-
International Journal of Surgery... May 2018Laparoscopic pancreatic surgery (LPS) has been widely used in the treatment of benign and low-grade pancreatic diseases. It is necessary to expand the current knowledge... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Laparoscopic pancreatic surgery (LPS) has been widely used in the treatment of benign and low-grade pancreatic diseases. It is necessary to expand the current knowledge on the feasibility and safety of LPS for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) by systematic reviewing the published studies and analyzing them by meta-analysis.
METHODS
Original articles compared LPS with open pancreatic surgery (OPS) for PDAC, published from January 1994 to August 2017 were searched in medical databases. Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), morbidity, mortality, operation time, blood loss, transfusion, hospital stay, retrieved lymph nodes (RLNs), and survival outcomes were compared.
RESULTS
Fourteen studies with a total of 13174 patients (1705 in LPS and 11469 in OPS) were included for the meta-analysis. LPS showed less morbidity (RR = 0.78, 95%CI: 0.66-0.92, P < .01), blood loss (WMD = -298.05 ml, 95% CI, -482.98∼-113.12 ml; P < .01), shorter hospital stay (WMD = -2.86, 95%CI, -3.85∼-1.87; P < .01), more RLNs (WMD = 1.47, 95%CI: 0.15-2.78; P = .03) and comparable POPF (RR = 1.12, 95%CI: 0.82-1.53, P = .50), operation time (WMD = 22.23 min; 95%CI: -19.56-64.01, P = .30), and 5-year overall survival (HR = 0.92, 95%CI: 0.80-1.06; P = .23) compared to OPS.
CONCLUSION
LPS can be performed safely in carefully selected patients with PADC and would improve the surgical outcomes. Considering the limitation of study design, the conclusions should be interpret cautiously and warrant to be confirmed by randomized controlled studies.
Topics: Blood Loss, Surgical; Blood Transfusion; Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal; Humans; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Operative Time; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Postoperative Complications; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29337177
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.12.032 -
International Journal of Surgery... Jul 2023The best approach for treating benign or low-grade malignant lesions localized in the pancreatic neck or body remains debatable. Conventional pancreatoduodenectomy and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The best approach for treating benign or low-grade malignant lesions localized in the pancreatic neck or body remains debatable. Conventional pancreatoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy (DP) are associated with a risk of impairment of pancreatic function at long-term follow-up. With advances in technology and surgical skills, the use of central pancreatectomy (CP) has gradually increased.
OBJECTIVES
The objective was to compare the safety, feasibility, and short-term and long-term clinical benefits of CP and DP in matched cases.
METHODS
The PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases were systematically searched to identify studies published from database inception to February 2022 that compared CP and DP. This meta-analysis was performed using R software.
RESULTS
Twenty-six studies matched the selection criteria, including 774 CP and 1713 DP cases. CP was significantly associated with longer operative time ( P <0.0001), less blood loss ( P <0.01), overall and clinically relevant pancreatic fistula ( P <0.0001), postoperative hemorrhage ( P <0.0001), reoperation ( P =0.0196), delayed gastric emptying ( P =0.0096), increased hospital stay ( P =0.0002), intra-abdominal abscess or effusion ( P =0.0161), higher morbidity ( P <0.0001) and severe morbidity ( P <0.0001) but with a significantly lower incidence of overall endocrine and exocrine insufficiency ( P <0.01), and new-onset and worsening diabetes mellitus ( P <0.0001) than DP.
CONCLUSIONS
CP should be considered as an alternative to DP in selected cases such as without pancreatic disease, length of the residual distal pancreas is more than 5 cm, branch-duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms, and a low risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula after adequate evaluation.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Retrospective Studies; Pancreas; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 37300889
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000326 -
Annals of Medicine Dec 2023Pancreatic fluid collections (PFC) are debris or fluid of the pancreas that needs to be drained out. This may result from surgery or necrotizing pancreatitis. This... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND/AIMS
Pancreatic fluid collections (PFC) are debris or fluid of the pancreas that needs to be drained out. This may result from surgery or necrotizing pancreatitis. This meta-analysis compared the outcomes of PFC through endoscopic and percutaneous interventions.
METHODS
A medical database was searched up to June 2022, comparing the outcomes of endoscopic drainage (ED) and percutaneous drainage (PD) for the PFC. Eligible studies reporting clinical and technical success and adverse events were selected.
