Current status of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy and pancreatectomy

Cost-effectiveness of open versus laparoscopic pancreatectomy: A nationwide, population-based study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic pancreatic resection is comparable to open pancreatic resection; however, cost-effectiveness analyses of laparoscopic pancreatic resection are scarce. The authors performed a population-based study investigating the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic pancreatic resection versus open pancreatic resection.

METHODS

Data from 9,256 patients who received pancreaticoduodenectomy (66.8%) and distal pancreatectomy (33.2%) from 2016 to 2018 were retrieved from the Korean National Health Insurance Service. Events after pancreatectomy were categorized as no complication, complication, and death. Probabilities of each event and average cost during index admission and 1 year were utilized to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, the cost difference between two interventions divided by quality-adjusted life year. Quality-adjusted life year, a function of length and quality of life, was measured with utility values determined by researching literature.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic pancreatic resection was performed in 12.4% of pancreaticoduodenectomies and 53.4% of distal pancreatectomies. For pancreaticoduodenectomy, laparoscopic pancreatic resection was associated with an increase of 0.0022 quality-adjusted life years for index admission and 0.0023 quality-adjusted life years for 1 year compared with open pancreatic resection. The incremental cost was $321 for index admission and -$1,414 for 1 year, leading to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $147,429 per quality-adjusted life year gained for index admission and -$614,965 per quality-adjusted life year gained for 1 year. For distal pancreatectomy, laparoscopic pancreatic resection improved 0.0131 quality-adjusted life years for index admission and 0.0285 quality-adjusted life years for index admission. The incremental cost was -$1,240 for index admission and -$5,875 for 1 year, leading to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of -$94,519 per quality-adjusted life year gained for index admission and -$206,351 for 1 year.

CONCLUSION

laparoscopic pancreatic resection was a cost-effective alternative to open pancreatic resection for pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy, except for the higher cost of index admission for pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Comparative analysis of clinical efficacy between laparoscopic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy

Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) is a technically demanding procedure but is gradually gaining acceptance in clinical practice. This study was performed to compare the short-term outcomes of LPD with open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). The perioperative data of the patients who underwent LPD (n = 25) and OPD (n = 40) from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2021 at Zhangjiagang Hospital Affiliated to Soochow University were collected and retrospectively analyzed. All patients received R0 resection, and none of the patients died within the perioperative period. The preoperative data (gender, age, body mass index [BMI], and preoperative bilirubin), the intraoperative data (operative time, number of retrieved lymph nodes), and postoperative data (level 1 monitoring time, postoperative fluid diet time, postoperative fluid feeding time, and hospitalization cost) were comparable between the 2 groups (P > .05). The estimated blood loss, abdominal drainage tube removal time, postoperative hospital stay, catheter removal time, and analgesic drug use were significantly lesser in the LPD group, when compared to the OPD group (P < .05). LPD is safe and feasible. Compared to OPD, LPD has less surgical trauma, less intraoperative bleeding, and faster postoperative recovery.

Application of a sectional U-shaped reinforcement combined with penetrating pancreaticojejunostomy (U-PPJ) for soft pancreas in laparoscopic pancreatic surgery

Laparoscopic techniques have been widely used in pancreatic surgery, such as laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) and laparoscopic central pancreatectomy (LCP). Laparoscopic pancreaticojejunostomy (LPJ) is a common procedure for LPD and LCP, and is also the most critical. The quality of LPJ is associated with the occurrence of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF). Although LPJ technology has been greatly improved, CR-POPF cannot be completely avoided especially to soft pancreas, which is an important reason for the high risk of laparoscopic pancreatic surgery. To date, there is a lack of standard LPJ approaches. Here, we report a U-shaped suture reinforcement for soft pancreatic section combined with penetrating pancreaticojejunostomy (PPJ) technique, called U-PPJ. Twenty-three patients with soft pancreas who underwent laparoscopic pancreatic surgery adopting U-PPJ method between 2017 and 2022 were enrolled (LPD = 19, LCP = 4). Preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative indexes were collected and analyzed. The results showed that all patients treated with U-PPJ were discharged without drainage tube or a small amount of exudate in the drainage tube does not require clinical treatment, but only needs to be removed after 2 days of observation. The average operation time was 417.35 min. The intraoperative blood loss was 171.74 ml. The pancreatic duct diameter was 3.41 mm. The average postoperative hospitalization days were 11.83 days. The average postoperative drainage tube removal time was 13.26 days. The incidence of postoperative B-grade pancreatic fistula was 4.3%, and no C-grade pancreatic fistula occurred. In our experience, U-PPJ can be completed by a skilled surgeon in less than 20 min. U-PPJ is safe, reliable, convenient and has a low incidence of CR-POPF in soft pancreas, which is worthy of clinical application. It also provides more options for laparoscopic pancreatic surgery. Since this is a retrospective study with a small number of cases, more prospective multicenter studies are needed to further verify its safety and efficacy.

Laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic and periampullary tumor: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and non-randomized comparative studies

Objective

This meta-analysis compares the perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) to those of open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) for pancreatic and periampullary tumors.

Background

LPD has been increasingly applied in the treatment of pancreatic and periampullary tumors. However, the perioperative outcomes of LPD versus OPD are still controversial.

Methods

PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized comparative trials (NRCTs) comparing LPD versus OPD for pancreatic and periampullary tumors. The main outcomes were mortality, morbidity, serious complications, and hospital stay. The secondary outcomes were operative time, blood loss, transfusion, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), bile leak (BL), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), lymph nodes harvested, R0 resection, reoperation, and readmission. RCTs were evaluated by the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. NRCTs were assessed using a modified tool from the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies. Data were pooled as odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD). This study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022338832).

Results

Four RCTs and 35 NRCTs concerning a total of 40,230 patients (4,262 LPD and 35,968 OPD) were included. Meta-analyses showed no significant differences in mortality (OR 0.91, p = 0.35), serious complications (OR 0.97, p = 0.74), POPF (OR 0.93, p = 0.29), PPH (OR 1.10, p = 0.42), BL (OR 1.28, p = 0.22), harvested lymph nodes (MD 0.66, p = 0.09), reoperation (OR 1.10, p = 0.41), and readmission (OR 0.95, p = 0.46) between LPD and OPD. Operative time was significantly longer for LPD (MD 85.59 min, p < 0.00001), whereas overall morbidity (OR 0.80, p < 0.00001), hospital stay (MD -2.32 days, p < 0.00001), blood loss (MD -173.84 ml, p < 0.00001), transfusion (OR 0.62, p = 0.0002), and DGE (OR 0.78, p = 0.002) were reduced for LPD. The R0 rate was higher for LPD (OR 1.25, p = 0.001).

Conclusions

LPD is associated with non-inferior short-term surgical outcomes and oncologic adequacy compared to OPD when performed by experienced surgeons at large centers. LPD may result in reduced overall morbidity, blood loss, transfusion, and DGE, but longer operative time. Further RCTs should address the potential advantages of LPD over OPD.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO, identifier CRD42022338832.

Outcomes of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy using a modified technique：346 cases from a single center

PURPOSE

To study the outcomes of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) using a modified technique.

METHODS

Our center used priority approach of uncinate process and artery in the pancreatectomy and duct to mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy with a single stitch in the pancreaticojejunostomy. Herein, we retrospectively reviewed 346 cases of LPD using modified techniques. Basic characteristics, preoperative outcomes, factors associated with unfavorable postoperative outcome, and mortality of patients undergoing LPD were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

The average operative time was 259.31 (35-425) min. The mean duration of pancreaticojejunostomy anastomosis was 31.97 (16-90) min. The mean intraoperative blood loss was 101.76 (0-1200) ml by estimation. Postoperative complications included 14 cases (4.1%) of bile leakage, 9 cases (2.6%) of delayed gastric emptying, 26 cases (7.5%) of postoperative bleeding, 34 cases (9.9%) of organ space infection, 17 cases (4.9%) of pulmonary infection, and 50 cases (14.5%) of POPF. Three factors including postoperative bleeding (OR = 3.502; P = 0.033), positive lymph node (OR = 3.296; P < 0.001), and postoperative chemotherapy (OR = 0.241; P = 0.008) were significantly associated with death of LPD.

CONCLUSIONS

The modified technique for LPD presents safety and reliability. Postoperative bleeding and positive lymph node may be associated with worse overall survival, and postoperative chemotherapy may be associated with better overall survival.

Intraoperative pancreatoscopy in pancreaticoduodenectomy for intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms of the pancreas: Application to the laparoscopic approach

BACKGROUND

/Purpose: Owing to the characteristics of IPMNs, which have variable skipped lesions along the main pancreatic duct (MPD), determining the surgical margins is very difficult. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and potential oncologic impact of intraoperative pancreatoscopy (IOP) compared to frozen section biopsy (FSB) in pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for pancreatic head IPMNs.

METHODS

Data of patients who underwent PD for IPMNs of the pancreas between October 2007 and May 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. IOP was performed in selected patients with IPMNs with inconclusive MPD involvement based on preoperative evaluations. Patients were divided into two groups, IOP group, FSB group. Clinicopathologic features and oncologic outcomes were compared between two groups.

RESULTS

60 patients underwent PD (laparoscopic or robotic, 42; open, 18) for pancreatic head IPMNs. IOP was safely performed in 28 patients, including minimally invasive approach used in 21 patients (35%). IOP group had a significantly larger MPD size (9.15 ± 4.79 mm vs 6.43 ± 4.11 mm, p = 0.021). Based on IOP, the initial surgical plan could be changed in 5 patients (17.8%) for complete resection. Recurrence occurred in 2 patients in FSB group and 3 patients in IOP group during the follow-up period (33.2 months, [range, 3.5-131.4 months]). Overall disease-free survival rate did not significantly differ between two groups (p = 0.529).

CONCLUSIONS

IOP can be safely performed in patients with pancreatic head IPMNs with MPD dilatation, even in the laparoscopic approach. Further studies evaluating the long-term oncologic effect of IOP for the management of IPMNs are required.

Standardized right artery first approach during laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary neoplasms: technical aspects and perioperative outcomes

BACKGROUND

The most debated aspects of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) concern the dissection of the pancreas from the surrounding vessels and the achievement of adequate resection margins, especially in patients with pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Data of consecutive patients undergoing LPD with right artery first approach from September 2020 to September 2021 for periampullary neoplasms (pancreatic, ampullary, duodenal, distal common biliary duct) were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. The overall cohort was divided into two groups: patients affected by pancreatic carcinoma (PC) and patients affected by other periampullary neoplasms (OP). Surgical and postoperative outcomes between PC and OP were compared.

RESULTS

Thirty-one patients (15 PC and 16 OP) were selected. No difference was found between PC and OP in terms of baseline characteristics. Median resection time and overall surgical time of the entire cohort were 275 min and 530 min, respectively, without difference between the groups (p = 0.599 and 0.052, respectively). Blood loss was similar between the groups, being 350 ml in PC and 325 ml in OP (p = 0.762). One patient (3.2%) was converted to laparotomy. No difference was found between the groups in terms of pathological outcomes. Median number of retrieved lymph nodes was 17. The majority of the patients (83.9%) received an R0 resection (73.3% and 93.7% in PC and OP, respectively; p = 0.172). Postoperative surgical outcomes did not differ between the groups, excepting for overall complication rate that was higher in the OP group (26.7% vs 68.7% in PC and OP, respectively; p = 0.032).

CONCLUSION

Standardized right artery first approach during LPD was feasible and did not show worse surgical and postoperative outcomes in patients with pancreatic cancer as compared to those affected by other periampullary neoplasms, except for a higher rate of minor complications.

Central pancreatectomy for benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic tumors in the neck and body of the pancreas

BACKGROUND

For tumors in the neck and body of the pancreas, distal pancreatectomy (DP) has been the standard surgical procedure for the last few decades and central pancreatectomy (CP) is an alternative surgical option. Whether CP better preserves remnant pancreatic endocrine and exocrine functions after surgery remains a subject of debate.

AIM

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of CP compared with DP for benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic tumors in the neck and body of the pancreas.

