-
HPB : the Official Journal of the... Jun 2023Spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) represents a widely adopted procedure in the presence of benign or low-grade malignant tumors. Splenic vessels... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Spleen preserving distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) represents a widely adopted procedure in the presence of benign or low-grade malignant tumors. Splenic vessels preservation and resection (Kimura and Warshaw techniques respectively) represent the two main surgical modalities to avoid splenic resection. Each one is characterized by strengths and drawbacks. The aim of the present study is to systematically review the current high-quality evidence regarding these two techniques and analyze their short-term outcomes.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA, AMSTAR II and MOOSE guidelines. The primary endpoint was to assess the incidence of splenic infarction and splenic infarction leading to splenectomy. As secondary endpoints, specific intraoperative variables and postoperative complications were explored. Metaregression analysis was conducted to evaluate the effect of general variables on specific outcomes.
RESULTS
Seventeen high-quality studies were included in quantitative analysis. A significantly lower risk of splenic infarction for patients undergoing Kimura SPDP (OR = 0.14; p < 0.0001). Similarly, splenic vessel preservation was associated with a reduced risk of gastric varices (OR = 0.1; 95% p < 0.0001). Regarding all secondary outcome variables, no differences between the two techniques were noticed. Metaregression analysis failed to identify independent predictors of splenic infarction, blood loss, and operative time among general variables.
CONCLUSIONS
Although Kimura and Warshaw SPDP have been demonstrated comparable for most of postoperative outcomes, the former resulted superior compared to the latter in reducing the risk of splenic infarction and gastric varices. For benign pancreatic tumors and low-grade malignancies Kimura SPDP may be preferred.
Topics: Humans; Esophageal and Gastric Varices; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Postoperative Complications; Retrospective Studies; Splenic Artery; Splenic Infarction; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36941150
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2023.02.009 -
ANZ Journal of Surgery Dec 2023To compare the clinical outcomes and prognosis of total pancreatectomy (TP) and pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for the treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Comparison of clinical outcomes and prognosis between total pancreatectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
To compare the clinical outcomes and prognosis of total pancreatectomy (TP) and pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for the treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), and to explore the safety and indications of TP.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases from January 1943 to March 2023 for literatures comparing TP and PD in the treatment of PDAC. The primary outcome was postoperative overall survival (OS), and secondary outcomes included surgery time, blood loss, readmission, hospital stay, perioperative mortality, and overall morbidity. Fixed-effect or random-effect models were selected based on heterogeneity, and odds ratio (OR), mean difference (MD), or hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.
RESULTS
A total of six studies involving 8396 patients were included in the meta-analysis. There was no statistically significant difference in OS after surgery between the two groups (HR = 1.08, 95% CI: 0.91-1.27; P = 0.38). The TP group had a longer surgery time (MD = 13.66, 95% CI: 4.57-22.75; P = 0.003) and more blood loss (MD = 133.17, 95% CI: 8.00-258.33; P = 0.04) than the PD group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of hospital stay (MD = 0.09, 95% CI: -2.04 to 2.22; P = 0.93), readmission rate (OR = 1.39; 95% CI: 1.00-1.92; P = 0.05), perioperative mortality (OR = 1.29, 95% CI: 0.98-1.69; P = 0.07), and overall morbidity (OR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.50-1.26; P = 0.33).
CONCLUSION
The surgical process of TP is relatively complex, but there is no difference in short-term clinical outcomes and OS compared to PD, making it a safe and reliable procedure. Indications and treatment outcomes for planned TP and salvage TP may differ, and more research is needed in the future for further classification and verification.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal; Prognosis
PubMed: 37614050
DOI: 10.1111/ans.18653 -
HPB : the Official Journal of the... Oct 2023Postoperative complications following distal pancreatectomy (DP) are common, especially postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). In order to design adequate prophylactic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Postoperative complications following distal pancreatectomy (DP) are common, especially postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). In order to design adequate prophylactic strategies, it is of relevance to determine the costs of these complications. An overview of the literature on the costs of complications following DP is lacking.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library (inception until 1 August 2022). The primary outcome was the costs (i.e. cost differential) of major morbidity, individual complications and prolonged hospital stay. Quality of non-RCTs were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Costs were compared with the use of Purchasing Power parity. This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021223019).
RESULTS
Overall, seven studies were included with 854 patients after DP. The rate POPF grade B/C varied between 13% and 27% (based on five studies) with a corresponding cost differential of EUR 18,389 (based on two studies). The rate of severe morbidity varied between 13% and 38% (based on five studies) with a corresponding cost differential of EUR 19,281 (based on five studies).
CONCLUSION
This systematic review reported considerable costs for POPF grade B/C and severe morbidity after DP. Prospective databases and studies should report on all complications in a uniform matter to better display the economic burden of complications of DP.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy; Pancreas; Pancreatic Fistula; Postoperative Complications; Morbidity; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37391314
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2023.03.007 -
Surgery Jul 2021Minimally invasive pancreatic resection has been shown recently in some randomized trials to be superior in selected perioperative outcomes compared with open resection... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Minimally invasive pancreatic resection has been shown recently in some randomized trials to be superior in selected perioperative outcomes compared with open resection when performed by experienced surgeons. However, minimally invasive pancreatic resection is associated with a long learning curve. This study aims to summarize the current evidence on the learning curve of minimally invasive pancreatic resection and define the number of cases required to surmount the learning curve.
METHODS
A systematic search was performed on PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane database using a detailed search strategy. Studies that did not describe the learning curve were excluded from the study. Data on the method of learning curve analysis, single surgeon versus institutional learning curve, and outcome measures were extracted and analyzed.
RESULTS
A total of 32 studies were included in the pooled analysis: 12 on laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy, 9 on robotic pancreatoduodenectomy, 12 on laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy, and 3 on robotic distal pancreatectomy. Sample population was comparable between laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (median 63 vs 65). Six of 12 studies and 7 of 9 studies used nonarbitrary methods of analysis in laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy, respectively. Operating time was used as the single outcome measure in 4 of 12 studies in laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and 5 of 9 studies in robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. Overall, there was no significant difference between the number of cases required to surmount the learning curve for laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy versus robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy 34.1 [95% confidence interval 30.7-37.7] versus robotic pancreatoduodenectomy 36.7 [95% confidence interval 32.9-41.0]; P = .8241) and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy versus robotic distal pancreatectomy (laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy 25.3 [95% confidence interval 22.5-28.3] versus robotic distal pancreatectomy 20.7 [95% confidence interval 15.8-26.5]; P = .5997.) CONCLUSION: This study provides a detailed summary of existing evidence around the learning curve in minimally invasive pancreatic resection. There was no significant difference between the learning curve for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy versus laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and robotic distal pancreatectomy versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. These findings were limited by the retrospective nature and heterogeneity of the studies published to date.
Topics: Humans; Laparoscopy; Learning Curve; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Operative Time; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Robotic Surgical Procedures
PubMed: 33541746
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2020.11.046 -
Translational Gastroenterology and... 2019Pancreatic cancer is one of the most aggressive and lethal malignancies with a dismal prognosis and survival. The curative effects of venous resection (VR) in pancreatic... (Review)
Review
Pancreatic cancer is one of the most aggressive and lethal malignancies with a dismal prognosis and survival. The curative effects of venous resection (VR) in pancreatic cancer remain controversial. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library. The overall postoperative complications, perioperative mortality, histopathology, and long-term survival were compared between patients undergoing pancreatectomy combined with (VR+ group) or without (VR- group) VR. Forty-one studies were included in the systematic review. Pancreatectomy combined with VR required longer operation time and led to increased perioperative blood loss, whereas postoperative complications were similar. Patients in the VR+ group showed larger tumors and reduced R0 rates. Regarding long-term survival, patients with VR+ seemed to have impaired 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival. Based on our results, VR in pancreatic cancer is a safe and feasible procedure. Given the fact that patients have miserable outcomes and survival in the palliative setting alone, extended resection including VR is required for the purpose of achieving radical resection.
PubMed: 31304423
DOI: 10.21037/tgh.2019.06.01 -
Annals of Surgery Feb 2024To provide procedure-specific estimates of symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE) and major bleeding after abdominal surgery. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses of the Procedure-specific Risks of Thrombosis and Bleeding in General Abdominal, Colorectal, Upper Gastrointestinal, and Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery.
OBJECTIVE
To provide procedure-specific estimates of symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE) and major bleeding after abdominal surgery.
BACKGROUND
The use of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis represents a trade-off that depends on VTE and bleeding risks that vary between procedures; their magnitude remains uncertain.
METHODS
We identified observational studies reporting procedure-specific risks of symptomatic VTE or major bleeding after abdominal surgery, adjusted the reported estimates for thromboprophylaxis and length of follow-up, and estimated cumulative incidence at 4 weeks postsurgery, stratified by VTE risk groups, and rated evidence certainty.
RESULTS
After eligibility screening, 285 studies (8,048,635 patients) reporting on 40 general abdominal, 36 colorectal, 15 upper gastrointestinal, and 24 hepatopancreatobiliary surgery procedures proved eligible. Evidence certainty proved generally moderate or low for VTE and low or very low for bleeding requiring reintervention. The risk of VTE varied substantially among procedures: in general abdominal surgery from a median of <0.1% in laparoscopic cholecystectomy to a median of 3.7% in open small bowel resection, in colorectal from 0.3% in minimally invasive sigmoid colectomy to 10.0% in emergency open total proctocolectomy, and in upper gastrointestinal/hepatopancreatobiliary from 0.2% in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy to 6.8% in open distal pancreatectomy for cancer.
CONCLUSIONS
VTE thromboprophylaxis provides net benefit through VTE reduction with a small increase in bleeding in some procedures (eg, open colectomy and open pancreaticoduodenectomy), whereas the opposite is true in others (eg, laparoscopic cholecystectomy and elective groin hernia repairs). In many procedures, thromboembolism and bleeding risks are similar, and decisions depend on individual risk prediction and values and preferences regarding VTE and bleeding.
Topics: Humans; Anticoagulants; Colorectal Neoplasms; Hemorrhage; Postoperative Complications; Thrombosis; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 37551583
DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000006059 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2021Robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) are the two principal minimally invasive surgical approaches for patients with...
BACKGROUND
Robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) are the two principal minimally invasive surgical approaches for patients with pancreatic body and tail adenocarcinoma. The use of RDP and LDP for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains controversial, and which one can provide a better R0 rate is not clear.
METHODS
A comprehensive search for studies that compared robotic laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for PDAC published until July 31, 2021, was conducted. Data on perioperative outcomes and oncologic outcomes (R0-resection and lymph node dissection) were subjected to meta-analysis. PubMed, Cochrane Central Register, Web of Science, and EMBASE were searched based on a defined search strategy to identify eligible studies before July 2021.
RESULTS
Six retrospective studies comprising 572 patients (152 and 420 patients underwent RDP and LDP) were included. The present meta-analysis showed that there were no significant differences in operative time, tumor size, and lymph node dissection between RDP and LDP group. Nevertheless, compared with the LDP group, RDP results seem to demonstrate a possibility in higher R0 resection rate (p<0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that RDP is a technically and oncologically safe and feasible approach for selected PDAC patients. Large randomized and controlled prospective studies are needed to confirm this data.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails, identifier [CRD42021269353].
PubMed: 34616686
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.752236 -
HPB : the Official Journal of the... Jun 2013Splenic preservation during a distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) may be performed with splenic vessel ligation, known as Warshaw's Technique (WT) or splenic vessel... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Splenic preservation during a distal pancreatectomy (SPDP) may be performed with splenic vessel ligation, known as Warshaw's Technique (WT) or splenic vessel preservation (SVP). The consensus on which approach is best is divided. A systematic review of evidence in the literature was undertaken with the aim of analysing the merits and disadvantages of both WT and SVP.
