Dataset Information

Comparison of acute kidney injury between open and laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy: Propensity score analysis.

ABSTRACT: Laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy is being performed more frequently because of improved surgical techniques. Although several studies have demonstrated safety and favourable outcomes of laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy compared to open pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy, few studies have focused on the development of postoperative acute kidney injury. This retrospective study compared the prevalence and risk factors of acute kidney injury following laparoscopic and open pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy. Data from 809 patients who underwent pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy between February 2012 and September 2016 were analysed. Patients were divided into two groups according to the surgical procedure (open pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy [n = 632] vs laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy [n = 177]). The Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes criteria were used to define postoperative acute kidney injury and risk factors were investigated using multivariable logistic regression analysis with propensity score matching analysis and standardized mortality ratio weighting to compare outcomes. No significant differences were found in the occurrence of postoperative acute kidney injury and incidence of postoperative ICU admission between open and laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy groups after propensity score matching (p = 1.000, p = 0.999, respectivelyand standardized mortality ratio weighted analysis (p = 0.619, p = 0.982, respectively). Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy group (propensity matched set, mean [SD], 16.7 [10.0] vs. 18.7 [9.6] days, p = 0.004; standardized mortality ratio, 16.6 [9.9] vs. 18.1 [8.8] days, p = 0.001). There was no significant difference in postoperative acute kidney injury incidence between both groups. Laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy is promising with comparable postoperative outcomes to open pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy and has the advantage of shorter hospital stay.

SUBMITTER: Park YS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6108515 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of acute kidney injury between open and laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy: Propensity score analysis.

Park Yong-Seok YS Jun In-Gu IG Go Yonji Y Song Jun-Gol JG Hwang Gyu-Sam GS

PloS one 20180824 8

Laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy is being performed more frequently because of improved surgical techniques. Although several studies have demonstrated safety and favourable outcomes of laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy compared to open pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy, few studies have focused on the development of postoperative acute kidney injury. This retrospective study compared the prevalence and risk factors of acute kidney injury fol ...[more]

PMID: 30142190

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the long-term survival, mortality, morbidity and the operation-related events in patients with periampullary and pancreatic carcinoma undergoing pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPPD) and pylorus-resecting pancreaticoduodenectomy (PRPD).MethodA systematic search of literature databases (Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science) was performed to identify studies. Outcome measures comparing PPPD versus PRPD for periampullary and pancreatic carcinoma were long-term survival, mortality, morbidity (overall morbidity, delayed gastric emptying [DGE], pancreatic fistula, wound infection, postoperative bleeding, biliary leakage, ascites and gastroenterostomy leakage) and operation related events (hospital stays, operating time, intraoperative blood loss and red blood cell transfusions).ResultsEight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including 622 patients were identified and included in the analysis. Among these patients, it revealed no difference in long-term survival between the PPPD and PRPD groups (HR = 0.23, p = 0.11). There was a lower rate of DGE (RR = 2.35, p = 0.04, 95% CI, 1.06-5.21) with PRPD. Mortality, overall morbidity, pancreatic fistula, wound infection, postoperative bleeding, biliary leakage, ascites and gastroenterostomy leakage were not significantly different between the groups. PPPDs were performed more quickly than PRPDs (WMD = 53.25 minutes, p = 0.01, 95% CI, 12.53-93.97); and there was less estimated intraoperative blood loss (WMD = 365.21 ml, p = 0.006, 95% CI, 102.71-627.71) and fewer red blood cell transfusions (WMD = 0.29 U, p = 0.003, 95% CI, 0.10-0.48) in patients undergoing PPPD. The hospital stays showed no significant difference.ConclusionsPPPD had advantages over PRPD in operating time, intraoperative blood loss and red blood cell transfusions, but had a significantly higher rate of DGE for periampullary and pancreatic carcinoma. PPPD and PRPD had comparable mortality and morbidity including pancreatic fistulas, wound infections, postoperative bleeding, biliary leakage, ascites and gastroenterostomy leakage. Our conclusions were limited by the available data. Further evaluations of high-quality RCTs are needed.

Project description:Currently, safety of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) in patients with liver cirrhosis is unknown. The aim of this study was to explore postoperative morbidity and mortality and long-term outcomes of cirrhotic patients after LPD. The study was a one-center retrospective study comprising 353 patients who underwent LPD between October 2010 and December 2019. A total of 28 patients had liver cirrhosis and were paired with 56 non-cirrhotic counterparts through propensity score matching (PSM). Baseline data, intra-operative data, postoperative data, and survival data were collected. Postoperative morbidity was considered as primary outcome whereas postoperative mortality, surgical parameters (operative durations, intraoperative blood loss), and long-term overall survival were secondary outcomes. Cirrhotic patients showed postoperative complication rates of 82% compared with rates of patients in the control group (48%) (P = 0.003). Further, Clavien-Dindo ≥III complication rates of 14% and 11% (P = 0.634), Clavien-Dindo I-II complication rates of 68% and 38% (P = 0.009), hospital mortality of 4% and 2% (P = 0.613) were observed for cirrhotic patients and non-cirrhotic patients, respectively. In addition, an overall survival rate of 32 months and 34.5 months (P = 0.991), intraoperative blood loss of 300 (200-400) ml and 150 (100-250) ml (P<0.0001), drain amount of 2572.5 (1023.8-5275) ml and 1617.5 (907.5-2700) ml (P = 0.048) were observed in the cirrhotic group and control group, respectively. In conclusion, LPD is associated with increased risk of postoperative morbidity in patients with liver cirrhosis. However, the incidence of Clavien-Dindo ≥III complications and post-operative mortality showed no significant increase. In addition, liver cirrhosis showed no correlation with poor overall survival in patients who underwent LPD. These findings imply that liver cirrhosis patients can routinely be considered for LPD at high volume centers with rigorous selection and management.