METHODS

This retrospective study enrolled 296 patients who underwent CP or DP for benign and low-malignant neoplasms at the same hospital between January 2016 and March 2020. Perioperative outcomes and long-term morbidity of endocrine/exocrine function were prospectively evaluated.

RESULTS

No significant difference was observed in overall morbidity or clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula between the two groups (P = 0.055). Delayed gastric emptying occurred more frequently in the CP group than in the DP group (29.4% vs 15.3%; P < 0.005). None of the patients in the CP group had new-onset or aggravated distal metastasis, whereas 40 patients in the DP group had endocrine function deficiency after surgery (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of diarrhea immediately after surgery, but at postoperative 12 mo, a significantly higher number of patients had diarrhea in the DP group than in the CP group (0% vs 9.5%; P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

CP is a generally safe procedure and is better than DP in preserving long-term pancreatic endocrine and exocrine functions. Therefore, CP might be a better option for treating benign or low-grade malignant neoplasms in suitable patients.

Clinical efficacy of coil embolization in treating pseudoaneurysm post-Whipple operation

The present study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of angiography and coil embolization for pseudoaneurysm post-pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). A total of 17 patients with gastrointestinal or abdominal hemorrhage after PD were included in the present study. Angiography was performed on the celiac artery, common hepatic artery, splenic artery, gastroduodenal artery and superior mesenteric artery to determine the size of the pseudoaneurysm, the parent artery and its collateral branches. A variety of embolization techniques have been applied to embolize pseudoaneurysm, including the sac packing technique, proximal embolization, exclusion technique and sandwich technique. Different techniques with coils were used for embolization and the clinical effects of embolization were analyzed. A total of 18 pseudoaneurysms were identified in 17 patients. In 2 patients, severe technical complications occurred, including migration of the coil and rupture of pseudoaneurysm, and one of them died, which may have been associated with this complication. No serious clinical complications were observed in the other patients. A total of 7 patients had mild clinical complications, including mild abdominal and dorsal pain, which were alleviated after symptomatic management. A total of 15 patients with definite pseudoaneurysm were successfully embolized without re-bleeding and complications. The clinical success rate was 94.1% (16/17). In conclusion, a variety of embolization techniques may be applied for the treatment of pseudoaneurysm after PD, which have high technical and clinical success rates and small trauma. It is recommended in emergency situations, but care should be taken to avoid serious technical complications.

Laparoscopic assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy: an important link in the process of transition from open to total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy

Background

The safety of total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy still remains controversial. Laparoscopic assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy (LAPD) may be an alternative selection. The purpose of the present study is to compare a consecutive cohort of LAPD and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) from a single surgeon.

Methods

A comparison was conducted between LAPD and OPD from January 2013 to December 2018. Perioperative outcomes and short-term oncological results were compared. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to determine associations among variables.

Results

133 patients were enrolled, 36 patients (27.1%) underwent LAPD and 97 (72.9%) underwent OPD. No 30-day and 90-day mortality occurred. LAPD was associated with decreased intraoperative estimated blood loss (300 versus 500 ml; P = 0.002), longer operative time (372 versus 305 min; P < 0.001) compared with OPD. LAPD had a conversion rate of 16.7%, and wasn’t associated with an increased grade B/C pancreatic fistula rate, major surgical complications, intraoperative blood transfusion, reoperation rate or length of hospital stay after surgery. In the subset of 58 pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas, R0 resection rate, median total harvested lymph node or lymph nodes ≥12 did not differ between the two groups.

Conclusion

LAPD could be performed with non-inferior short-term perioperative and oncologic outcomes achieved by OPD in selected patients.

LAPAROSCOPIC DISTAL PANCREATECTOMY WITH OR WITHOUT SPLEEN PRESERVATION: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SHORT AND LONG-TERM OUTCOMES

Background:

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is the preferred approach for resection of tumors in the distal pancreas because of its many advantages over the open approach.

Aim:

To analyse and compare short and long-term outcomes from LDP performed through two different techniques: with splenectomy vs. spleen preservation and splenic vessel preservation.

