morbidity.
METHODS
Medline/PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were surveyed for studies performing limited resection of the pancreatic head and resection of a segment of the duodenum and common bile duct or preservation of the duodenum and common bile duct (CBD). The systematic analysis included 27 cohort studies that reported on limited pancreatic head resections for benign tumors. In a subgroup analysis, 12 of the cohort studies were additionally evaluated to compare the postoperative morbidity after total head resection including duodenal segment resection (DPPHR-S) and total head resection conserving duodenum and CBD (DPPHR-T).
RESULTS
Three hundred thirty-nine of a total of 503 patients (67.4%) underwent total head resections. One hundred forty-seven patients (29.2%) of them underwent segmental resection of the duodenum and CBD (DPPHR-S) and 192 patients (38.2%) underwent preservation of duodenum and CBD. One hundred sixty-four patients experienced partial head resection (32.6%). The final histological diagnosis revealed in 338 of 503 patients (67.2%) cystic neoplasms, 53 patients (10.3%) neuroendocrine tumors, and 20 patients (4.0%) low-risk periampullary carcinomas. Severe postoperative complications occurred in 62 of 490 patients (12.7%), pancreatic fistula B + C in 40 of 295 patients (13.6%), resurgery was experienced in 2.7%, and delayed gastric emptying in 12.3%. The 90-day mortality was 0.4%. The subgroup analysis comparing 143 DPPHR-S patients with 95 DPPHR-T patients showed that the respective rates of procedure-related biliary complications were 0.7% (1 of 143 patients) versus 8.4% (8 of 95 patients) (p ≤ 0.0032), and rates of duodenal complications were 0 versus 6.3% (6 of 95 patients) (p ≤ 0.0037). DPPHR-S was associated with a higher rate of delay of gastric emptying compared to DPPHR-T (18.9 vs. 2.1%, p ≤ 0.0001).
CONCLUSION
Parenchyma-sparing, limited head resection for benign tumors preserves functional pancreatic and duodenal tissue and carries in terms of fistula B + C rate, resurgery, rehospitalization, and 90-day mortality a low risk of postoperative complications. A subgroup analysis exhibited after total pancreatic head resection that preserves the duodenum and CBD an association with a significant increase in procedure-related biliary and duodenal complications compared to total head resection combined with resection of the periampullary segment of the duodenum and resection of the intrapancreatic CBD.
Topics: Common Bile Duct; Duodenum; Humans; Pancreas; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 26525207
DOI: 10.1007/s11605-015-2981-2