-
Annals of Surgery Jan 2020The aim of this study was to develop and externally validate the first evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreas resection (MIPR) before and during the... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to develop and externally validate the first evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreas resection (MIPR) before and during the International Evidence-based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR) meeting in Miami (March 2019).
SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA
MIPR has seen rapid development in the past decade. Promising outcomes have been reported by early adopters from high-volume centers. Subsequently, multicenter series as well as randomized controlled trials were reported; however, guidelines for clinical practice were lacking.
METHODS
The Scottisch Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology was used, incorporating these 4 items: systematic reviews using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to answer clinical questions, whenever possible in PICO style, the GRADE approach for assessment of the quality of evidence, the Delphi method for establishing consensus on the developed recommendations, and the AGREE-II instrument for the assessment of guideline quality and external validation. The current guidelines are cosponsored by the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Asian-Pacific Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery, Pancreas Club, the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgery, the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, and the Society of Surgical Oncology.
RESULTS
After screening 16,069 titles, 694 studies were reviewed, and 291 were included. The final 28 recommendations covered 6 topics; laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy, central pancreatectomy, pancreatoduodenectomy, as well as patient selection, training, learning curve, and minimal annual center volume required to obtain optimal outcomes and patient safety.
CONCLUSION
The IG-MIPR using SIGN methodology give guidance to surgeons, hospital administrators, patients, and medical societies on the use and outcome of MIPR as well as the approach to be taken regarding this challenging type of surgery.
Topics: Congresses as Topic; Evidence-Based Medicine; Florida; Humans; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Diseases; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Societies, Medical
PubMed: 31567509
DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003590 -
Surgery Sep 2014The lymph node (Ln) status of patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is an important predictor of survival. The survival benefit of extended...
Definition of a standard lymphadenectomy in surgery for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a consensus statement by the International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS).
BACKGROUND
The lymph node (Ln) status of patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is an important predictor of survival. The survival benefit of extended lymphadenectomy during pancreatectomy is, however, disputed, and there is no true definition of the optimal extent of the lymphadenectomy. The aim of this study was to formulate a definition for standard lymphadenectomy during pancreatectomy.
METHODS
During a consensus meeting of the International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery, pancreatic surgeons formulated a consensus statement based on available literature and their experience.
RESULTS
The nomenclature of the Japanese Pancreas Society was accepted by all participants. Extended lymphadenectomy during pancreatoduodenectomy with resection of Ln's along the left side of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) and around the celiac trunk, splenic artery, or left gastric artery showed no survival benefit compared with a standard lymphadenectomy. No level I evidence was available on prognostic impact of positive para-aortic Ln's. Consensus was reached on selectively removing suspected Ln's outside the resection area for frozen section. No consensus was reached on continuing or terminating resection in cases where these nodes were positive.
CONCLUSION
Extended lymphadenectomy cannot be recommended. Standard lymphadenectomy for pancreatoduodenectomy should strive to resect Ln stations no. 5, 6, 8a, 12b1, 12b2, 12c, 13a, 13b, 14a, 14b, 17a, and 17b. For cancers of the body and tail of the pancreas, removal of stations 10, 11, and 18 is standard. Furthermore, lymphadenectomy is important for adequate nodal staging. Both pancreatic resection in relatively fit patients or nonresectional palliative treatment were accepted as acceptable treatment in cases of positive Ln's outside the resection plane. This consensus statement could serve as a guide for surgeons and researchers in future directives and new clinical studies.
