-
BMC Surgery Jul 2023
Topics: Humans; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Pancreas; Pancreatectomy
PubMed: 37420195
DOI: 10.1186/s12893-023-02091-7 -
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 -
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Aug 2023The systematic review is aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open distal pancreatectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The systematic review is aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open distal pancreatectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy.
METHOD
The MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, and clinical trial registries were systematically searched using the PRISMA framework. Studies of adults aged ≥ 18 year comparing laparoscopic and/or robotic versus open DP and/or PD that reported cost of operation or index admission, and cost-effectiveness outcomes were included. The risk of bias of non-randomised studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, while the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB2) tool was used for randomised studies. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for continuous variables.
RESULTS
Twenty-two studies (152,651 patients) were included in the systematic review and 15 studies in the meta-analysis (3 RCTs; 3 case-controlled; 9 retrospective studies). Of these, 1845 patients underwent MIS (1686 laparoscopic and 159 robotic) and 150,806 patients open surgery. The cost of surgical procedure (SMD 0.89; 95% CI 0.35 to 1.43; I = 91%; P = 0.001), equipment (SMD 3.73; 95% CI 1.55 to 5.91; I = 98%; P = 0.0008), and operating room occupation (SMD 1.17, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.24; I = 95%; P = 0.03) was higher with MIS. However, overall index hospitalisation costs trended lower with MIS (SMD - 0.13; 95% CI - 0.35 to 0.06; I = 80%; P = 0.17). There was significant heterogeneity among the studies.
CONCLUSION
Minimally invasive major pancreatic surgery entailed higher intraoperative but similar overall index hospitalisation costs.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Pancreatectomy; Retrospective Studies; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Pancreas; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Laparoscopy
PubMed: 37572127
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-03017-w -
Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery Sep 2023Robotic central pancreatectomy has not been widely performed because of its rare indications, technical difficulties, and concern about the high complication rate. We...
Robotic central pancreatectomy has not been widely performed because of its rare indications, technical difficulties, and concern about the high complication rate. We reviewed six robotic central pancreatectomy cases between May 2016 and June 2021 at a single institution. This multimedia article aims to introduce our technique of robotic central pancreatectomy with perioperative and follow-up outcomes. All patients experienced biochemical leakage of postoperative pancreatic fistula, except in one with a grade B pancreatic fistula, which resulted in a pseudocyst formation and was successfully managed by endoscopic internal drainage. All patients achieved completely negative resection margins. There was no new-onset diabetes mellitus or recurrence during the median follow-up period of 13.5 months (range, 10-74 months). With an acceptable complication rate and the preservation of pancreatic function, robotic central pancreatectomy could be a good surgical option for patients with benign and borderline malignant tumors of the pancreatic neck or proximal body.
PubMed: 37712316
DOI: 10.7602/jmis.2023.26.3.155 -
Islets Dec 2023Patients with chronic pancreatitis (CP) often have severe and intractable abdominal pain, leading to decreased quality of life (QOL), inability to work or attend school,...
BACKGROUND
Patients with chronic pancreatitis (CP) often have severe and intractable abdominal pain, leading to decreased quality of life (QOL), inability to work or attend school, and increased health care costs due to repeated emergency room visits and hospitalizations.
METHODS
We evaluated the efficacy of total pancreatectomy and islet autotransplantation (TPIAT) in terms of pain control and QOL in CP patients treated at our center in Japan. To evaluate QOL, we used the Short-Form 36 Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2 Standard, Japanese), European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), and Quality of Life Questionnaire-Pancreatic Modification (QLQ-PAN28).
RESULTS
Between August 2016 and June 2019, we performed this procedure in 5 patients. All patients were followed up for 12 months and all transplanted islets were still functioning at the 1-year follow-up. The major adverse events were abdominal wall hemorrhage, intestinal obstruction, intra-abdominal abscess, and abdominal pain requiring hospitalization; no case had sequelae. No major complications were due to islet transplantation. Pain scores improved postoperatively in all patients. Three QOL item dimensions role-physical ( = 0.03125), general health perception ( = 0.03125) and vitality ( = 0.03125) in the SF-36 were significantly improved 12 months after TPIAT. Mean values of many other QOL items improved, though not significantly.