Method:

Fifty-eight patients were operated and subsequently divided between two groups: Group 1, LDP with splenectomy (LDPS); and Group 2, LDP with spleen preservation and preservation of splenic vessels (LDPSPPSV).

Results:

The epidemiological characteristics were statistically similar between the two groups (age, gender, BMI and lesion size). Both the mean of operative time (p=0.04) and the mean of intra-operative blood loss (p=0,03) were higher in Group 1. The mean of resected lymph nodes was also higher in Group 1 (p<0.000). There were no statistic differences between the groups in relation to open conversion, morbidity or early postoperative mortality. The mean hospital stay was similar between groups. Pancreatic fistula (grade B and C) was similar between the groups. The mean of overall follow-up was 37.6 months (5-96). Late complications were similar between the groups.

Conclusion:

Both techniques were superimposable; however, LDPS presented, respectively, higher intra-operative bleeding, longer duration of the operation and higher number of lymph nodes resected. No differences were observed in the studied period in relation to the appearance of infections or neoplasm related to splenectomy during follow-up. Maintenance of the spleen avoided periodic immunizations in patients in LDPSPSV. It is indicated in small pancreatic lesions with indolent course.

Laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal versus central pancreatectomy for tumors in the pancreatic neck and proximal body

For benign and borderline tumors in the pancreatic neck and proximal body, laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP) and laparoscopic central pancreatectomy (LCP) are alternative surgical procedures. Choosing between LSPDP and LCP is difficult. This retrospective cohort study was looking forward to provide evidence for clinical decision.A total of 59 patients undergoing LSPDP (Kimura procedure) and LCP between June 2013 and March 2017 were selected. The clinical outcomes of patients were compared by χ test or Fisher exact test and Student t test.This study included 36 patients in LSPDP group, and 23 patients in LCP group. The overall complications incidence in LCP group was significantly higher than LSPDP group (35 vs 6%, P = .004), and the postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) (grade B and C) rate and abdominal infection rate in LCP group were still significantly higher than LSPDP group (POPF 22 vs 3%, P = .019; abdominal infection 35 vs 3%, P = .001, respectively). The length of resected pancreas was significantly longer in LSPDP group (9.8 ± 2.0 vs 5.3 ± 1.1 cm, P = .007). The median follow-up was 39 months (range 12-57 months). No patient was confronted by tumor recurrence. The proportion of postoperative pancreatin and insulin treatment in LCP group were similar to LSPDP group (9 vs 17%, P = .383; 0 vs 3%, P = 1.000, respectively).For patients with poor general condition, the safety of LCP needs to be taken seriously; in some ways, LSPDP may be more secure, physiological, and easier operation for tumor located in pancreatic neck and proximal body.

LAPAROSCOPIC DISTAL PANCREATECTOMY WITH SPLEEN PRESERVATION

Background:

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy has been the choice for resection of distal pancreas lesions due many advantages over open approach. Spleen preservation technique seems minimizes infectious complications in long-term outcome.

Aim:

To present the results of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies with spleen preservation by Kimura´s technique (preservation of spleen blood vessels) performed by single surgical team.

Methods:

Retrospective case series aiming to evaluate both short and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies with spleen preservation.

Results:

A total of 54 laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies were performed, in which 26 were laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies with spleen preservation by Kimura´s technique. Mean age was 47.9 years-old (21-75) where 61.5% were female. Mean BMI was 28.5 kg/m² (18-38.8). Mean diameter of lesion was 4.3 cm (1.8-7.5). Mean operative time was 144.1 min (90-200). Intraoperative bleeding was 119.2 ml (50-600). Conversion to laparotomy 3% (n=1). Postoperative morbidity was 11.5%. Postoperative mortality was null. Mean of hospital stay was 4.8 days (2-14). Mean time of follow-up period was 19.7 months (2-60). There was no neoplasm recurrence or mortality on evaluated period. There was no infectious complication.

Conclusion:

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy with spleen and splenic vessels preservation is feasible, safe, and effective procedure. This technique presented both low morbidity and null mortality on this sample. There were neither infectious complications nor neoplasm recurrence on long-term follow-up period.