-
Journal of Personalized Medicine Jun 2021When oncologically feasible, avoiding unnecessary splenectomies prevents patients who are undergoing distal pancreatectomy (DP) from facing significant thromboembolic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
When oncologically feasible, avoiding unnecessary splenectomies prevents patients who are undergoing distal pancreatectomy (DP) from facing significant thromboembolic and infective risks.
METHODS
A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Web Of Science identified 11 studies reporting outcomes of 323 patients undergoing intended spleen-preserving minimally invasive robotic DP (SP-RADP) and 362 laparoscopic DP (SP-LADP) in order to compare the spleen preservation rates of the two techniques. The risk of bias was evaluated according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.
RESULTS
SP-RADP showed superior results over the laparoscopic approach, with an inferior spleen preservation failure risk difference (RD) of 0.24 (95% CI 0.15, 0.33), reduced open conversion rate (RD of -0.05 (95% CI -0.09, -0.01)), reduced blood loss (mean difference of -138 mL (95% CI -205, -71)), and mean difference in hospital length of stay of -1.5 days (95% CI -2.8, -0.2), with similar operative time, clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (ISGPS grade B/C), and Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 postoperative complications.
CONCLUSION
Both SP-RADP and SP-LADP proved to be safe and effective procedures, with minimal perioperative mortality and low postoperative morbidity. The robotic approach proved to be superior to the laparoscopic approach in terms of spleen preservation rate, intraoperative blood loss, and hospital length of stay.
PubMed: 34199314
DOI: 10.3390/jpm11060552 -
World Journal of Surgery Oct 2021This systematic review explored the efficacy of different pain relief modalities used in the management of postoperative pain following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This systematic review explored the efficacy of different pain relief modalities used in the management of postoperative pain following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and distal pancreatectomy (DP) and impact on perioperative outcomes.
METHODS
MEDLINE (OVID), Embase, Pubmed, Web of Science and CENTRAL databases were searched using PRISMA framework. Primary outcomes included pain on postoperative day 2 and 4 and respiratory morbidity. Secondary outcomes included operation time, bile leak, delayed gastric emptying, postoperative pancreatic fistula, length of stay, and opioid use.
RESULTS
Five randomized controlled trials and seven retrospective cohort studies (1313 patients) were included in the systematic review. Studies compared epidural analgesia (EDA) (n = 845), patient controlled analgesia (PCA) (n = 425) and transabdominal wound catheters (TAWC) (n = 43). EDA versus PCA following PD was compared in eight studies (1004 patients) in the quantitative meta-analysis. Pain scores on day 2 (p = 0.19) and 4 (p = 0.18) and respiratory morbidity (p = 0.42) were comparable between EDA and PCA. Operative times, bile leak, delayed gastric emptying, pancreatic fistula, opioid use, and length of stay also were comparable between EDA and PCA. Pain scores and perioperative outcomes were comparable between EDA and PCA following DP and EDA and TAWC following PD.
CONCLUSIONS
EDA, PCA and TAWC are the most frequently used analgesic modalities in pancreatic surgery. Pain relief and other perioperative outcomes are comparable between them. Further larger randomized controlled trials are warranted to explore the relative merits of each analgesic modality on postoperative outcomes with emphasis on postoperative complications.
Topics: Analgesia, Epidural; Analgesia, Patient-Controlled; Analgesics; Humans; Pain, Postoperative; Pancreatectomy; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 34185150
DOI: 10.1007/s00268-021-06217-x -
Polski Przeglad Chirurgiczny Jun 2021Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a potentially life-threatening complication after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). It is observed when the amylase activity in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a potentially life-threatening complication after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). It is observed when the amylase activity in the drain fluid exceeds three times the normal upper value. Grades B and C of POPF are considered as clinically relevant. Fistula might originate due to failure of healing of a pancreatic anastomosis or from raw pancreatic surface.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
18 retrospective and prospective studies published between 2015 and 2020 were included in this meta-analysis. Total number of patients was 5836. To investigate potential risk factors associated with the occurrence of POPF, odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. To compare discontinuous data, mean differences (MD) were calculated.
RESULTS
13 factors were divided into preoperative and intraoperative groups. Male sex, higher BMI, soft pancreatic texture and small pancreatic duct were considered as significant risk factors while vascular resection lowered the risk of development pancreatic fistula.
DISCUSSION
It is considered that the development of POPF is associated with intrapancreatic fat. More severe infiltration with fat tissue is responsible for soft texture of the gland, while higher BMI is one of the risk factors of increased pancreatic fat. On the contrary, diabetes is associated with fibrotic pancreas which could lower the risk of developing POPF.
Topics: Amylases; Anastomosis, Surgical; Humans; Male; Pancreas; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Postoperative Complications; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Risk Factors
PubMed: 36169536
DOI: 10.5604/01.3001.0014.9659 -
Gland Surgery May 2021Pancreatic cancer is one of the most aggressive and lethal tumours in Western society. Pancreatic surgery can be considered a challenge for open and laparoscopic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Pancreatic cancer is one of the most aggressive and lethal tumours in Western society. Pancreatic surgery can be considered a challenge for open and laparoscopic surgeons, even if the accuracy of gland dissection, due to the close relationship between pancreas, the portal vein, and mesenteric vessels, besides the reconstructive phase (in pancreaticoduodenectomy), lead to significant difficulties for laparoscopic technique. Minimally invasive pancreatic surgery changed utterly with the development of robotic surgery. However, this review aims to make more clarity on the influence of robotic surgery on long-term morbidity.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus to identify and analyze studies published from November 2011 to September 2020 concerning robotic pancreatic surgery. The following terms were used to perform the search: "long term morbidity robotic pancreatic surgery".
RESULTS
Eighteen articles included in the study were published between November 2011 and September 2020. The review included 2041 patients who underwent robotic pancreatic surgery, mainly for a malignant tumour. The two most common robotic surgical procedures adopted were the robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) and the robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD). In two studies, patients were divided into groups; on the one hand, those who underwent a robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD), on the other hand, those who underwent robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP). The remaining items included surgical approach such as robotic middle pancreatectomy (RMP), robotic distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy, robotic-assisted laparoscopic pancreatic dissection (RALPD), robotic enucleation of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours.
CONCLUSIONS
Comparison between robotic surgery and open surgery lead to evidence of different advantages of the robotic approach. A multidisciplinary team and a surgical centre at high volume are essential for better postoperative morbidity and mortality.
PubMed: 34164320
DOI: 10.21037/gs-21-64 -
Gland Surgery May 2021To compare perioperative and short-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) using data from...
Perioperative and short-term oncological outcomes following laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy after learning curve in the past 10 years: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
To compare perioperative and short-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) using data from large-scale retrospective cohorts and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the last 10 years.
METHODS
A meta-analysis to assess the safety and feasibility of LDP and OPD registered with PROSPERO: (CRD42020218080) was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. Studies comparing LPD with OPD published between January 2010 and October 2020 were included; only clinical studies reporting more than 30 cases for each operation were included. Two authors performed data extraction and quality assessment independently. The primary endpoint was operative times, blood loss, and 90 days mortality. Secondary endpoints included reoperation, length of hospital stay (LOS), morbidity, Clavien-Dindo ≥3 complications, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), blood transfusion, delayed gastric emptying (DGE), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), and oncologic outcomes (R0-resection, lymph node dissection).
RESULTS
Overall, the final analysis included 15 retrospective cohorts and 3 RCTs comprising 12,495 patients (2,037 and 10,458 patients underwent LPD and OPD). It seems OPD has more lymph nodes harvested but no significant differences [weighted mean difference (WMD): 1.08; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.02 to 2.14; P=0.05]. Nevertheless, compared with OPD, LPD was associated with a higher R0 resection rate [odds ratio (OR): 1.26; 95% CI: 1.10-1.44; P=0.0008] and longer operative time (WMD: 89.80 min; 95% CI: 63.75-115.84; P<0.00001), patients might benefit from lower rate of wound infection (OR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.33-0.59; P<0.0001), much less blood loss (WMD: -212.25 mL; 95% CI: -286.15 to -138.14; P<0.00001) and lower blood transfusion rate (OR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.43-0.77; P=0.0002) and shorter LOS (WMD: -1.63 day; 95% CI: -2.73 to -0.51; P=0.004). No significant differences in 90-day mortality, overall morbidity, Clavien-Dindo ≥3 complications, reoperation, POPF, DGE and PPH between LPD and OPD.
CONCLUSIONS
Our study suggests that after learning curve, LPD is a safe and feasible alternative to OPD as it provides similar perioperative and acceptable oncological outcomes when compared with OPD.
PubMed: 34164310
DOI: 10.21037/gs-20-916 -
World Journal of Gastrointestinal... Jun 2021Hepatopancreatoduodenectomy (HPD) is the simultaneous combination of hepatic resection, pancreaticoduodenectomy, and resection of the entire extrahepatic biliary system....
BACKGROUND
Hepatopancreatoduodenectomy (HPD) is the simultaneous combination of hepatic resection, pancreaticoduodenectomy, and resection of the entire extrahepatic biliary system. HPD is not a universally accepted due to high mortality and morbidity rates, as well as to controversial survival benefits.
AIM
To evaluate the current role of HPD for curative treatment of gallbladder cancer (GC) or extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ECC) invading both the hepatic hilum and the intrapancreatic common bile duct.
METHODS
A systematic literature search using the PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases was performed to identify studies reporting on HPD, using the following keywords: 'Hepatopancreaticoduodenectomy', 'hepatopancreatoduodenectomy', 'hepatopancreatectomy', 'pancreaticoduodenectomy', 'hepatectomy', 'hepatic resection', 'liver resection', 'Whipple procedure', 'bile duct cancer', 'gallbladder cancer', and 'cholangiocarcinoma'.
RESULTS
This updated systematic review, focusing on 13 papers published between 2015 and 2020, found that rates of morbidity for HPD have remained high, ranging between 37.0% and 97.4%, while liver failure and pancreatic fistula are the most serious complications. However, perioperative mortality for HPD has decreased compared to initial experiences, and varies between 0% and 26%, although in selected center it is well below 10%. Long term survival outcomes can be achieved in selected patients with R0 resection, although 5-year survival is better for ECC than GC.
CONCLUSION
The present review supports the role of HPD in patients with GC and ECC with horizontal spread involving the hepatic hilum and the intrapancreatic bile duct, provided that it is performed in centers with high experience in hepatobiliary-pancreatic surgery. Extensive use of preoperative portal vein embolization, and preoperative biliary drainage in patients with obstructive jaundice, represent strategies for decreasing the occurrence and severity of postoperative complications. It is advisable to develop internationally-accepted protocols for patient selection, preoperative assessment, operative technique, and perioperative care, in order to better define which patients would benefit from HPD.
PubMed: 34163578
DOI: 10.4251/wjgo.v13.i6.625 -
BJS Open May 2021Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains the main cause of morbidity in patients after distal pancreatectomy. The objective of this study was to investigate... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) remains the main cause of morbidity in patients after distal pancreatectomy. The objective of this study was to investigate whether an absorbable fibrin sealant patch could prevent POPF after distal pancreatectomy.
METHODS
A multicentre, patient-blinded, parallel-group randomized superiority trial was performed in seven Dutch hospitals. Allocation was done using a computer-generated randomization list with a 1 : 1 allocation ratio and concealed varying permuted block sizes. Pancreatic stump closure with a fibrin patch was compared with standard treatment in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy. The primary endpoint was the development of grade B/C POPF. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed which combined the present findings with all available evidence.
RESULTS
Between October 2010 and August 2017, 247 patients were enrolled. Fifty-four patients (22.2 per cent) developed a POPF, 25 of 125 patients in the patch group versus 29 of 122 in the control group (20.0 versus 23.8 per cent; P = 0·539). No related adverse effects were observed. In the meta-analysis, no significant difference was seen between the patch and control groups (19.7 versus 22.0 per cent; odds ratio 0.89, 95 per cent c.i. 0.60 to 1.32; P = 0·556).
CONCLUSION
Application of a fibrin patch to the pancreatic stump does not reduce the incidence of POPF in distal pancreatectomy. Future studies should focus on alternative fistula mitigation strategies, considering pancreatic neck thickness and duct size as risk factors. Trial registration number NL5876 (Netherlands Trial Registry).
Topics: Humans; Fibrin Tissue Adhesive; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Pancreas; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 34137446
DOI: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrab001 -
HPB : the Official Journal of the... Sep 2021Preoperative chemo- or chemoradiotherapy is recommended for borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of preoperative... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The effect of preoperative chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy on pancreatic fistula and other surgical complications after pancreatic resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.
BACKGROUND
Preoperative chemo- or chemoradiotherapy is recommended for borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of preoperative therapy on surgical complications in patients with resected pancreatic cancer.
METHODS
This systematic review and meta-analysis included studies reporting on the rate of surgical complications after preoperative chemo- or chemoradiotherapy versus immediate surgery in pancreatic cancer patients. The primary endpoint was the rate of grade B/C POPF. Pooled odds ratios were calculated using random-effects models.