CONCLUSION
The QOL improvement after TPIAT for CP suggests its effectiveness in the Japanese population.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy; Transplantation, Autologous; Quality of Life; Japan; Treatment Outcome; Pancreatitis, Chronic; Islets of Langerhans Transplantation; Abdominal Pain
PubMed: 37087752
DOI: 10.1080/19382014.2023.2202092 -
Internal and Emergency Medicine Nov 2023Overweight and obesity are some of the most important health challenges. Many diseases are related to these metabolic disorders, and, among them, the pancreatic fat... (Review)
Review
Overweight and obesity are some of the most important health challenges. Many diseases are related to these metabolic disorders, and, among them, the pancreatic fat accumulation, also called "pancreatic steatosis" or "nonalcoholic fatty pancreas", seems to have an emerging role in different conditions. There are different method to evaluate the fat content in the pancreas, such as histology, different imaging techniques and endoscopic ultrasound, but there is no gold standard for the correct diagnosis and for the identification of "inter/intralobular" and "intra-acinar" pancreatic fat. However, the fat storage in the pancreas is linked to chronic inflammation and to several conditions, such as acute and chronic pancreatitis, type 2 diabetes mellitus and pancreatic cancer. In addition, pancreatic fat accumulation has also been demonstrated to play a role in surgical outcome after pancreatectomy, in particular for the development of postoperative pancreatic fistula. Different possible therapeutic approaches have been proposed, but there is still a lack of evidence. The aim of this review is to report the current evidence about the relationship between the obesity, the pancreatic fat accumulation and its potential role in pancreatic diseases.
Topics: Humans; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Pancreas; Pancreatic Diseases; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Obesity
PubMed: 37462859
DOI: 10.1007/s11739-023-03364-y -
Surgical Endoscopy Nov 2023Although robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) has a lower conversion rate to open surgery and causes less blood loss than laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP), clear...
BACKGROUND
Although robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) has a lower conversion rate to open surgery and causes less blood loss than laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP), clear evidence on the impact of the surgical approach on morbidity is lacking. Prior studies have shown a higher rate of complications among obese patients undergoing pancreatectomy. The primary aim of this study is to compare short-term outcomes of RDP vs. LDP in patients with a BMI ≥ 30.
METHODS
In this multicenter study, all obese patients who underwent RDP or LDP for any indication between 2012 and 2022 at 18 international expert centers were included. The baseline characteristics underwent inverse probability treatment weighting to minimize allocation bias.
RESULTS
Of 446 patients, 219 (50.2%) patients underwent RDP. The median age was 60 years, the median BMI was 33 (31-36), and the preoperative diagnosis was ductal adenocarcinoma in 21% of cases. The conversion rate was 19.9%, the overall complication rate was 57.8%, and the 90-day mortality rate was 0.7% (3 patients). RDP was associated with a lower complication rate (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.52-0.89; p = 0.005), less blood loss (150 vs. 200 ml; p < 0.001), fewer blood transfusion requirements (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.15-0.50; p < 0.001) and a lower Comprehensive Complications Index (8.7 vs. 8.9, p < 0.001) than LPD. RPD had a lower conversion rate (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.19-0.39; p < 0.001) and achieved better spleen preservation rate (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.13-3.39; p = 0.016) than LPD.
CONCLUSIONS
In obese patients, RDP is associated with a lower conversion rate, fewer complications and better short-term outcomes than LPD.
Topics: Humans; Middle Aged; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Pancreatectomy; Treatment Outcome; Laparoscopy; Operative Time; Length of Stay; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37715084
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-023-10361-x -
International Journal of Surgery... Mar 2024International guidelines recommend monitoring of the use and outcome of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS). However, data from prospective international audits...
BACKGROUND
International guidelines recommend monitoring of the use and outcome of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery (MIPS). However, data from prospective international audits on minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) are lacking. This study examined the use and outcome of robot-assisted (RDP) and laparoscopic (LDP) distal pancreatectomy in the E-MIPS registry.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Post-hoc analysis in a prospective audit on MIPS, including consecutive patients undergoing MIDP in 83 centers from 19 European countries (01-01-2019/31-12-2021). Primary outcomes included intraoperative events (grade 1: excessive blood loss, grade 2: conversion/change in operation, grade 3: intraoperative death), major morbidity, and in-hospital/30-day mortality. Multivariable logistic regression analyses identified high-risk groups for intraoperative events. RDP and LDP were compared in the total cohort and in high-risk groups.
RESULTS
Overall, 1672 patients undergoing MIDP were included; 606 (36.2%) RDP and 1066 (63.8%) LDP. The annual use of RDP increased from 30.5% to 42.6% (P<0.001). RDP was associated with fewer grade 2 intraoperative events compared to LDP (9.6% vs. 16.8%, P<0.001), with longer operating time (238 vs. 201 minutes,P<0.001). No significant differences were observed between RDP and LDP regarding major morbidity (23.4% vs. 25.9%, P=0.264) and in-hospital/30-day mortality (0.3% vs. 0.8%, P=0.344). Three high-risk groups were identified; BMI>25 kg/m2, previous abdominal surgery, and vascular involvement. In each group, RDP was associated with fewer conversions and longer operative times.
CONCLUSION
This European registry-based study demonstrated favorable outcomes for MIDP, with mortality rates below 1%. LDP remains the predominant approach, whereas the use of RDP is increasing. RDP was associated with less conversions and longer operative time, including in high-risk subgroups. Future randomized trials should confirm these findings and assess cost differences.
PubMed: 38498397
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000001315