RESULTS
Seventeen studies with 1170 patients were included for meta-analysis, of which 543 patients underwent ED and 627 underwent PD. The odd ratio (OR) of technical success was 0.81 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31, 2.1) and clinical success was in the favor of the ED group at OR 2.23 (95% CI 1.45, 3.41). Adverse events OR 0.62 (95% CI 0.27, 1.39) and stent migration OR 0.61 (95% CI 0.10, 3.88) were the same in both groups, but hospital stay pooled mean difference of 15.02 days (95% CI 9.86, 20.18), mortality OR 0.24 (95% CI 0.09, 0.67), and re-interventions OR 0.25 (95% CI 0.16, 0.40) favored ED.
CONCLUSIONS
ED is safe and efficient for PFC with higher clinical success, lower mortality rate, hospital stay, and re-interventions compared with PD.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatic Diseases; Pancreas; Endoscopy; Stents; Drainage; Treatment Outcome; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37243522
DOI: 10.1080/07853890.2023.2213898 -
Medical Oncology (Northwood, London,... Mar 2016The timing of surgery and antineoplastic therapies in patients with resectable non-metastatic pancreatic cancer is still a controversial matter of debate, with special... (Review)
Review
The timing of surgery and antineoplastic therapies in patients with resectable non-metastatic pancreatic cancer is still a controversial matter of debate, with special regard to neoadjuvant approaches. Following the criteria of the PRISMA statement, a literature search was conducted looking for RCTs focusing on adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapies in resectable pancreatic cancer. The quality of the available evidence was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. Data extraction was carried out by two independent investigators. The search led to the identification of 2830 papers of which 14 RCTs focusing on adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatment of resectable pancreatic cancer eligible for the systematic review. Risk of bias was estimated "unclear" in 3 studies and "high" in 5 studies. Median age ranged between 53 and 66. Overall survival in the surgery-only arms ranged between 11 and 20.2 months; in the adjuvant treatment arms 12.5-29.8 months; and in the neoadjuvant setting 9.9-19.4 months. Neoadjuvant protocols should be offered only in randomized clinical trials comparing the standard of care (surgery followed by adjuvant treatments) to a neoadjuvant approach followed by surgery and adjuvant treatment.
Topics: Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Humans; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26883935
DOI: 10.1007/s12032-016-0742-z -
European Journal of Radiology Nov 2021The main goal of this systematic review was to assess the technical and clinical success, adverse events (AEs), surgery, and overall mortality proportion after... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
The main goal of this systematic review was to assess the technical and clinical success, adverse events (AEs), surgery, and overall mortality proportion after percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) of two pancreatic lesions.
METHODS
An extant search in online databases including Scopus, PubMed (Medline), Embase (Elsevier), Web of Science, Cochrane library, and Google Scholar, was conducted to recognize all studies that used PCD intervention in the management of pancreatic necrosis (PN) and pancreatic pseudocysts (PP). Random effects meta-analysis was performed, and Cochrane's Q test and Istatistic were utilized to determine heterogeneity. In addition, meta-regression was used to explore the influence of categorical variables on heterogeneity.
RESULTS
Thirty-two studies (1398 patients) including PN in 26 (1256 cases, 89.8%) studies and PP in 6 (142 cases, 10.2%) studies were identified. Technical success proportion was 100% (95% confidence interval [CI] 100%-100%, I: 0.0%), clinical success 63% (95% CI 55%-71%, I: 92.9%), AEs 26% (95% CI 21%-31%, I: 78%), surgery after PCD intervention 33% (95% CI 25%-40%, I: 92.4%), and overall mortality was 13% (95% CI 9%-17%, I: 82.8%). The most common ADs after PCD intervention were development of fistula (106, 42.6%), hemorrhage (44, 17.7%), sepsis (40, 16.1%).
CONCLUSION
A significant clinical success proportion with low AEs, surgery, and overall mortality proportion after PCD intervention was found, although the results should be interpreted with caution due to the high heterogeneity.
Topics: Catheters; Drainage; Humans; Pancreas; Pancreatic Pseudocyst; Pancreatitis, Acute Necrotizing; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34607289
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109978 -
Pancreatology : Official Journal of the... 2016The current management of pancreatic mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCN) is defined by the consensus European, International Association of Pancreatology and American... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The current management of pancreatic mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCN) is defined by the consensus European, International Association of Pancreatology and American College of Gastroenterology guidelines. However, the criterion for surgical resection remains uncertain and differs between these guidelines. Therefore through this systematic review of the existing literature we aimed to better define the natural history and prognosis of these lesions, in order to clarify recommendations for future management.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library) for studies published in the English language between 1970 and 2015.
RESULTS
MCNs occur almost exclusively in women (female:male 20:1) and are mainly located in the pancreatic body or tail (93-95%). They are usually found incidentally at the age of 40-60 years. Cross-sectional imaging and endoscopic ultrasound are the most frequently used diagnostic tools, but often it is impossible to differentiate MCNs from branch duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (BD-IPMN) or oligocystic serous adenomas pre-operatively. In resected MCNs, 0-34% are malignant, but in those less than 4 cm only 0.03% were associated with invasive adenocarcinoma. No surgically resected benign MCNs were associated with a synchronous lesion or recurrence; therefore further follow-up is not required after resection. Five-year survival after surgical resection of a malignant MCN is approximately 60%.
CONCLUSIONS
Compared to other pancreatic tumors, MCNs have a low aggressive behavior, with exceptionally low rates of malignant transformation when less than 4 cm in size, are asymptomatic and lack worrisome features on pre-operative imaging. This differs significantly from the natural history of small BD-IPMNs, supporting the need to differentiate mucinous cyst subtypes pre-operatively, where possible. The findings support the recommendations from the recent European Consensus Guidelines, for the more conservative management of MCNs.
Topics: Humans; Neoplasms, Cystic, Mucinous, and Serous; Pancreatic Cyst; Pancreatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 27681503
DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2016.09.011 -
Annals of Surgical Oncology Dec 2015Perioperative blood transfusion (PBT) is common in pancreatic surgery. Recent studies have suggested that PBT may be associated with worse long-term outcomes. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Perioperative blood transfusion (PBT) is common in pancreatic surgery. Recent studies have suggested that PBT may be associated with worse long-term outcomes.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing long-term clinical outcomes of cancer patients undergoing curative-intent pancreatic surgery with regard to occurrence of PBT was performed.
RESULTS
A total of 23 studies (4339 patients) were included in the systematic review, and 19 studies (3646 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Nearly half (45.8 %) of all patients were female (range 25-60 %), and median age ranged from 59 to 72 years. About half (46.5 %, range 19-72 %) of the patients were transfused. Most had pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (69.5 %), while others had ampullary carcinoma (15.0 %), cholangiocarcinoma (7.4 %), or exocrine tumors of pancreas (8.1 %). Most (91.1 %) underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy, while the remaining patients underwent a total or distal pancreatectomy. The 5-year overall survival for all patients ranged from 0 to 65 %. Thirteen and nine of 19 studies reported a detrimental effect of PBT on survival on univariable and multivariable analysis, respectively. Overall, PBT was associated with shorter overall survival (pooled odds ratio 2.43, 95 % confidence interval 1.90-3.10); this finding was reproduced in sensitivity analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
Patients receiving PBT had significantly lower 5-year survival after curative-intent pancreatic surgery. Further research should focus on implementing guidelines for and discerning factors associated with the poor outcomes after PBT.
Topics: Blood Transfusion; Female; Humans; Male; Neoplasm Staging; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Perioperative Care; Prognosis; Survival Rate
PubMed: 26293837
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-015-4823-6 -
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Mar 2023Previous studies have demonstrated that the ideal time for drainage of walled-off pancreatic fluid collections is 4 to 6 weeks after their development. However, some... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Previous studies have demonstrated that the ideal time for drainage of walled-off pancreatic fluid collections is 4 to 6 weeks after their development. However, some pancreatic collections, notably infected pancreatic fluid collections, require earlier drainage. Nevertheless, the optimal timing of the first intervention is unclear, and consensus data are sparse. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of EUS-guided drainage of pancreatic fluid collections <4 weeks after development compared with ≥4 weeks after development.
METHODS
Search strategies were developed for PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from inception. Outcomes of interest were technical success, defined as successful endoscopic placement of a lumen-apposing metal stent; clinical success, defined as a reduction in cystic collection size; and procedure-related adverse events. A random-effects model was used for analysis, and results are expressed as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS
Six studies (630 patients) were included in our final analysis, in which 182 patients (28.9%) were enrolled in the early drainage cohort and 448 patients (71.1%) in the standard drainage cohort. The mean fluid collection size was 143.4 ± 18.8 mm for the early cohort versus 128 ± 19.7 mm for the standard cohort. Overall, technical success was equal in both cohorts. Clinical success did not favor either standard drainage or early drainage (OR, .39; 95% CI, .13-1.22; P = .11). No statistically significant differences were found in overall adverse events (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, .63-4.45; P = .31) or mortality (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, .29-4.48; P = .85). Hospital stay was longer for patients undergoing early drainage compared with standard drainage (23.7 vs 16.0 days, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
Both early (<4 weeks) and standard (≥4 weeks) drainage of walled-off pancreatic fluid collections offer similar technical and clinical outcomes. Patients requiring endoscopic drainage should not be delayed for 4 weeks.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatic Pseudocyst; Pancreas; Endoscopy; Stents; Treatment Outcome; Drainage; Endosonography
PubMed: 36395824
DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2022.11.003 -
Digestive and Liver Disease : Official... May 2016Safety of non-operative management for low-risk branch-duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (BD-IPMNs) is debated. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Safety of non-operative management for low-risk branch-duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (BD-IPMNs) is debated.
AIM
To perform a systematic review/meta-analysis to determine their risk of developing pancreatic malignancy and of pancreatic malignancy-related deaths.
METHODS
A MEDLINE search was performed and methodology was based on PRISMA statement. Incidence rates of overall pancreatic malignancy, malignant BD-IPMN, IPMN-distinct PDAC, and of pancreatic malignancy-related death rates were calculated by dividing the total number of events by the total number of person-years (pyrs) of follow-up. Heterogeneity was determined by I(2) statistic.
RESULTS
20 studies including 2177 patients were included. Mean follow-up ranged from 29.3 to 76.7 months. Overall, 82 patients (3.7%) developed a pancreatic malignancy with a pooled estimate rate of 0.007/pyrs (I(2)=32.8%). The pooled estimate rate of malignant IPMN was 0.004/pyrs (I(2)=40.8%), and the pooled estimate rate of distinct PDAC 0.002/pyrs (I(2)=0%). The rate of death due to pancreatic malignancy during follow-up was 0.9%, with an overall pooled estimate rate of death of 0.002/pyrs (I(2)=0%).
CONCLUSION
Non-operative management of low-risk BD-IPMN is safe, with a very low risk of malignant transformation of IPMN and of distinct PDAC. The rate of pancreatic malignancy-related mortality is low, particularly when compared with the mortality of pancreatic surgery.
Topics: Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal; Cell Transformation, Neoplastic; Humans; Neoplasms, Cystic, Mucinous, and Serous; Pancreatic Ducts; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Risk Factors; Watchful Waiting
PubMed: 26965783
DOI: 10.1016/j.dld.2016.02.003 -
Canadian Journal of Surgery. Journal... 2022Patients should be informed beforehand of the risk factors for exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (ExoPI) after pancreatic surgery; however, there are no clear identified... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Patients should be informed beforehand of the risk factors for exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (ExoPI) after pancreatic surgery; however, there are no clear identified risk factors for this condition. This study aimed to identify the preoperative, perioperative and postoperative risk factors for ExoPI after pancreatic surgery.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, SAGE, CINAHL Plus and Taylor & Francis from inception to Mar. 7, 2021, for full-text articles that included patients who had undergone pancreatic surgery. The primary outcome was the number of ExoPI events and any risk factors evaluated. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to assess study quality.
RESULTS
Twenty studies involving 4131 patients (2312 [52.3%] male, mean age 60.12 [standard deviation 14.07] yr) were included. Of the 4131 patients, 1651 (40.0%) had postoperative ExoPI. Among the 11 factors evaluated, the significant risk factors were preoperative main pancreatic duct (MPD) diameter greater than 3 mm (odds ratio [OR] 4.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-19.05), pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) as the surgical treatment procedure (OR 3.31, 95% CI 1.92-5.68), pancreaticogastrostomy (PG) as the anastomotic procedure (OR 3.13, 95% CI 1.83-5.35), hard pancreatic texture (OR 2.93, 95% CI 1.99-4.32) and adjuvant chemotherapy (OR 2.50, 95% CI 1.54-4.04). Gender, history of diabetes mellitus or endocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EndoPI), underlying diseases, de novo diabetes or EndoPI, pylorus-preserving PD and postoperative pancreatic fistula were not risk factors for ExoPI after pancreatic surgery.
CONCLUSION
Preoperative MPD diameter greater than 3 mm, PD, PG reconstruction, hard pancreatic texture and adjuvant chemotherapy were risk factors for the development of ExoPI after pancreatic surgery. The findings should provide useful information for patients to reduce postoperative dissatisfaction and improve quality of life.
Topics: Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Female; Quality of Life; Exocrine Pancreatic Insufficiency; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Pancreatectomy; Pancreas; Postoperative Complications; Pancreatic Diseases
PubMed: 36384688
DOI: 10.1503/cjs.010621