Project description:BackgroundSelected studies have reported improved outcomes in laparoscopic compared with open distal pancreatic resection. Concerns regarding failure to achieve proper oncological resection and compromised long-term outcomes remain. This study investigated whether postoperative outcomes and long-term survival after laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy are comparable to those after an open procedure.MethodsThis retrospective case-control study included patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy for resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma between 2010 and 2013, identified from the National Cancer Database. Propensity score nearest-neighbour 1 : 1 matching was performed between patients undergoing laparoscopic or open distal pancreatectomy based on all relevant co-variables. The primary outcome was overall survival.ResultsOf 1947 eligible patients, 605 (31·1 per cent) underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. After propensity score matching, two well balanced groups of 563 patients each were analysed. There was no difference in overall survival at 3 years after laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy (41·6 versus 36·0 per cent; hazard ratio 0·93, 95 per cent c.i. 0·77 to 1·12; P = 0·457). The overall conversion rate was 27·3 per cent (165 of 605). Patients who underwent laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy had outcomes comparable to those of patients who had an open procedure with regard to median time to chemotherapy (50 versus 50 days; P = 0·342), median number of nodes examined (12 versus 12; P = 0·759); 30-day mortality (1·2 versus 0·9 per cent; P = 0·562); 90-day mortality (2·8 versus 3·7 per cent; P = 0·403), 30-day readmission rate (9·6 versus 9·2 per cent; P = 0·838) and positive margin rate (14·9 versus 18·5 per cent; P = 0·110). However, median duration of hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscopic group (6 versus 7 days; P < 0·001).ConclusionLaparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is an acceptable alternative to open distal pancreatectomy with no detriment to survival.

Project description:Background Radical resection remains the most effective treatment for hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HCCA). However, due to the complex anatomy of the hilar region, the tumor is prone to invade portal vein and hepatic arteries, making the surgical treatment of HCCA particularly difficult. Successful laparoscopic radical resection of HCCA(IIIA, IIIB) requires excellent surgical skills and rich experience. Furthermore, the safety and effectiveness of this operation are still controversial. Aim To retrospectively analyze and compare the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic and open surgery for patients with HCCA. Methods Clinical imaging and postoperative pathological data of 89 patients diagnosed with HCCA (IIIA, IIIB) and undergoing radical resection in our center from January 2018 to March 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 6 patients (4 were lost to follow-up and 2 were pathologically confirmed to have other diseases after surgery) were ruled out, and clinical data was collected from the remaining 83 patients for statistical analysis. These patients were divided into an open surgery group (n=62) and a laparoscopic surgery group (n=21) according to the surgical methods used, and after 1:2 propensity score matching (PSM), 32 and 16 patients respectively in the open surgery group and laparoscopic surgery group were remained. The demographic data, Bismuth type, perioperative data, intraoperative data, postoperative complications, pathological findings, and long-term survivals were compared between these two groups. Results After 1:2 PSM, 32 patients in the open surgery group and 16 patients in the laparoscopic surgery group were included for further analysis. Baseline characteristics and pathological outcomes were comparable between the two groups. Statistically significant differences between the two groups were observed in intraoperative blood loss and operative time, as it were 400-800 mL vs 200-400 mL (P=0.012) and (407.97 ± 76.06) min vs (489.69 ± 79.17) min (P=0.001) in the open surgery group and laparoscopic surgery group, respectively. The R0 resection rate of the open group was 28 cases (87.5%), and the R0 resection rate of the laparoscopic group was 15 cases (93.75%). The two groups showed no significant difference in terms of surgical approach, intraoperative blood transfusion, incidence of postoperative complications, and short- and long-term efficacy (P>0.05). Conclusions Laparoscopic radical resection of HCCA has comparable perioperative safety compared to open surgery group, as it has less bleeding and shorter operation time. Although it is a promising procedure with the improvement of surgical skills and further accumulation of experience, further investigations are warranted before its wider application.

Dataset Information

Comparison of acute kidney injury between open and laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy: Propensity score analysis.

Publications

Comparison of acute kidney injury between open and laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy: Propensity score analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets