-
Scientific Reports Mar 2017Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a common complication following distal pancreatectomy (DP). However, the risk factors of this complication in patients after... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is a common complication following distal pancreatectomy (DP). However, the risk factors of this complication in patients after DP still remain controversial. The aim of our study is to estimate the association between potential risk factors and POPF. Relevant articles published up to June 21, 2016 were identified via PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library. Studies that examined the risk factors of POPF following DP were enrolled. 20 articles (2070 patients) were finally included in this study. The pooled data suggested that patients with soft pancreas, higher Body Mass Index (BMI), blood transfusion, elevated intraoperative blood loss, and longer operative time had a decreased risk for POPF. However, age, gender, malignant pathology, types of stump closure, octreotide therapy, history of diabetes and chronic pancreatitis, splenectomy, multiorgan resection, main duct ligation, preoperative serum albumin levels, PGA felt wrapping, and extended lymphadenectomy could not be regarded as risk factors for POPF. Our analytic data demonstrated that pancreas texture, BMI, blood transfusion, intraoperative blood loss, and operative time were clinical predictor for POPF. This study may assist surgeons to screen patients with high risk of POPF and select appropriate treatment measures.
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Postoperative Complications; Risk Factors
PubMed: 28298641
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-00311-8 -
Frontiers in Surgery 2024Advancements in surgical techniques have improved outcomes in patients undergoing pancreatic surgery. To date there have been no meta-analyses comparing robotic and...
BACKGROUND
Advancements in surgical techniques have improved outcomes in patients undergoing pancreatic surgery. To date there have been no meta-analyses comparing robotic and laparoscopic approaches for distal pancreatectomies (DP) in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to explore the oncological outcomes of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP), robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) and open distal pancreatectomy (ODP).
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted for studies reporting laparoscopic, robotic or open surgery for DP. Frequentist network meta-analysis of oncological outcomes (overall survival, resection margins, tumor recurrence, examined lymph nodes, administration of adjuvant therapy) were performed.
RESULTS
Fifteen studies totalling 9,301 patients were included in the network meta-analysis. 1,946, 605 and 6,750 patients underwent LDP, RDP and ODP respectively. LDP (HR: 0.761, 95% CI: 0.642-0.901, = 0.002) and RDP (HR: 0.757, 95% CI: 0.617-0.928, = 0.008) were associated with overall survival (OS) benefit when compared to ODP. LDP (HR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.793-1.27, = 0.968) was not associated with OS benefit when compared to RDP. There were no significant differences between LDP, RDP and ODP for resection margins, tumor recurrence, examined lymph nodes and administration of adjuvant therapy.
CONCLUSION
This study highlights the longer OS in both LDP and RDP when compared to ODP for patients with PDAC.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/, PROSPERO (CRD42022336417).
PubMed: 38933652
DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2024.1369169 -
Annals of Surgery Open : Perspectives... Mar 2022To depict and analyze learning curves for open, laparoscopic, and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and distal pancreatectomy (DP). (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To depict and analyze learning curves for open, laparoscopic, and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and distal pancreatectomy (DP).
BACKGROUND
Formal training is recommended for safe introduction of pancreatic surgery but definitions of learning curves vary and have not been standardized.
METHODS
A systematic search on PubMed, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases identified studies on learning curves in pancreatic surgery. Primary outcome was the number needed to reach the learning curve as defined by the included studies. Secondary outcomes included endpoints defining learning curves, methods of analysis (statistical/arbitrary), and classification of learning phases.
