-
Surgical Endoscopy Jun 2023Robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy (RDP) has been suggested to hold some benefits over laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) but consensus and data on specific... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
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.
Topics: Humans; Robotics; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Pancreatectomy; Treatment Outcome; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal; Laparoscopy; Operative Time; Length of Stay; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 36781467
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-023-09894-y -
International Journal of Surgery... Dec 2023Pancreatic cancer frequently involves the surrounding major arteries, preventing surgeons from making a radical excision. Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) can lessen the size... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Perioperative and long-term survival outcomes of pancreatectomy with arterial resection in borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer following neoadjuvant therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Pancreatic cancer frequently involves the surrounding major arteries, preventing surgeons from making a radical excision. Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) can lessen the size of local tumors and eliminate potential micrommetastases. However, systematic and evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of arterial resection (AR) after NAT in pancreatic cancer are scarce.
METHOD
A computerized search of the Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library databases, and Clinicaltrials was performed to identify studies reporting the outcomes of patients who underwent pancreatectomy with AR and NAT for pancreatic cancer. Studies that reported perioperative and/or long-term results after pancreatectomy with AR and NAT were eligible for inclusion. The quality of the evidence was assessed with Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Form of bias tool. Data were pooled and analyzed by Stata 14.0 software.
RESULT
Nine studies with an overall sample size of 215 met our eligibility criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. All studies were retrospective studies, and the methodological quality was moderate. The pooled morbidity and mortality rates were 51% (95% CI: 41-61%; I²= 0.0%) and 2% (95% CI: 0-0.08; I²=33.3%), respectively. Meta-analysis showed that the overall R0 resection rate was 79% (CI: 70-86%, I²=15.5%). Comparative data on R0 rates of patients who underwent pancreatectomy with and without NAT showed a significant difference in favor of the former group with moderate statistical heterogeneity (Relative risk=1.21; 95% CI: 0.776-1.915; I²=48.0%). The median 1-, 2-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates of patients who had AR were 92.3% (range: 72.7-100%), 64.8% (range: 25-78.8%), 51.6% (range: 16.7-63.6%), and 14% (range: 0-41.1%), respectively. Data on median progression-free survival ranged from 5.25 to 36.3 months, and the median overall survival ranged from 17 to 44.9 months.
CONCLUSIONS
Pancreatectomy with major AR following NAT has the potential to enhance the survival rate of patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer involving the arteries by achieving R0 resection, despite a significant risk of postoperative complications. However, to validate the feasibility and effectiveness of this procedure, prospective controlled studies are necessary to address limitations arising from small sample sizes and potential biases inherent in retrospective studies.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Arteries; Neoplasms, Second Primary
PubMed: 38259002
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000742 -
Annals of Surgical Oncology Jun 2013Robotic surgery is gaining momentum with advantages for minimally invasive management of pancreatic diseases. The objective of this meta-analysis is to compare the... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Robotic surgery is gaining momentum with advantages for minimally invasive management of pancreatic diseases. The objective of this meta-analysis is to compare the clinical and oncologic safety and efficacy of robotic versus open pancreatectomy.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify studies comparing robotic pancreatectomy and open pancreatectomy. Postoperative outcomes, intraoperative outcomes, and oncologic safety were evaluated. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effect model.
RESULTS
Seven studies matched the selection criteria, including 137 (40 %) cases of robotic pancreatectomy and 203 (60 %) cases of open pancreatectomy. None of the included studies were randomized. Overall complication rate was significantly lower in robotic group [risk difference (RD) = -0.12, 95 % confidence interval (CI) -0.22 to -0.01, P = 0.03], as well as reoperation rate (RD = -0.12; CI -0.2 to -0.03, P = 0.006) and margin positivity (RD = -0.18; 95 % CI -0.3 to -0.06, P = 0.003). There was no significant difference in postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) incidence and mortality. The median (range) conversion rate was 10 % (0-12 %).
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this meta-analysis suggest that robotic pancreatectomy is as safe and efficient as, if not superior to, open surgery for patients with benign or malignant pancreatic diseases. However, the evidence is limited and more randomized controlled trials are needed to further clearly define this role.
Topics: Blood Loss, Surgical; Confidence Intervals; Humans; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Neoplasm, Residual; Operative Time; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Reoperation; Robotics
PubMed: 23504140
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-012-2823-3 -
Surgery Apr 2023We sought to provide a meta-analysis and credibility assessment of available randomized controlled trials and propensity score matched studies when assessing early and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
We sought to provide a meta-analysis and credibility assessment of available randomized controlled trials and propensity score matched studies when assessing early and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy compared with open distal pancreatectomy.
METHODS
The MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched for pertinent literature up to June 2022. Random-effect meta-analyses were applied. Trial sequential analysis was applied to verify whether results were true- or false-positive or -negative findings.
RESULTS
Thirteen studies were identified (2 randomized controlled trials and 11 propensity score matched studies). The early outcomes were assessed on 12 studies, including 4,346 patients. In this population, laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy decreased postoperative stay (mean difference = 1.8 days; P = .001) and estimated blood loss (mean difference = 148 mL; P = .001), and trial sequential analysis confirmed these as true-positive findings. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and open distal pancreatectomy had similar operating times (P = .165), and trial sequential analysis confirmed this as a true-negative finding. Major morbidity, mortality, and readmission were similar, but results were inconclusive by trial sequential analysis. Oncologic outcomes were assessed on 5 studies, including 2,430 patients. In this population, laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy showed higher R0 resection rate (OR = 1.46; P = .001) and shorter time to adjuvant therapy (mean difference 4.0 days P = .003). A survival benefit was observed at 1 year after laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (OR = 1.45; P = .001), which was not confirmed at 3 years (P = .650).
CONCLUSION
Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is superior to open distal pancreatectomy for most of the early outcomes analyzed. The operating time was equalized as a result of the learning curve. Results from patients with pancreatic cancer suggest at least an oncologic noninferiority of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy compared with open distal pancreatectomy.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Postoperative Period; Laparoscopy; Treatment Outcome; Postoperative Complications; Length of Stay
PubMed: 36564287
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2022.11.029 -
Clinical Endocrinology Dec 2011Islet autotransplantation (IAT) may decrease the morbidity and mortality of postpancreatectomy diabetes mellitus. The current systematic review and meta-analysis... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Islet autotransplantation (IAT) may decrease the morbidity and mortality of postpancreatectomy diabetes mellitus. The current systematic review and meta-analysis examined the rate of insulin independence (II) and mortality after IAT post-total (TP) or partial pancreatectomy (PP).
METHODS
Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, SCOPUS and reference lists were searched until 31 January 2011. Eligible studies enrolled adult patients with IAT post-TP or PP, regardless of study design, sample size and language. Two investigators identified eligible studies and extracted data independently. From each study, 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated and pooled using random effects meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Fifteen observational studies were eligible (11 IAT post-TP, two post-PP and two including both). The II rates for IAT post-TP at last follow-up and transiently during the study were 4·62 per 100 person-years (95% CI: 1·53-7·72) and 8·34 per 100 person-years (95% CI: 3·32-13·37), respectively. In the later group, patients achieved transient II lasting 15·57 months (95% CI: 10·35-20·79). The II rate at last follow-up for IAT post-PP was 24·28 per 100 person-years (95% CI: 0·00-48·96). Whereas the 30-day mortality for IAT post-TP and post-PP was 5% (95% CI: 2-10%) and 0, respectively, the long-term mortality was 1·38 per 100 person-years (95% CI: 0·66-2·11) and 0·70 per 100 person-years (95% CI: 0·00-1·80) respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
IAT postpancreatectomy offers some patients a chance for insulin independence. Better data reporting are essential to establish the risks and benefits of IAT after pancreatic surgery.
Topics: Adult; Algorithms; Diabetes Mellitus; Humans; Islets of Langerhans Transplantation; Pancreatectomy; Transplantation, Autologous; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 21605156
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2265.2011.04121.x -
The British Journal of Surgery Jun 2013Central pancreatectomy (CP) is a parenchyma-sparing surgical procedure that enables the removal of benign and/or low-grade malignant lesions from the neck and proximal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Central pancreatectomy (CP) is a parenchyma-sparing surgical procedure that enables the removal of benign and/or low-grade malignant lesions from the neck and proximal body of the pancreas. The aim of this review was to evaluate the short- and long-term surgical results of CP from all published studies, and the results of comparative studies of CP versus distal pancreatectomy (DP).
METHODS
Eligible studies published between 1988 and 2010 were reviewed systematically. Comparisons between CP and DP were pooled and analysed by meta-analytical techniques using random- or fixed-effects models, as appropriate.
RESULTS
Ninety-four studies, involving 963 patients undergoing CP, were identified. Postoperative morbidity and pancreatic fistula rates were 45·3 and 40·9 per cent respectively. Endocrine and exocrine pancreatic insufficiency was reported in 5·0 and 9·9 per cent of patients. The overall mortality rate was 0·8 per cent. Compared with DP, CP had a higher postoperative morbidity rate and a higher incidence of pancreatic fistula, but a lower risk of endocrine insufficiency (relative risk (RR) 0·22, 95 per cent confidence interval 0·14 to 0·35; P < 0·001). The risk of exocrine failure was also lower after CP, although this was not significant (RR 0·59, 0·32 to 1·07; P = 0·082).
CONCLUSION
CP is a safe procedure with good long-term functional reserve. In situations where DP represents an alternative, CP is associated with a slightly higher risk of early complications.
Topics: Gastrostomy; Humans; Length of Stay; Operative Time; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Diseases; Pancreaticojejunostomy; Postoperative Complications; Prospective Studies; Reoperation; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 23640664
DOI: 10.1002/bjs.9136 -
Surgical Endoscopy Jul 2011Advances in operative techniques and technology have facilitated laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) and laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD). (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Advances in operative techniques and technology have facilitated laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) and laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD).
METHODS
All distal pancreatectomies were attempted laparoscopically, while selected patients underwent LPD. The literature was systematically reviewed.
RESULTS
Between 2002 and 2008, 21 patients underwent LDP (n=14) or LPD (n = 7). The mean operating time, blood loss, and hospital stay after LDP were 265 min, 262 ml, and 7.7 days, respectively, and after LPD they were 628 min, 350 ml, and 11.1 days, respectively. The conversion, morbidity, pancreatic fistula, readmission, reoperation, and mortality after LDP were 7.1, 35.7, 28.4, 28.4, 0, and 7.1% respectively, and after LPD they were 0, 28.6, 14.3, 28.6, 0, and 0% respectively. The literature review identified 987 LDP and 126 LPD. Most LDP were for benign disease (83.9%) while most LPD were for malignancy (91.5%). The mean operating time, morbidity, pancreatic fistula, mortality, and hospital stay after LDP were 221.5 min, 24.7%, 16.4%, 0.4%, and 7.7 days, respectively, and after LPD they were 448.3 min, 28.6%, 11.6%, 2.1%, and 16 days, respectively.
CONCLUSION
LDP, particularly for benign disease and low-grade malignancy, is increasingly becoming the gold standard approach in experienced hands. In selected patients, LPD is feasible and safe. Long-term follow-up data are needed.
Topics: Blood Loss, Surgical; Humans; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Diseases; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Postoperative Complications; Reoperation; Time Factors; United Kingdom
PubMed: 21298539
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-010-1538-4 -
Annals of Surgery Dec 2011The majority of pancreatic cancers are diagnosed at an advanced stage. As surgical resection remains the only hope for cure, more aggressive surgical approaches have... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The majority of pancreatic cancers are diagnosed at an advanced stage. As surgical resection remains the only hope for cure, more aggressive surgical approaches have been advocated to increase resection rates. Institutions have begun to release data on their experience with pancreatectomy and simultaneous arterial resection (AR), which has traditionally been considered a general contraindication to resection. The aim of the present meta-analysis was to evaluate the perioperative and long-term outcomes of patients with AR during pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer.
METHODS
The Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library and J-East databases were systematically searched to identify studies reporting outcome of patients who underwent pancreatectomy with AR for pancreatic cancer. Studies that reported perioperative and/or long-term results after pancreatectomy with AR were eligible for inclusion. Meta-analyses included comparative studies providing data on patients with and without AR and were performed using a random effects model.
RESULTS
The literature search identified 26 studies including 366 and 2243 patients who underwent pancreatectomy with and without AR. All studies were retrospective cohort studies and the methodological quality was moderate to low. Meta-analyses revealed AR to be associated with a significantly increased risk for perioperative mortality [Odds ratio (OR) = 5.04; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.69-9.45; P < 0.0001; I² = 24%], poor survival at 1 year (OR = 0.49; 95% CI, 0.31-0.78; P = 0.002; I² = 35%) and 3 years (OR = 0.39; 95% CI, 0.17-0.86; P = 0.02; I² = 49%) compared with patients without AR. The increased perioperative mortality (OR = 8.87; 95% CI, 3.40-23.13; P < 0.0001; I² = 5%) and lower survival rate at 1 year (OR = 0.50; 95% CI, 0.31-0.82; P = 0.006; I² = 40%) was confirmed in the comparison to patients undergoing venous resection. Despite substantial perioperative mortality, pancreatectomy with AR was associated with more favorable survival compared with patients who did not undergo resection for locally advanced disease.
CONCLUSIONS
AR in patients undergoing pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer is associated with a poor short and long-term outcome. Pancreatectomy with AR may, however, be justified in highly selected patients owing to the potential survival benefit compared with patients without resection. These patients should be treated within the bounds of clinical trials to assess outcomes after AR in the era of modern pancreatic surgery and multimodal therapy.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Celiac Artery; Cohort Studies; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Hepatic Artery; Humans; Male; Mesenteric Artery, Superior; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Invasiveness; Neoplasm Staging; Palliative Care; Pancreas; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Survival Analysis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 22064622
DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31823ac299 -
The British Journal of Surgery Jun 2012Total pancreatectomy and islet autotransplantation (TP/IAT) is a treatment option in a subset of patients with chronic pancreatitis. A systematic review of the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Total pancreatectomy and islet autotransplantation (TP/IAT) is a treatment option in a subset of patients with chronic pancreatitis. A systematic review of the literature was performed to evaluate the outcome of this procedure, with an attempt to ascertain when it is indicated.
METHODS
MEDLINE (1950 to present), Embase (1980 to present) and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify studies of outcomes in patients undergoing TP/IAT. Cohort studies that reported the outcomes following the procedure were included. The MOOSE guidelines were used as a basis for this review.
RESULTS
Five studies met the inclusion criteria. The techniques reported for pancreatectomy and islet cell isolation varied between studies. TP/IAT was successful in reducing pain in patients with chronic pancreatitis. Comparing morphine requirements before and after the procedure, two studies recorded significant reductions. Concurrent IAT reduced the insulin requirement after TP; the rate of insulin independence ranged from 46 per cent of patients at 5 years' mean follow-up to 10 per cent at 8 years. The impact on quality of life was poorly reported. The studies reviewed did not provide evidence for optimal timing of TP/IAT in relation to the evolution of chronic pancreatitis.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review showed that TP/IAT had favourable outcomes with regard to pain reduction. Concurrent IAT enabled a significant proportion of patients to remain independent of insulin supplementation.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Analgesics, Opioid; Female; Humans; Insulin; Islets of Langerhans Transplantation; Male; Middle Aged; Morphine; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatitis, Chronic; Transplantation, Autologous; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 22434330
DOI: 10.1002/bjs.8713 -
HPB : the Official Journal of the... Nov 2012Currently, laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is regarded as a safe and effective surgical approach for lesions in the body and tail of the pancreas. This review... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
Currently, laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is regarded as a safe and effective surgical approach for lesions in the body and tail of the pancreas. This review compares outcomes of the laparoscopic technique with those of open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) and assesses the efficacy, safety and feasibility of each type of procedure.
METHODS
Comparative studies published between January 1996 and April 2012 were included. Studies were selected based on specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. Evaluated endpoints were operative outcomes, postoperative recovery and postoperative complications.
RESULTS
Fifteen non-randomized comparative studies that recruited a total of 1456 patients were analysed. Rates of conversion from LDP to open surgery ranged from 0% to 30%. Patients undergoing LDP had less intraoperative blood loss [weighted mean difference (WMD) -263.36.59 ml, 95% confidence interval (CI) -330.48 to -196.23 ml], fewer blood transfusions [odds ratio (OR) 0.28, 95% CI 0.11-0.76], shorter hospital stay (WMD -4.98 days, 95% CI -7.04 to -2.92 days), a higher rate of splenic preservation (OR 2.98, 95% CI 2.18-3.91), earlier oral intake (WMD -2.63 days, 95% CI -4.23 to 1.03 days) and fewer surgical site infections (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.18-0.75). However, there were no differences between the two approaches with regard to operation time, time to first flatus and the occurrence of pancreatic fistula and other postoperative complications.
CONCLUSIONS
Laparoscopic resection results in improved operative and postoperative outcomes compared with open surgery according to the results of the present meta-analyses. It may be a safe and feasible option for patients with lesions in the body and tail of the pancreas. However, randomized controlled trials should be undertaken to confirm the relevance of these early findings.
Topics: Chi-Square Distribution; Humans; Laparoscopy; Odds Ratio; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Diseases; Postoperative Complications; Recovery of Function; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 23043660
DOI: 10.1111/j.1477-2574.2012.00531.x