Topics: Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal; Humans; Lymph Node Excision; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Pancreaticoduodenectomy
PubMed: 25061003
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2014.06.016 -
Endocrine Reviews Apr 2019Pancreatic islet transplantation has become an established approach to β-cell replacement therapy for the treatment of insulin-deficient diabetes. Recent progress in... (Review)
Review
Pancreatic islet transplantation has become an established approach to β-cell replacement therapy for the treatment of insulin-deficient diabetes. Recent progress in techniques for islet isolation, islet culture, and peritransplant management of the islet transplant recipient has resulted in substantial improvements in metabolic and safety outcomes for patients. For patients requiring total or subtotal pancreatectomy for benign disease of the pancreas, isolation of islets from the diseased pancreas with intrahepatic transplantation of autologous islets can prevent or ameliorate postsurgical diabetes, and for patients previously experiencing painful recurrent acute or chronic pancreatitis, quality of life is substantially improved. For patients with type 1 diabetes or insulin-deficient forms of pancreatogenic (type 3c) diabetes, isolation of islets from a deceased donor pancreas with intrahepatic transplantation of allogeneic islets can ameliorate problematic hypoglycemia, stabilize glycemic lability, and maintain on-target glycemic control, consequently with improved quality of life, and often without the requirement for insulin therapy. Because the metabolic benefits are dependent on the numbers of islets transplanted that survive engraftment, recipients of autoislets are limited to receive the number of islets isolated from their own pancreas, whereas recipients of alloislets may receive islets isolated from more than one donor pancreas. The development of alternative sources of islet cells for transplantation, whether from autologous, allogeneic, or xenogeneic tissues, is an active area of investigation that promises to expand access and indications for islet transplantation in the future treatment of diabetes.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Humans; Islets of Langerhans Transplantation; Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Diseases
PubMed: 30541144
DOI: 10.1210/er.2018-00154 -
Bratislavske Lekarske Listy 2024Distal pancreatectomy is a standard surgical procedure for selected benign, premalignant, and malignant lesions localized in the pancreatic body or tail. Surgical...
NTRODUCTION
Distal pancreatectomy is a standard surgical procedure for selected benign, premalignant, and malignant lesions localized in the pancreatic body or tail. Surgical resection remains the only curative option for patients diagnosed with adenocarcinoma of the pancreas.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
Perioperative and postoperative clinical courses were retrospectively assessed in patients, who underwent distal pancreatectomy during the 2011‒2021 period.
RESULTS
During the 2011‒2021 period, a total of 112 distal pancreatectomies were performed. 67 patients (59.8%) underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy, and 45 patients (40.2%) open laparotomy. The conversion was necessary for 13 patients (11.6%). Distal pancreatectomies performed laparoscopically were associated more often with biochemical leak and the development of grade B fistula, on the other hand grade C fistula developed only in patients operated by open laparotomy (LPT). The mean operating time was slightly longer in the laparoscopic group (227.1 min vs 214.6 min). The mean estimated blood loss was significantly higher in the LPT group (540.4 ml vs 191.9 ml). The mean hospitalization time was slightly longer in the LPT group (11.8 days vs 9.3 days). The rates of early reoperations were comparable between both groups (6 vs 5).
CONCLUSION
Laparoscopic techniques are preferred in centers around the world to bring patients benefits by using a minimally invasive approach. These techniques are also preferred in our center, in nearly 60% of all distal pancreatectomies performed during 10 years, but on the other hand, there is a much more careful approach chosen in cases of malignant disease to achieve adequate radicality (Tab.4, Ref. 20).
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Retrospective Studies; Pancreas; Laparoscopy; Fistula; Treatment Outcome; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 38526860
DOI: 10.4149/BLL_2024_36 -
World Journal of Surgery Oct 2016Robotic assistance enhances surgical dexterity and could facilitate wider adoption of laparoscopy for pancreatic resections (PR).
BACKGROUND
Robotic assistance enhances surgical dexterity and could facilitate wider adoption of laparoscopy for pancreatic resections (PR).
METHODS
Data were prospectively entered into a database and analyzed retrospectively to assess feasibility and safety of robotic-assisted PR (RAPR). Additionally, robotic-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy (RAPD) was compared to a contemporary group of open pancreaticoduodenectomies (OPD).