RESULTS
Forty-one comparative studies including 25,389 patients were included. Vascular resections were more often performed after preoperative therapy (29.4% vs. 15.7%, p < 0.001). Preoperative therapy was associated with a lower rate of grade B/C POPF as compared to immediate surgery (pooled OR 0.47, 95%CI 0.38-0.58). This reduction was mostly obtained by preoperative chemoradiotherapy (OR 0.46, 95%CI 0.29-0.73), but not by preoperative chemotherapy alone (OR 0.83, 95%CI 0.59-1.16). No difference was demonstrated for major morbidity, mortality, postpancreatectomy haemorrhage, delayed gastric emptying and overall morbidity.
CONCLUSION
Preoperative chemo- and chemoradiotherapy in patients with pancreatic cancer appears to be safe with respect to POPF and other surgical complications as compared to immediate surgery. The reduced rate of POPF appears to be attributable to preoperative chemoradiation.
Topics: Chemoradiotherapy; Humans; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 34099372
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2021.04.027 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2021Prophylactic intra-peritoneal drainage has been considered to be an effective measure to reduce postoperative complications after pancreatectomy. However, routinely...
INTRODUCTION
Prophylactic intra-peritoneal drainage has been considered to be an effective measure to reduce postoperative complications after pancreatectomy. However, routinely placed drainage during abdominal surgery may be unnecessary or even harmful to some patients, due to the possibility of increasing complications. And there is still controversy about the prophylactic intra-peritoneal drainage after pancreatectomy. This meta-analysis aimed to analyze the incidence of complications after either pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) or distal pancreatectomy (DP) in the drain group and no-drain group.
METHODS
Data were retrieved from four electronic databases PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science up to December 2020, including the outcomes of individual treatment after PD and DP, mortality, morbidity, clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF), bile leak, wound infection, postoperative hemorrhage, delayed gastric emptying (DGE), intra-abdominal abscess, reoperation, intervened radiology (IR), and readmission. Cochrane Collaboration Handbook and the criteria of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used to assess the quality of studies included.
RESULTS
We included 15 studies after strict screening. 13 studies with 16,648 patients were analyzed to assess the effect of drain placement on patients with different surgery procedures, and 4 studies with 6,990 patients were analyzed to assess the effect of drain placement on patients with different fistula risk. For patients undergoing PD, the drain group had lower mortality but higher rate of CR-POPF than the no-drain group. For patients undergoing DP, the drain group had higher rates of CR-POPF, wound infection and readmission. There were no significant differences in bile leak, hemorrhage, DGE, intra-abdominal abscess, and IR in either overall or each subgroup. For Low-risk subgroup, the rates of hemorrhage, DGE and morbidity were higher after drainage. For High-risk subgroup, the rate of hemorrhage was higher while the rates of reoperation and morbidity were lower in the drain group.
CONCLUSIONS
Intraperitoneal drainage may benefit some patients undergoing PD, especially those with high pancreatic fistula risk. For DP, current evidences suggest that routine drainage might not benefit patients, but no clear conclusions can be drawn because of the study limitations.
PubMed: 34094952
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.658829 -
Cancers Apr 2021Major vascular invasion represents one of the most frequent reasons to consider pancreatic adenocarcinomas unresectable, although in the last decades, demolitive... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Major vascular invasion represents one of the most frequent reasons to consider pancreatic adenocarcinomas unresectable, although in the last decades, demolitive surgeries such as distal pancreatectomy with celiac axis resection (DP-CAR) have become a therapeutical option.
METHODS
A meta-analysis of studies comparing DP-CAR and standard DP in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma was conducted. Moreover, a systematic review of studies analyzing oncological, postoperative and survival outcomes of DP-CAR was conducted.
RESULTS
Twenty-four articles were selected for the systematic review, whereas eleven were selected for the meta-analysis, for a total of 1077 patients. Survival outcomes between the two groups were similar in terms of 1 year overall survival (OS) (odds ratio (OR) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34 to 1.31, = 0.24). Patients who received DP-CAR were more likely to have T4 tumors (OR 28.45, 95% CI 10.46 to 77.37, < 0.00001) and positive margins (R+) (OR 2.28, 95% CI 1.24 to 4.17, = 0.008). Overall complications (OR, 1.72, 95% CI, 1.15 to 2.58, = 0.008) were more frequent in the DP-CAR group, whereas rates of pancreatic fistula (OR 1.16, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.65, = 0.41) were similar.
CONCLUSIONS
DP-CAR was not associated with higher mortality compared to standard DP; however, overall morbidity was higher. Celiac axis involvement should no longer be considered a strict contraindication to surgery in patients with locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Considering the different baseline tumor characteristics, DP-CAR may need to be compared with palliative therapies instead of standard DP.
PubMed: 33921838
DOI: 10.3390/cancers13081967