RESULTS
Out of 1115 articles, 66 studies with 14,206 patients were included. Thirty-five studies (53%) based the learning curve analysis on statistical calculations. Most often used parameters to define learning curves were operative time (n = 51), blood loss (n = 17), and complications (n = 10). The number of procedures to surpass a first phase of learning curve was 30 (20-50) for open PD, 39 (11-60) for laparoscopic PD, 25 (8-100) for robotic PD ( = 0.521), 16 (3-17) for laparoscopic DP, and 15 (5-37) for robotic DP ( = 0.914). In a three-phase model, intraoperative parameters improved earlier (first to second phase: operating time -15%, blood loss -29%) whereas postoperative parameters improved later (second to third phase: complications -46%, postoperative pancreatic fistula -48%). Studies with higher sample sizes showed higher numbers of procedures needed to overcome the learning curve (rho = 0.64, < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
This study summarizes learning curves for open-, laparoscopic-, and robotic pancreatic surgery with different definitions, analysis methods, and confounding factors. A standardized reporting of learning curves and definition of phases (competency, proficiency, mastery) is desirable and proposed.
PubMed: 37600094
DOI: 10.1097/AS9.0000000000000111 -
HPB : the Official Journal of the... Oct 2019The current evidence comparing oncological adequacy and effectiveness of robotic and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy to open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic...
INTRODUCTION
The current evidence comparing oncological adequacy and effectiveness of robotic and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy to open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma is inconclusive. Recent pairwise meta-analyses demonstrated reduced blood loss and length of stay as the principal advantages of RDP and LDP compared to ODP. The aim of this study was to compare the three approaches to distal pancreatectomy conducting a pairwise meta-analysis and consequently network meta-analysis.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed using the databases, EMBASE, Pubmed, the Cochrane library, and Google Scholar. Meta-analyses were performed using both fixed-effect and random-effect models.
RESULTS
RDP cohort represented only 11% of the total sample; significantly younger patients with smaller size tumours were included in the RDP and LDP cohorts compared to ODP cohort. Significantly less blood loss and shorter length of stay were the advantages of both RDP and LDP compared to ODP. The ODP cohort included significantly more specimens with positive resection margins compared to RDP and LDP cohorts.
DISCUSSION
The results of the present study demonstrate that reduced blood losses and shorter length of stay are the advantages of RDP and LDP compared to ODP. However, demographic discrepancies, underpowered RDP sample and differences in oncological burden do not permit certain conclusions regarding the oncological safety of RDP and LDP for pancreatic adenocarcinoma.
Topics: Humans; Laparoscopy; Margins of Excision; Network Meta-Analysis; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Robotic Surgical Procedures
PubMed: 31080086
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2019.04.010 -
HPB : the Official Journal of the... Aug 2016The relation between para-aortic lymph nodes (PALN) involvement and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) survival, along with the optimal handling of this particular... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Positive para-aortic lymph nodes following pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer. Systematic review and meta-analysis of impact on short term survival and association with clinicopathologic features.
BACKGROUND
The relation between para-aortic lymph nodes (PALN) involvement and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) survival, along with the optimal handling of this particular lymph node station remain unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess this.
METHODS
A search of Medline, Embase, Ovid and Cochrane databases was performed until July 2015 to identify studies reporting on the relation of PALN involvement and PDAC outcomes and a meta-analysis was performed following data extraction.
RESULTS
Ten retrospective studies and two prospective non randomized studies (2467 patients) were included. Patients with positive PALN had worse one (p < 0.00001) and two year (p < 0.00001) survival when compared with patients with negative PALN. Even when comparing only patients with positive lymph nodes (N1), patients with PALN involvement presented with a significant lower one (p = 0.03) and two (p = 0.002) year survival. PALN involvement was associated with an increased possibility of positive margin (R1) resection (p < 0.00001), stations' 12, 14 and 17 malignant infiltration (p < 0.00001), but not with tumour stage (p = 0.78).
DISCUSSION
Involvement of PALN is associated with decreased survival in pancreatic cancer patients. However, existence of long term survivors among this subgroup of patients should be further evaluated, in order to identify factors associated with their favourable prognosis.
Topics: Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal; Chi-Square Distribution; Female; Humans; Lymph Nodes; Lymphatic Metastasis; Male; Margins of Excision; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Staging; Neoplasm, Residual; Odds Ratio; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Survival Analysis; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27485057
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2016.04.007 -
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 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2013Pancreatic resections are associated with high morbidity (30% to 60%) and mortality (5%). Synthetic analogues of somatostatin are advocated by some surgeons to reduce... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Pancreatic resections are associated with high morbidity (30% to 60%) and mortality (5%). Synthetic analogues of somatostatin are advocated by some surgeons to reduce complications following pancreatic surgery; however, their use is controversial.
OBJECTIVES
To determine whether prophylactic somatostatin analogues should be used routinely in pancreatic surgery.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 1), MEDLINE, EMBASE and Science Citation Index Expanded to February 2013.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials comparing prophylactic somatostatin or one of its analogues versus no drug or placebo during pancreatic surgery (irrespective of language or publication status).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and independently extracted data. We analysed data with both the fixed-effect and random-effects models using Review Manager (RevMan). We calculated the risk ratio (RR), mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) based on an intention-to-treat or available case analysis. When it was not possible to perform either of the above, we performed a per protocol analysis.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 21 trials (19 trials of high risk of bias) involving 2348 people. There was no significant difference in the perioperative mortality (RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.56 to 1.16; n = 2210) or the number of people with drug-related adverse effects between the two groups (RR 2.09; 95% CI 0.83 to 5.24; n = 1199). Quality of life was not reported in any of the trials. The overall number of participants with postoperative complications was significantly lower in the somatostatin analogue group (RR 0.70; 95% CI 0.61 to 0.80; n = 1903) but there was no significant difference in the re-operation rate (RR 1.26; 95% CI 0.58 to 2.70; n = 687) or hospital stay (MD -1.29 days; 95% CI -2.60 to 0.03; n = 1314) between the groups. The incidence of pancreatic fistula was lower in the somatostatin analogue group (RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.55 to 0.79; n = 2206). The proportion of these fistulas that were clinically significant was not mentioned in most trials. On inclusion of trials that clearly distinguished clinically significant fistulas, there was no significant difference between the two groups (RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.38 to 1.28; n = 292).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Somatostatin analogues may reduce perioperative complications but do not reduce perioperative mortality. Further adequately powered trials with low risk of bias are necessary. Based on the current available evidence, somatostatin and its analogues are recommended for routine use in people undergoing pancreatic resection.
Topics: Gastrointestinal Agents; Humans; Length of Stay; Octreotide; Pancreas; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Diseases; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Postoperative Complications; Publication Bias; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Reoperation; Sepsis; Somatostatin
PubMed: 23633353
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008370.pub3 -
Medicine Aug 2020Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is the most common and intractable complication after partial pancreatectomy, with an incidence of 13% to 64%. Polyglycolic acid... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is the most common and intractable complication after partial pancreatectomy, with an incidence of 13% to 64%. Polyglycolic acid (PGA) mesh is a new technique that is designed to prevent POPF, and its effect has been evaluated in several randomized controlled trials and some retrospective cohort studies. In this study, we systematically and comprehensively analyzed the efficacy of PGA mesh based on reported studies.We searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases in English between January 2010 and October 2019. Analysis was performed by using Review Manger 5.3 software.Three RCTs and 8 nonrandomized studies were eligible with a total of 1598 patients including 884 PGA group patients and 714 control group patients. For pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), distal pancreatectomy (DP), and the 2 partial pancreatectomy (PD or DP), we found significant statistical differences in overall POPF (relative risk [RR] = 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.61-0.91, P = .004; RR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.57-0.96, P = .02; RR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.64-0.89, P = .0009, respectively) and clinical pancreatic fistula (PF) (RR = 0.5, 95% CI = 0.37-0.68, P < .00001; RR = 0.31, 95% CI = 0.21-0.46, P < .00001; RR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.32-0.52, P < .00001, respectively) in favor of PGA. For partial pancreatectomy, significant statistical differences were found in overall complications (RR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.67-0.88, P = .0002) and estimated blood loss (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -53.58; 95% CI: -101.20 to -5.97, P = .03) in favor of PGA. We did not find significant differences regarding operative time (WMD = -8.86; 95% CI: -27.59 to 9.87, P = .35) and hospital stay (WMD = -2.73; 95% CI: -7.53 to 2.06, P = .26).This meta-analysis shows the benefits of the PGA mesh technique regarding POPF, clinical PF, and postoperative complications. This still needs to be verified by more randomized control trials.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Polyglycolic Acid; Postoperative Complications; Surgical Mesh
PubMed: 32846759
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000021456 -
Cancers Apr 2021Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN) are common but difficult to manage since accurate tools for diagnosing malignancy are unavailable. This study tests the... (Review)
Review
Ductal Dilatation of ≥5 mm in Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasm Should Trigger the Consideration for Pancreatectomy: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of Resected Cases.
Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN) are common but difficult to manage since accurate tools for diagnosing malignancy are unavailable. This study tests the diagnostic value of the main pancreatic duct (MPD) diameter for detecting IPMN malignancy using a meta-analysis of published data of resected IPMNs. Collected from a comprehensive literature search, the articles included in this analysis must report malignancy cases (high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and invasive carcinoma (IC)) and MPD diameter so that two MPD cut-offs could be created. The sensitivity, specificity, and odds ratios of the two cutoffs for predicting malignancy were calculated. A review of 1493 articles yielded 20 retrospective studies with 3982 resected cases. A cutoff of ≥5 mm is more sensitive than the ≥10 mm cutoff and has pooled sensitivity of 72.20% and 75.60% for classification of HGD and IC, respectively. Both MPD cutoffs of ≥5 mm and ≥10 mm were associated with malignancy (OR = 4.36 (95% CI: 2.82, 6.75) vs. OR = 3.18 (95% CI: 2.25, 4.49), respectively). The odds of HGD and IC for patients with MPD ≥5 mm were 5.66 (95% CI: 3.02, 10.62) and 7.40 (95% CI: 4.95, 11.06), respectively. OR of HGD and IC for MPD ≥10 mm cutoff were 4.36 (95% CI: 3.20, 5.93) and 4.75 (95% CI: 2.39, 9.45), respectively. IPMN with MPD of >5 mm could very likely be malignant. In selected IPMN patients, pancreatectomy should be considered when MPD is >5 mm.
PubMed: 33922344
DOI: 10.3390/cancers13092031 -
Asian Journal of Surgery Jan 2019Robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy (RADP) has been developed with the aim of improving surgical quality and overcoming the limitations of laparoscopic distal... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
Robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy (RADP) has been developed with the aim of improving surgical quality and overcoming the limitations of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) and open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) for pancreatic resections. A systematic search was performed in the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and China Biology Medicine databases up to December 2016 for studies that compared the surgical outcomes of RADP vs. LDP or ODP for pancreatic resections. The weighted mean differences, odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated, and the data were combined using the random-effects model. The GRADE system was used to interpret the primary outcomes of this meta-analysis. A total of seventeen non-randomized observational clinical studies involving 2133 patients satisfied the eligibility criteria. Compared with LDP, RADP was associated with a longer operative time (P = 0.018), a shorter hospital length of stay (P = 0.030), and a higher rate of spleen preservation (P = 0.022). Moreover, RADP was associated with a shorter hospital LOS (P = 0.014) and a lower total complication rate (P = 0.034) than ODP. We found no statistically significant differences between the techniques in the mean estimated blood loss, severe complication rate, incidence of total pancreatic fistulas or incidence of severe pancreatic fistulas. The overall quality of evidence was poor for all outcomes. This meta-analysis indicates that RADP may be safe and comparable in terms of surgical results to LDP and ODP. Further RCTs are needed to confirm the outcomes of this meta-analysis.
Topics: Blood Loss, Surgical; Confidence Intervals; Databases, Bibliographic; Humans; Incidence; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Odds Ratio; Operative Time; Organ Sparing Treatments; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Patient Safety; Postoperative Complications; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Spleen; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30337121
DOI: 10.1016/j.asjsur.2018.08.011