Comparison of laparoscopic versus open radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy for pancreatic cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy vesus laparoscopic distal pancreatosplenectomy for left-sided pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

We aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes and postoperative complications of laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (L-RAMPS) versus laparoscopic distal pancreatosplenectomy (L-DPS) for left-sided pancreatic cancer through a meta-analysis.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis, conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, were performed. Literature searches were conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase for studies published from their inception up to June 14th, 2024.

Results

A total of three retrospective studies involving 242 patients were included in this meta-analysis, with 116 patients in the L-RAMPS group and 126 in the L-DPS group. The meta-analysis results indicated that L-RAMPS was associated with the retrieval of more lymph nodes (MD: 3.06; 95% CI: 2.51 to 3.62, p < 0.00001) and longer operative time (MD: 20.05; 95% CI: 13.97 to 26.12, p < 0.00001) compared to L-DPS for left-sided pancreatic cancer patients. However, no significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of R0 resection margins, the incidence of pancreatic fistula (Grade B and C), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage, or postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo Grades II and III).

Conclusions

In patients with left-sided pancreatic cancer, L-RAMPS resulted in the retrieval of more lymph nodes, a longer operative time, and a similar incidence of postoperative complications compared to L-DPS. Larger sample sizes, extended follow-up periods, and well-conducted randomized controlled trials are needed to further validate these findings.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=558977, identifier CRD42024558977.

A LASSO Cox Regression Predictive Model for Patients Undergoing Surgery for Pancreatic Body and Tail Adenocarcinoma Patients: Comparative Long-Term Survival Analysis of Radical Antegrade Modular Pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) and Standard Retrograde Pancreatosplenectomy (SPRS)

PURPOSE

This study was designed to assess the advantages of radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) over standard retrograde pancreatosplenectomy (SPRS) in terms of disease-free survival (DFS) by comparing clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Clinical data from 154 patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy at Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital between January 2015 and August 2018 were collected. We compared the preoperative conditions, postoperative complications, and survival outcomes of patients who underwent two different surgical procedures. By creating a LASSO-Cox model, we determined the parameters affecting DFS and the risk ratios of the two surgical procedures on DFS.

RESULTS

The R0 resection rate (85.23% vs. 68.18%, P = 0.003), negative posterior margin rate (96.59% vs. 75.76%, P < 0.001), and tumor bed recurrence rate (15.29% vs. 40.00%, P = 0.001) significantly differed between the RAMPS and SPRS groups. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival and DFS rates of the RAMPS group were significantly better than those of the SPRS group (P < 0.05). Disease-free survival analysis based on Kaplan-Meier curves revealed that RAMPS was superior to SPRS (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend RAMPS as the preferred procedure for treating ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic body and tail due to its enhanced lymph node repair capacity and visualization of posterior pancreatic sections, which can increase DFS in patients.

Exploring the landscape of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery: Progress, challenges, and future directions

Minimally invasive surgery (MI) has become the standard of care for many surgical procedures aimed at reducing the burden on patients. However, its adoption in pancreatic surgery (PS) has been limited by the pancreas's unique location and the complexity of the dissection and reconstruction phases. These factors continue to contribute to PS having one of the highest morbidity and mortality rates in general surgery. Despite a rough start, MIPS has gained widespread acceptance in clinical practice recently. Robust evidence supports MI distal pancreatectomy safety, even in oncological cases, indicating its potential superiority over open surgery. However, definitive evidence of MI pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) feasibility and safety, particularly for malignant lesions, is still lacking. Nonetheless, reports from high-volume centers are emerging, suggesting outcomes comparable to those of the open approach. The robotic PS increasing adoption, facilitated by the wider availability of robotic platforms, may further facilitate the transition to MIPD by overcoming the technical constraints associated with laparoscopy and accelerating the learning curve. Although the MIPS implementation process cannot be stopped in this evolving world, ensuring patient safety through strict outcome monitoring is critical. Investing in younger surgeons with structured and recognized training programs can promote safe expansion.

Evaluating the efficacy of laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy in selected early-stage left-sided pancreatic cancer: a propensity score matching study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic radical pancreatectomy is safe and beneficial for recectable pancreatic cancer, but the extent of resection for early-stage tumors remains controversial.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with left-sided pancreatic cancer who underwent either laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (LRAMPS, n = 54) or laparoscopic distal pancreatosplecnectomy (LDP, n = 131) between October 2020 and December 2022 were reviewed. The preoperative radiological selection criteria were as follows: (1) tumor diameter ≤ 4 cm; (2) located ≥ 1 cm from the celiac trunk; (3) didn't invade the fascial layer behind the pancreas.

RESULTS

After 1:1 propensity score matching (LRAMPS, n = 54; LDP, n = 54), baseline data were well-balanced with no differences. LRAMPS resulted in longer operation time (240.5 vs. 219.0 min, P = 0.020) and higher intraoperative bleeding volume (200 vs. 150 mL, P = 0.001) compared to LDP. Although LRAMPS harvested more lymph nodes (16 vs. 13, P = 0.008), there were no statistically significant differences in lymph node positivity rate (35.2% vs. 33.3%), R0 pancreatic transection margin (94.4% vs. 96.3%), and retroperitoneal margin (83.3% vs. 87.0%) rate. Postoperative complications did not significantly differ between the two groups. However, LRAMPS was associated with increased drainage volume (85.0 vs. 40.0 mL, P = 0.001), longer time to recover semi-liquid diet compared to LDP (5 vs. 4 days, P < 0.001) and increased daily bowel movement frequency. Tumor recurrence pattern and recurrence-free survival were comparable between the two groups, but the adjuvant chemotherapy regimens varied, and the completion rate of the 6-month intravenous chemotherapy was lower in the LRAMPS group compared to the LDP group (51.9% vs. 75.9%, P = 0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

LRAMPS did not provide oncological benefits over LDP for left-sided pancreatic cancer within the selection criteria, but it increased operation time, intraoperative bleeding, and postoperative bowel movement frequency. These factors impacted the regimen selection and completion of adjuvant chemotherapy, consequently compromising the potential benefits of LRAMPS in achieving better local control.

Laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) for adenocarcinoma of the body and tail of the pancreas - technical considerations with analysis of surgical outcomes

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to establish whether laparoscopic RAMPS (L-RAMPS) is a safe procedure with better oncological outcomes compared to laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) with splenectomy among patients with distal pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

METHODS

This is a retrospective study performed on consecutive patients who underwent L-RAMPS and LDP with splenectomy for resectable or borderline resectable PDAC of the body and tail. In this paper, we presented our technique of laparoscopic RAMPS and analyzed intraoperative and perioperative complications, oncological efficacy, and long-term survival.

RESULTS

The study included 12 patients in the L-RAMPS group and 13 patients in the LDP with splenectomy. L-RAMPS was associated with significantly higher rates of R0 resection (91.7% vs. 69.2%, p = 0.027). There were no differences between the L-RAMPS and LDP with splenectomy groups in intraoperative blood loss (400 mL vs 400 mL, p = 0.783) and median operative time (250 min vs 220 min, p = 0.785). No differences were found in terms of perioperative complications, including the incidence of pancreatic fistula.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic RAMPS is a feasible and safe procedure. It provides higher radicality as compared with LDP with splenectomy, without increasing the risk of complications. Further studies are necessary to evaluate long-term outcomes.

Antibiotic prophylaxis after 48 h postoperatively are not associated with decreased surgical site infections and other healthcare associated infections in pancreatic surgery patients: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

It is controversial whether antibiotic should be used prophylactically 48 h after pancreatic surgery. Hence, the association of antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) after 48 h postoperatively with the incidence of surgical site infections (SSIs) and other healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) in patients receiving pancreatic surgery was evaluated.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis was performed on 1073 patients who underwent pancreatic surgery. These patients were categorized into the non-AP after 48 h postoperatively group (n = 963) and the AP after 48 h postoperatively group (n = 110) based on whether or not they obtained AP from 48 h to 30 days after surgery. Outcomes included SSIs and other HAIs.

RESULTS

The incidence of SSIs in the non-AP after 48 h postoperatively group (98/963, 10.2%) was notably lower than that in the AP after 48 h postoperatively group (22/110, 20.0%) (P = 0.002). Other HAIs incidence was not significantly different between the non-AP after 48 h postoperatively group (77/963, 8.0%) and the AP after 48 h postoperatively group (11/110, 10.0%) (P = 0.468). Multiple regression analysis demonstrated that AP after 48 h postoperatively was a risk factor for SSIs (OR = 2.14, 95% CI 1.28-3.59) but not for other HAIs (OR = 1.24, 95% CI 0.63-2.42) after adjustment for age, gender, and diabetes. Subsequent to adjustment for all confounding factors, AP after 48 h postoperatively was not a influence factor for SSIs (OR = 2.13, 95% CI 0.76-5.99) and other HAIs (OR = 3.69, 95% CI 0.99-13.81).

CONCLUSIONS

AP after 48 h postoperatively following pancreatic surgery was not associated with the lower morbidity rate of SSIs and other HAIs. Nonetheless, this study may facilitate further development of strategies towards standardization of the duration of AP management of pancreatic surgery.

Minimally Invasive versus Open Distal Pancreatectomy in the 2020s: Recent Institutional Experience and a Narrative Review of Current Evidence

(1) Background: Distal pancreatectomy is a standard treatment for tumours of the pancreatic body and tail. Minimally invasive techniques for all types of pancreatic tumours (benign and malignant) are being established, while concerns regarding oncological safety, cost effectiveness and learning curves are being explored with prospective studies. This paper presents our unit's data in the context of the above concerns and provides a relevant narrative review of the current literature. (2) Methods: Data were collected retrospectively between 2014 and 2021 for all adult patients who underwent elective distal pancreatectomy in our tertiary care referral HPB Unit. Data on demographics, underlying pathology, perioperative variables and post-operative complications were collected and reported using descriptive statistics. On review of the Miami guidelines, four important but less validated areas regarding distal pancreatectomy are presented in light of the current evidence; these are recent randomised controlled trials, oncological safety, cost effectiveness and learning curves in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP). (3) Results: 207 patients underwent distal pancreatectomy in total from 2014-2021, with 114 and 93 patients undergoing open and minimally invasive techniques, respectively. 44 patients were operated on for PDAC in the open vs. 17 in the minimally invasive group. The operative time was 212 min for the open and 248 min for the minimally invasive group. The incidence of pancreatic fistula was higher in the minimally invasive group vs. the open group (16% vs. 4%). (4) Conclusions: Our unit's data conform with the published literature, including three randomised control trials. These published studies will not only pave the way for establishing minimally invasive techniques for suitable patients, but also define their limitations and indications. Future studies will inform us about the oncological safety, cost effectiveness, overall survival and learning curves regarding patients undergoing minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy.