1
|
Wu Y, Guo J, Peng W. Application of the IDEAL framework in hepatopancreatobiliary surgery: a review of the literature. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2023; 409:20. [PMID: 38153558 DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-03211-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2023] [Accepted: 12/20/2023] [Indexed: 12/29/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate every stage of surgical innovation and generate high-quality research evidence, the IDEAL (Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, Long-term study) framework was developed. This study aimed to explore the application of the IDEAL framework in hepatopancreatobiliary surgery and identify factors limiting its dissemination. METHODS We conducted a citation search of 8 core IDEAL framework articles in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus databases from 2009 to 2022. Two independent reviewers screened and selected articles related to hepatopancreatobiliary surgery. RESULTS A total of 1621 articles were identified through citation search. Following screening, 132 articles were finally retained, including 75 original studies (57%) and 57 secondary studies (43%). Of the original studies, only 10 articles (13%) accurately applied the IDEAL framework in methodology, distributed as follows: 1 in pre-IDEAL stage (0), 2 in Idea stage (1), 7 in Development stage (2a), 1 in Exploration stage (2b), and no articles in Assessment and Long-term study stages (3, 4). In the secondary studies, 36 articles (63%) mentioned and discussed the IDEAL framework, and all supported its application. CONCLUSIONS The application of the IDEAL framework in hepatopancreatobiliary surgery is increasingly widespread, as evidenced by its substantial citation in numerous articles. However, the utilization of the IDEAL framework remains predominantly confined to the early stages of innovation in hepatopancreatobiliary surgery, coupled with instances of misapplication stemming from insufficient comprehension of the framework. Further efforts are necessary to extend the impact of the IDEAL framework and provide surgeons with comprehensive guidance for its judicious implementation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Youwei Wu
- Division of Liver Surgery, Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China
| | - Jiulin Guo
- Department of Information, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Wei Peng
- Division of Liver Surgery, Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China.
- Chinese Evidence-Based Medicine Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Partelli S, Ricci C, Cinelli L, Montorsi RM, Ingaldi C, Andreasi V, Crippa S, Alberici L, Casadei R, Falconi M. Evaluation of cost-effectiveness among open, laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Surg 2021; 222:513-520. [PMID: 33853724 DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2021.03.066] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2021] [Revised: 03/20/2021] [Accepted: 03/30/2021] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is still a matter of debate. This study compares the cost-effectiveness of open (ODP), laparoscopic (LDP) and robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP). METHODS Pubmed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases were searched. Studies comparing cost-effectiveness of ODP and MIDP were included. RESULTS A total of 1052 titles were screened and 16 articles were included in the study, 2431 patients in total. LDP resulted the most cost-efficient procedure, with a mean total cost of 14,682 ± 5665 € and the lowest readmission rates. ODP had lower surgical procedure costs, 3867 ± 768 €. RDP was the safest approach regarding hospital stay costs (5239 ± 1741 €), length of hospital stay, morbidity, clinically relevant pancreatic fistula and reoperations. CONCLUSION In this meta-analysis MIDP resulted as the most cost-effective approach. LDP seems to be protective against high costs, but RDP seems to be safer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stefano Partelli
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational & Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Claudio Ricci
- Department of Internal Medicine and Surgery (DIMEC), Alma Mater Studorium, University of Bologna, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy; Division of Pancreatic Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Lorenzo Cinelli
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational & Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Roberto Maria Montorsi
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational & Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Carlo Ingaldi
- Department of Internal Medicine and Surgery (DIMEC), Alma Mater Studorium, University of Bologna, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy; Division of Pancreatic Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Valentina Andreasi
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational & Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Stefano Crippa
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational & Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Laura Alberici
- Department of Internal Medicine and Surgery (DIMEC), Alma Mater Studorium, University of Bologna, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy; Division of Pancreatic Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Riccardo Casadei
- Department of Internal Medicine and Surgery (DIMEC), Alma Mater Studorium, University of Bologna, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy; Division of Pancreatic Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Massimo Falconi
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational & Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
The Miami International Evidence-based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection. Ann Surg 2020; 271:1-14. [PMID: 31567509 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000003590] [Citation(s) in RCA: 263] [Impact Index Per Article: 65.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to develop and externally validate the first evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreas resection (MIPR) before and during the International Evidence-based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR) meeting in Miami (March 2019). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA MIPR has seen rapid development in the past decade. Promising outcomes have been reported by early adopters from high-volume centers. Subsequently, multicenter series as well as randomized controlled trials were reported; however, guidelines for clinical practice were lacking. METHODS The Scottisch Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology was used, incorporating these 4 items: systematic reviews using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to answer clinical questions, whenever possible in PICO style, the GRADE approach for assessment of the quality of evidence, the Delphi method for establishing consensus on the developed recommendations, and the AGREE-II instrument for the assessment of guideline quality and external validation. The current guidelines are cosponsored by the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the Asian-Pacific Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery, Pancreas Club, the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgery, the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, and the Society of Surgical Oncology. RESULTS After screening 16,069 titles, 694 studies were reviewed, and 291 were included. The final 28 recommendations covered 6 topics; laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatectomy, central pancreatectomy, pancreatoduodenectomy, as well as patient selection, training, learning curve, and minimal annual center volume required to obtain optimal outcomes and patient safety. CONCLUSION The IG-MIPR using SIGN methodology give guidance to surgeons, hospital administrators, patients, and medical societies on the use and outcome of MIPR as well as the approach to be taken regarding this challenging type of surgery.
Collapse
|
4
|
Kovid N, Han HS, Yoon YS, Cho JY. Advanced laparoscopic HPB surgery: Experience in Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. Ann Gastroenterol Surg 2020; 4:224-228. [PMID: 32490336 PMCID: PMC7240149 DOI: 10.1002/ags3.12323] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/12/2019] [Revised: 02/04/2020] [Accepted: 02/17/2020] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
The worldwide trend in surgery has moved from open surgery to minimally invasive surgery. Likewise, the application of minimally invasive surgery in the hepato-pancreato-biliary (HBP) field is also rapidly expanding. The field of HBP surgery can be divided into liver, pancreas and biliary fields. Minimally invasive liver surgery is recently developed. However, laparoscopic liver resection in difficult areas is challenging. However, with the accumulation of experiences, laparoscopic liver resection for difficult areas is performed more than before. With more propagation, more and more liver resection will be performed by laparoscopic approach. In minimally surgery for the pancreas, distal pancreatectomy has become a well-recommended procedure in benign and borderline malignancy. There have been several systemic reviews that show advantages of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. The reports on laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) are slowly increasing in spite of technical difficulty, with several systemic reviews showing advantages of the procedure. However, more PD will be performed as robotic-assisted procedures in the future. The laparoscopic surgery for biliary tract malignancy is still in early stages. The laparoscopic surgery for gallbladder cancer has been contraindicated, although there have been encouraging reports from expert centers. The laparoscopic surgery for Klatskin tumor is still an experimental procedure. Robotic-assisted procedures for the surgery of cholangiocarcinoma will be the future. Robotic-assisted surgery for the HBP field is still not well-developed. However, with the necessity of more precise manipulation like intracorporeal suturing, robotic-assisted surgery will be used more often in the field of HBP surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Ho-Seong Han
- Seoul National University Bundang Hospital Gyeonggi-do Korea
| | - Yoo-Seok Yoon
- Seoul National University Bundang Hospital Gyeonggi-do Korea
| | - Jai Young Cho
- Seoul National University Bundang Hospital Gyeonggi-do Korea
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Buanes TA. The role of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy-how take care of patient security? ANNALS OF TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE 2019; 7:S94. [PMID: 31576302 DOI: 10.21037/atm.2019.04.54] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Trond A Buanes
- Department of Hepato-Pancreatico-Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital (OuS), Oslo, Norway.,Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Lefor AK. Robotic and laparoscopic surgery of the pancreas: an historical review. BMC Biomed Eng 2019; 1:2. [PMID: 32903347 PMCID: PMC7412643 DOI: 10.1186/s42490-019-0001-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/28/2018] [Accepted: 01/03/2019] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Surgery of the pancreas is a relatively new field, with operative series appearing only in the last 50 years. Surgery of the pancreas is technically challenging. The entire field of general surgery changed radically in 1987 with the introduction of the laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Minimally Invasive surgical techniques rapidly became utilized worldwide for gallbladder surgery and were then adapted to other abdominal operations. These techniques are used regularly for surgery of the pancreas including distal pancreatectomy and pancreatoduodenectomy. The progression from open surgery to laparoscopy to robotic surgery has occurred for many operations including adrenalectomy, thyroidectomy, colon resection, prostatectomy, gastrectomy and others. Data to show a benefit to the patient are scarce for robotic surgery, although both laparoscopic and robotic surgery of the pancreas have been shown not to be inferior with regard to major operative and oncologic outcomes. While there were serious concerns when laparoscopy was first used in patients with malignancies, robotic surgery has been used in many benign and malignant conditions with no obvious deterioration of outcomes. Robotic surgery for malignancies of the pancreas is well accepted and expanding to more centers. The importance of centers of excellence, surgeon experience supported by a codified mastery-based training program and international registries is widely accepted. Robotic pancreatic surgery is associated with slightly decreased blood loss and decreased length of stay compared to open surgery. Major oncologic outcomes appear to have been preserved, with some studies showing higher rates of R0 resection and tumor-free margins. Patients with lesions of the pancreas should find a surgeon they trust and do not need to be concerned with the operative approach used for their resection. The step-wise approach that has characterized the growth in robotic surgery of the pancreas, in contradistinction to the frenzy that accompanied the introduction of laparoscopic cholecystectomy, has allowed the identification of areas for improvement, many of which lie at the junction of engineering and medical practice. Refinements in robotic surgery depend on a partnership between engineers and clinicians.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alan Kawarai Lefor
- Department of Surgery, Jichi Medical University, Shimotsuke, Tochigi Japan
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Buanes T, Edwin B. Long term oncological outcome of laparoscopic techniques in pancreatic cancer. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2018; 10:383-391. [PMID: 30631402 PMCID: PMC6323502 DOI: 10.4253/wjge.v10.i12.383] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/28/2018] [Revised: 11/05/2018] [Accepted: 12/05/2018] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
The laparoscopic technique in distal pancreatic resection (LDP) has been widely accepted, and outcome data support the hypothesis that survival is improved, partly due to improved postoperative safety and recovery, thus optimizing treatment with adjuvant chemotherapy. But laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD or Whipple-procedures) has spread more slowly, due to the complexity of the procedure. Surgical safety has been a problem in hospitals with low patient volume, resulting in raised postoperative mortality, requiring careful monitoring of outcome during the surgical learning curve. Robotic assistance is expected to improve surgical safety, but data on long term oncological outcome of laparoscopic Whipple procedures with or without robotic assistance is scarce. Future research should still focus surgical safety, but most importantly long term outcome, recorded as recurrence at maximal follow up or - at best - overall long term survival (OS). Available data show median survival above 2.5 years, five year OS more than 30% after LDP even in series with suboptimal adjuvant chemotherapy. Also after LPD, long term survival is reported equal to or longer than open resection. However, surgical safety during the learning curve of LPD is a problem, which hopefully can be facilitated by robotic assistance. Patient reported outcome should also be an endpoint in future trials, including patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Trond Buanes
- Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Division of Cancer, Surgery and Transplantation, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo N-0424, Norway
| | - Bjørn Edwin
- the Intervention Centre and Department of Hepato-Pancreatico-Biliary Surgery, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo N-0424, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Magge DR, Zenati MS, Hamad A, Rieser C, Zureikat AH, Zeh HJ, Hogg ME. Comprehensive comparative analysis of cost-effectiveness and perioperative outcomes between open, laparoscopic, and robotic distal pancreatectomy. HPB (Oxford) 2018; 20:1172-1180. [PMID: 31217087 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2018.05.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/19/2018] [Revised: 05/08/2018] [Accepted: 05/18/2018] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND NSQIP data show that half of distal pancreatectomies (DP) are performed by a minimally invasive approach (MIS). Advantages have been demonstrated for MIS DP, yet comparative cost data are limited. Outcomes and cost were compared in patients undergoing open (ODP), laparoscopic (LDP), and robotic (RDP) approaches at a single institution. METHODS A retrospective review was performed on patients undergoing DP between 1/2010-5/2016. Analysis was intention-to-treat, and cost was available after 1/2013. RESULTS DP was performed in 374 patients: ODP = 85, LDP = 93, and RDP = 196. Operating time was lowest in the RDP cohort (p < 0.0001). ODP had higher estimated blood loss (p < 0.0001) and transfusions (p < 0.0001) than LDP and RDP. LDP had greater conversions to open procedures than RDP (p = 0.001). Postoperative outcomes were similar between groups. Length of stay was higher in the ODP group (p = 0.0001) than LDP and RDP. Overall cost for the ODP was higher than the RDP and LDP group (p = 0.002). On multivariate analysis, RDP reduced LOS (ODP: Odds = 6.5 [p = 0.0001] and LDP: Odds = 2.1 [p = 0.036]) and total cost (ODP: Odds = 5.7 [p = 0.002] and LDP: Odds = 2.8 [p = 0.042]) independently of all demographics and illness covariates. CONCLUSIONS A robotic approach is associated with reduced length of stay and cost compared to open and laparoscopic procedures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deepa R Magge
- Division of GI Surgical Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, USA
| | - Mazen S Zenati
- Division of GI Surgical Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, USA
| | - Ahmad Hamad
- Department of Surgery, Ohio State University, USA
| | - Caroline Rieser
- Division of GI Surgical Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, USA
| | - Amer H Zureikat
- Division of GI Surgical Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, USA
| | | | - Melissa E Hogg
- Division of GI Surgical Oncology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Abstract
Over the past 135 years, the field of pancreatic surgery for treatment of pancreatic malignancies has been a challenge to the surgical community. Originally filled with unacceptably high morbidity and mortality, these obstacles have been overcome through the work of numerous great surgeons in recent decades. Today, despite the improved safety of operating on the pancreas, patients still suffer from high rates of malignant recurrence and poor overall survival. Recent advances in pancreatic surgery aim to further improve the morbidity of these operations while increasing the number of patients who are both candidates for surgical resection and those who receive complete resections. This review focuses on recent literature describing the pros and cons of minimally invasive approaches to pancreatic surgery and the risks and benefits of vascular reconstruction to improve resectability. Both topics are currently debated amongst pancreatic surgeons and this article summarizes the varied viewpoints and their impact on outcomes in pancreas cancer surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexandra W Acher
- Department of General Surgery, University of Utah Health Care, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Josh Bleicher
- Department of General Surgery, University of Utah Health Care, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Austin Cannon
- Department of General Surgery, University of Utah Health Care, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Courtney Scaife
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Abstract
OPINION STATEMENT Pancreatic cancer surgery is a continuously evolving field. Despite tremendous advances in perioperative outcomes, pancreatic resection is still associated with substantial morbidity, and mortality is not nil. Institutional caseload is a well-established determinant of patient outcomes, and centralization to experienced centers is essential to the safety and oncological appropriateness of the resection. Minimally invasive approaches are increasingly applied for pancreatic resection, even in cancer patients. Nevertheless, the level of evidence in this field remains low. Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy appears potentially beneficial towards some perioperative outcomes, although its oncological results remain incompletely studied. Data regarding perioperative and oncologic outcomes for minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (Whipple's resection) is even less mature, but suggest that similar results as the open approach can be achieved in selected, high-volume centers. Conversely, its indiscriminate adoption by inexperienced surgeons and institutions has potential deleterious effects given its steep learning curve. Newer neoadjuvant treatment protocols display enhanced ability to downstage advanced tumors, increasing candidates for potentially curative surgery. Conversely, putative benefits of neoadjuvant treatment in patients with technically resectable tumors have not been reliably demonstrated and its optimal indications remain highly controversial.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laura Maggino
- Department of Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA, USA.,Unit of General and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery and Oncology-The Pancreas Institute, University of Verona Hospital Trust, Verona, Italy
| | - Charles M Vollmer
- Department of Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Vollmer CM, Asbun HJ, Barkun J, Besselink MG, Boggi U, Conlon KCP, Han HS, Hansen PD, Kendrick ML, Montagnini AL, Palanivelu C, Røsok BI, Shrikhande SV, Wakabayashi G, Zeh HJ, Kooby DA. Proceedings of the first international state-of-the-art conference on minimally-invasive pancreatic resection (MIPR). HPB (Oxford) 2017; 19:171-177. [PMID: 28189345 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2017.01.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2016] [Accepted: 01/05/2017] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
The application of minimally-invasive techniques to major pancreatic resection (MIPR) has occurred steadily, but slowly, over the last two decades. Questions linger regarding its safety, efficacy, and broad applicability. On April 20th, 2016, the first International State-of-the-Art Conference on Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Resection convened in Sao Paulo, Brazil in conjunction with the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association's (IHPBA) 10th World Congress. This report describes the genesis, preparation, execution and output from this seminal event. Major themes explored include: (i) scrutiny of best-level evidence outcomes of both MIPR Distal Pancreatectomy (DP) and pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), (ii) Cost/Value/Quality of Life assessment of MIPR, (iii) topics in training, education and credentialing, and (iv) development of best approaches to analyze results of MIPR - including clinical trial design and registry development. Results of a worldwide survey of over 400 surgeons on the practice of MIPR were presented. The proceedings of this event serve as a platform for understanding the role of MIPR in pancreatic resection. Data and concepts presented at this meeting form the basis for further study, application and dissemination of MIPR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Marc G Besselink
- Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Ho-Seong Han
- Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, SeongNam si, South Korea
| | - Paul D Hansen
- Portland Providence Cancer Center, Portland, OR, USA
| | | | | | - C Palanivelu
- GEM Hospital & Research Center, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Kendrick ML, van Hilst J, Boggi U, de Rooij T, Walsh RM, Zeh HJ, Hughes SJ, Nakamura Y, Vollmer CM, Kooby DA, Asbun HJ. Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy. HPB (Oxford) 2017; 19:215-224. [PMID: 28317658 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2017.01.023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 59] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2017] [Accepted: 01/21/2017] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) is increasingly performed with several institutional series and comparative studies reported. The aim was to conduct an assessment of the best-evidence and expert opinion on the current status and future challenges of MIPD. METHODS A systematic review of the literature was performed and best-evidence presented at a State-of-the-Art conference on Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Resection. Expert panel discussion and audience response activity was used to assess perceived value and future direction. RESULTS From 582 studies, 26 comparative trials of MIPD and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) were assessed for perioperative outcomes. There were no randomized controlled trials and all available comparative studies were determined of low quality. Several observational and case-matched studies demonstrate longer operative times, but less estimated blood loss and shorter length of hospital stay for MIPD. Registry-based studies demonstrate increased mortality rates after MIPD in low-volume centers. Oncologic assessment demonstrates comparable outcomes of MIPD. Expert opinion supports ongoing evaluation of MIPD. CONCLUSION MIPD appears to provide similar perioperative and oncologic outcomes in selected patients, when performed at experienced, high-volume centers. Its overall role in pancreatoduodenectomy needs to be better defined. Improved training opportunities, registry participation and prospective evaluation are needed.
Collapse
|