Dataset Information

Perioperative and oncological outcomes following minimally invasive versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic duct adenocarcinoma.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The outcomes of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy have not been adequately compared with those of open pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the perioperative and oncological outcomes of these two pancreaticoduodenectomy procedures specifically in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Methods

Before this study was initiated, a specific protocol was designed and has been registered in PROSEPRO (ID: CRD42020149438). Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were systematically searched for studies published between January 1994 and October 2019. Overall survival, disease-free survival, and time to commencing adjuvant chemotherapy were the primary endpoint measurements, whereas perioperative and short-term outcomes were the secondary endpoints.

Results

The final analysis included 9 retrospective cohorts comprising 11,242 patients (1377 who underwent minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy and 9865 who underwent open pancreaticoduodenectomy). There were no significant differences in the patients' overall survival, operative time, postoperative complications, 30-day mortality, rate of vein resection, number of harvested lymph nodes, or rate of positive lymph nodes between the two approaches. However, disease-free survival, time to starting adjuvant chemotherapy, length of hospital stay, and rate of negative margins in patients who underwent minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy showed improvements relative to those in patients who underwent open surgery.

Conclusions

Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy provides similar or even improved perioperative, short-term, and long-term oncological outcomes when compared with open pancreaticoduodenectomy for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

SUBMITTER: Sun R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8057975 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is a major operative intervention performed most commonly for malignancy in the head of pancreas. The aim of this study was to evaluate the utilization of blood transfusion for PD and to determine whether this had prognostic significance in a subset of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data on blood transfusion requirement were retrospectively collected for patients undergoing PD from 1998 to 2005. Standard prognostic factors and survival data were also collected in patients with PDAC. RESULTS: One-hundred-and-seventy patients underwent PD. Seventy-six patients (45%) received transfusion. The median (interquartile range) number of units of red cell concentrate (RCC) transfused perioperatively (intraoperatively and within 24 h of surgery) was 1.5 (0.5-2.5). The median preoperative haemoglobin (Hb) was 126 g/dl. The median number of units of RCC transfused perioperatively in patients with Hb <126 g/dl was 2 (1-3); for those with Hb > or = 126 g/dl the median was 0 (0-1); p=0.003. Forty-nine patients who were resected for PDAC were subjected to survival analysis. Univariate and multivariate analyses showed that only posterior resection margin invasion was associated with an adverse outcome (margin positive 198 [143-470] days vs margin negative 398 [303-859] days; p=0.02). Perioperative RCC transfusion requirement was not a significant predictor of survival (transfusion 408 [214-769] days vs no transfusion 331 [217-391] days; p=0.18). Furthermore, RCC transfusion within 30 days of operation was not a significant predictor of poor survival (transfusion 331 [201-459] days vs no transfusion 317 [196-769] days; p=0.43). CONCLUSIONS: PD can be performed with a moderately low requirement for RCC transfusion; however, low preoperative haemoglobin is a predictor for the requirement of RCC transfusion. Administration of RCC transfusion does not appear to be a significant adverse prognostic factor in patients with resected PDAC.

Project description:BackgroundLittle is known about what factors predict better outcomes for patients who undergo minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). We hypothesized that patients with dilated pancreatic ducts have improved postoperative outcomes with MIPD compared to OPD.MethodsAll patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy were prospectively followed over a time period of 47 months, and perioperative and pathologic covariates and outcomes were compared. Ideal outcome after PD was defined as follows: (1) no complications, (2) postoperative length of stay < 7 days, and (3) negative (R0) margins on pathology. Patients with dilated pancreatic ducts (≥ 3 mm) who underwent MIPD were 1:3 propensity score-matched to patients with dilated ducts who underwent OPD and outcomes compared. Likewise, patients with non-dilated pancreatic ducts (< 3 mm) who underwent MIPD were 1:3 propensity score-matched to patients with non-dilated ducts who underwent OPD and outcomes were compared.Results371 patients underwent PD-74 (19.9%) MIPD and 297 (80.1%) underwent OPD. Overall, patients who underwent MIPD had significantly less intraoperative blood loss. After 1:3 propensity score matching, patients with dilated pancreatic ducts who underwent MIPD (n = 45) had significantly lower overall complication and 90-day readmission rates compared to matched OPD patients (n = 135) with dilated ducts. Patients with dilated duct who underwent MIPD were more likely to have an ideal outcome than patients with OPD (29 vs 15%, p = 0.035). There were no significant differences in postoperative outcomes among propensity score-matched patients with non-dilated pancreatic ducts who underwent MIPD (n = 29) compared to matched patients undergoing OPD (n = 87) with non-dilated ducts.ConclusionsMIPD is safe with comparable perioperative outcomes to OPD. Patients with pancreatic ducts ≥ 3 mm appear to derive the most benefit from MIPD in terms of fewer complications, lower readmission rates, and higher likelihood of ideal outcome.

Project description:BackgroundRecently, the first randomized trials comparing minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) for non-malignant and malignant disease showed a 2-day reduction in time to functional recovery after MIDP. However, for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), concerns have been raised regarding the oncologic safety (i.e., radical resection, lymph node retrieval, and survival) of MIDP, as compared to ODP. Therefore, a randomized controlled trial comparing MIDP and ODP in PDAC regarding oncological safety is warranted. We hypothesize that the microscopically radical resection (R0) rate is non-inferior for MIDP, as compared to ODP.Methods/designDIPLOMA is an international randomized controlled, patient- and pathologist-blinded, non-inferiority trial performed in 38 pancreatic centers in Europe and the USA. A total of 258 patients with an indication for elective distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy because of proven or highly suspected PDAC of the pancreatic body or tail will be randomly allocated to MIDP (laparoscopic or robot-assisted) or ODP in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome is the microscopically radical resection margin (R0, distance tumor to pancreatic transection and posterior margin ≥ 1 mm), which is assessed using a standardized histopathology assessment protocol. The sample size is calculated with the following assumptions: 5% one-sided significance level (α), 80% power (1-β), expected R0 rate in the open group of 58%, expected R0 resection rate in the minimally invasive group of 67%, and a non-inferiority margin of 7%. Secondary outcomes include time to functional recovery, operative outcomes (e.g., blood loss, operative time, and conversion to open surgery), other histopathology findings (e.g., lymph node retrieval, perineural- and lymphovascular invasion), postoperative outcomes (e.g., clinically relevant complications, hospital stay, and administration of adjuvant treatment), time and site of disease recurrence, survival, quality of life, and costs. Follow-up will be performed at the outpatient clinic after 6, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months postoperatively.DiscussionThe DIPLOMA trial is designed to investigate the non-inferiority of MIDP versus ODP regarding the microscopically radical resection rate of PDAC in an international setting.Trial registrationISRCTN registry ISRCTN44897265 . Prospectively registered on 16 April 2018.