METHODS
A systematic search of medical literature from 1985-2011 was undertaken to identify all comparative studies and case series on SPDP. Non-English papers, series with < 5 patients, technical reports and reviews were excluded. The remaining articles were reviewed considering the study design, surgical technique, outcomes and complications.
RESULTS
In 23 relevant studies, 356 patients underwent WT and 572 underwent SVP. In WT patients, the mean operating time (160 versus 215 min, P < 0.001), mean estimated blood loss (301 versus 390 ml, P < 0.001) and length of stay (8 versus 11 days, P < 0.001) was significantly less than the SVP patients, respectively. Considering complications, splenic infarction and splenectomy occurred more frequently in WT patients (P < 0.05).
DISCUSSION
WT is technically easier to perform than SVP but has a higher incidence of subsequent splenectomies. Surgeons should be able to perform both procedures and tailor the technique according to the patient.
Topics: Blood Loss, Surgical; Humans; Length of Stay; Ligation; Organ Sparing Treatments; Pancreatectomy; Reoperation; Spleen; Splenectomy; Splenic Artery; Splenic Infarction; Splenic Vein; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 23458666
DOI: 10.1111/hpb.12003 -
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Sep 2023Prevention and management of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreatic resections is still an unresolved issue. Continuous irrigation of the...
PURPOSE
Prevention and management of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreatic resections is still an unresolved issue. Continuous irrigation of the peripancreatic area is frequently used to treat necrotizing pancreatitis, but its use after elective pancreatic surgery is not well-known. With this systematic review, we sought to evaluate the current knowledge and expertise regarding the use of continuous irrigation in the surgical area to prevent or treat POPF after elective pancreatic resections.
METHODS
A systematic search of the literature was conducted according to the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, screening the databases of Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Ovid MEDLINE. Because of the heterogeneity of the included articles, a statistical inference could not be performed and the literature was reviewed only descriptively. The study was pre-registered online (OSF Registry).
RESULTS
Nine studies were included. Three studies provided data regarding the prophylactic use of continuous irrigation after distal and limited pancreatectomies. Here, patients after irrigation showed a lower rate of clinically relevant POPF, related complications, lengths of stay, and mortality. Six other papers reported the use of local lavage to treat clinically relevant POPF and subsequent fluid collections, with successful outcomes.
CONCLUSION
In the current literature, only a few publications are focused on the use of continuous irrigation after pancreatic resection to prevent or manage POPF. The included studies showed promising results, and this technique may be useful in patients at high risk of POPF. Further investigations and randomized trials are needed.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy; Elective Surgical Procedures; Therapeutic Irrigation; Pancreas; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 37659027
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-03070-5 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Dec 2008Chronic pancreatitis affects 3-9 people in 100,000; 70% of cases are alcohol-induced. (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Chronic pancreatitis affects 3-9 people in 100,000; 70% of cases are alcohol-induced.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of lifestyle interventions in people with chronic pancreatitis? What are the effects of dietary supplements in people with chronic pancreatitis? What are the effects of drug interventions in people with chronic pancreatitis? What are the effects of nerve blocks for pain relief in people with chronic pancreatitis? What are the effects of different invasive treatments for specific complications of chronic pancreatitis? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to April 2008 (BMJ Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 23 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: avoiding alcohol consumption, biliary decompression, calcium supplements, ductal decompression (endoscopic or surgical), low-fat diet, nerve blocks, opioid analgesics, pancreatic enzyme supplements, pseudocyst decompression (endoscopic or surgical), resection using distal pancreatectomy, resection using pancreaticoduodenectomy (Kausch-Whipple or pylorus-preserving), and vitamin/antioxidant supplements.
Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Diet, Fat-Restricted; Humans; Pain Management; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatitis; Pancreatitis, Chronic
PubMed: 19445788
DOI: No ID Found