RESULTS
Between October 2008 and October 2014, 200 consecutive patients underwent RAPR. Three procedures were converted to open surgery (1.5 %), despite 14 patients required associated vascular procedures. RAPD was performed in 83 patients (41.5 %), distal pancreatectomy in 83 (41.5 %), total pancreatectomy in 17 (8.5 %), tumor enucleation in 12 (6 %), and central pancreatectomy in 5 (2.5 %). Thirty-day and 90-day mortality rates were 0.5 and 1 %, respectively. Both deaths occurred after RAPD with vein resection. Complications occurred in 63.0 % of the patients (≥Clavien-Dindo grade IIIb in 4 %). Median comprehensive complication index was 20.9 (0-26.2). Incidence of grade B/C pancreatic fistula was 28.0 %. Reoperation was required in 14 patients (7.0 %). The risk of reoperation decreased after post-operative day 20 (OR 0.072) (p = 0.0015). When compared to OPD, RAPD was associated with longer mean operative time (527.2 ± 166.1 vs. 425.3 ± 92.7; <0.0001) but had an equivalent safety profile. The median number of examined lymph nodes (37; 28.8-45.3 vs. 36; 28-52.8) and the rate of margin positivity in patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer were also similar (12.5 vs. 45.5 %).
CONCLUSIONS
RAPR, including RAPD, are safely feasible in selected patients. The results of RAPD in pancreatic cancer are encouraging but deserve further investigation.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Conversion to Open Surgery; Feasibility Studies; Female; Humans; Laparoscopy; Lymph Nodes; Male; Margins of Excision; Middle Aged; Operative Time; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Postoperative Complications; Postoperative Period; Reoperation; Retrospective Studies; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Young Adult
PubMed: 27206401
DOI: 10.1007/s00268-016-3565-3 -
HPB : the Official Journal of the... Mar 2017The first International conference on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection was arranged in conjunction with the annual meeting of the International... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The first International conference on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection was arranged in conjunction with the annual meeting of the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (IHPBA), in Sao Paulo, Brazil on April 19th 2016. The presented evidence and outcomes resulting from the session for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is summarized and addressed perioperative outcome, the outcome for cancer and patient selection for the procedure.
METHODS
A literature search was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to compare MIDP and open distal pancreatectomy. Patient selection was discussed based on plenary talks, panel discussions and a worldwide survey on MIDP.
RESULTS
Of 582 studies, 52 (40 observational and 12 case-matched) were included in the assessment for outcome for LDP (n = 5023) vs. ODP (n = 16,306) whereas 16 observational comparative studies were identified for cancer outcome. No randomized trials were identified. MIDP resulted in similar outcome to ODP with a tendency for lower blood loss and shorter hospital stay in the MIDP group.
DISCUSSION
Available evidence for comparison of MIDP to ODP is weak, although the number of studies is high. Observed outcomes of MIDP are promising. In the absence of randomized control trials, an international registry should be established.
Topics: Congresses as Topic; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Laparoscopy; Pancreatectomy; Patient Selection; Postoperative Complications; Risk Factors; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28215903
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2017.01.009 -
Updates in Surgery Sep 2016Total pancreatectomy is associated with short- and long-term high complication rate and without evidence of oncologic advantages. Several metabolic consequences are... (Review)
Review
Total pancreatectomy is associated with short- and long-term high complication rate and without evidence of oncologic advantages. Several metabolic consequences are co-related with the apancreatic state. The unstable diabetes related to the total resection of the pancreas expose the patients to short- and long-term life-threatening complications. Severe hypoglycemia is a short-term dangerous complication that can also cause patients' death. Chronic complications of severe diabetes (cardiac and vascular diseases, neuropathy, nephropathy, and retinopathy) are also cause of morbidity, mortality and worsening of quality of life. For this reasons the number of total pancreatectomies performed has certainly decreased over time. However, today there are still some indications for this kind of procedures. Chronic pancreatitis untreatable with conventional treatments, surgical treatment of precancerous pancreatic lesions, surgical treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer and the management of patients with extraordinary high-risk pancreatic texture after pancreaticoduodenectomy represent possible indications for total pancreatectomy and are analyzed in the present paper.
Topics: Decision Making; Humans; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Pancreatitis, Chronic; Quality of Life; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27605208
DOI: 10.1007/s13304-016-0388-6 -
Minerva Chirurgica Jun 2019
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy
PubMed: 31066539
DOI: 10.23736/S0026-4733.19.08032-5 -
Minerva Surgery Dec 2023Being an underdiagnosed and under or insufficiently treated condition, surgical pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (PSP) is the condition in which pancreatic enzymes are...
Being an underdiagnosed and under or insufficiently treated condition, surgical pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (PSP) is the condition in which pancreatic enzymes are insufficient for digestion because of gastrointestinal (GI) surgery involving the upper GI tract, biliary ducts, or the pancreas, and and leading to potential malnutrition and deterioration in quality of life. Age, obesity, history of tobacco use, family history of diabetes, surgery due to a malignant tumor, presence of steatorrhea, jaundice, weight loss, and intraoperative findings of hard pancreatic texture have been associated with a higher risk of PSP. Pancreatoduodectomy (PD) has demonstrated an increased risk of developing PSP, with a prevalence between 19-100%. Distal pancreatectomy (DP) and central pancreatectomy (CenP) are associated with less risk of PSP, with a prevalence of 0-82% and 3.66-8.7%, respectively. In patients with chronic pancreatitis (CP), PSP was associated with 80% in Partington-Rochelle procedure, 86% in Frey procedure, 80% in duodenum preserving pancreatic head procedure, >60% in PD and 27.5-63% in DP. Fecal elastase-1 (FE-1) is a generally accepted tool for diagnosis. Treatment is recommended to start as soon as a diagnosis is achieved, or clinical suspicion is high. Pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy improves symptoms of malabsorption, facilitates weight gain, and ultimately improves patients' quality of life. Starting dosage is between 10,000-50,000 units in snacks and 50,000-75,000 units in main meals, administered throughout food intake, though further data specifically on PSP are needed. Follow-up in PSP is recommended on an on-demand basis, where malnutrition should be assessed.
Topics: Humans; Quality of Life; Exocrine Pancreatic Insufficiency; Pancreas; Pancreatectomy; Malnutrition
PubMed: 38059441
DOI: 10.23736/S2724-5691.23.10125-0 -
Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift Fur Alle... Jun 2017Despite being technically challenging, laparoscopic surgical procedures are increasingly being used also in pancreatic surgery. This review attempts to evaluate these... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
Despite being technically challenging, laparoscopic surgical procedures are increasingly being used also in pancreatic surgery. This review attempts to evaluate these procedures based on the currently available literature against the background of the high mortality of pancreatic surgery observed nationwide and the as yet unclear oncological validation of these procedures.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Recently published retrospective cohort and register trials have evaluated not only perioperative outcome but also long-term survival after laparoscopic pancreatic resection.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION
Laparoscopic interventions are increasingly being used for treatment of malignant tumors of the pancreas. The advantages of laparoscopy, such as less intraoperative blood loss, reduced postoperative pain and a shorter duration of hospital stay, have all been demonstrated in retrospective trials. Equivalent long-term survival after oncological laparoscopic pancreatic surgery compared to open procedures was also observed in these trials; however, mortality even after laparoscopic pancreatic surgery was found to be significantly increased in low-volume centers. Prospective trials are still needed to prove adequate oncological treatment. Laparoskopische Verfahren haben sich in den letzten Jahren in fast allen Bereichen der Chirurgie quasi zum Standard entwickelt und werden von Patienten zunehmend nachgefragt. Die kosmetischen Ergebnisse sind deutlich besser als bei konventionellem Vorgehen und sie reduzieren unter anderem den postoperativen Schmerz, Schmerzmittelbedarf sowie den Krankenhausaufenthalt [29]. Daher ist es wenig überraschend, dass minimal-invasive Verfahren auch bei technisch hochkomplexen Eingriffen, wie z. B. am Pankreas, zunehmend eingesetzt werden. Allerdings wird ihr Einsatz hier noch immer kontrovers diskutiert.
Topics: Cohort Studies; Germany; Hospitals, High-Volume; Hospitals, Low-Volume; Laparoscopy; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Retrospective Studies; Survival Analysis
PubMed: 28258384
DOI: 10.1007/s00104-017-0398-z