The Largest European Single-Center Experience: 300 Laparoscopic Pancreatic Resections

Retrospective analysis of delta hemoglobin and bleeding-related risk factors in pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Objective and accurate assessment of blood loss during pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is crucial for ensuring the safety and efficacy of the procedure. While the visual method remains the most common clinical metric, many scholars argue that it significantly differs from actual blood loss and is inherently subjective.

AIM

To assess blood loss in PD via delta hemoglobin (ΔHb) and compare it with the visual method to predict bleeding-related risk factors.

METHODS

In this retrospective analysis, 1722 patients who underwent PD from 2017 to 2022 at Shandong Provincial Hospital were divided into three groups: Open PD (OPD), laparoscopic PD (LPD), and conversion to OPD (CTOPD). Intraoperative ΔHb (IΔHb) was calculated via preoperative and 72-hour-postoperative hemoglobin concentrations, and its association with visually obtained estimated blood loss (EBL) was analyzed. Perioperative ΔHb (PΔHb) was calculated via preoperative and predischarge hemoglobin concentrations. We compared the differences in IΔHb and PΔHb among the three groups, and performed univariate and multivariate regression analyses of IΔHb and PΔHb.

RESULTS

The preoperative general information of patients showed no statistically significant difference among the three groups (P > 0.05). The IΔHb in the OPD, LPD, and CTOPD groups were 22.00 (12.00, 36.00), 21.00 (10.00, 33.00), and 33.00 (18.12, 52.24) g/L, respectively; And the PΔHb in the OPD, LPD, and CTOPD groups were 25.87 (13.51, 42.00), 25.00 (14.00, 45.00), and 37.48 (21.64, 59.65) g/L, respectively, values significantly differed (P < 0.05). IΔHb and EBL were significantly correlated (r = 0.337, P < 0.001). The results of univariate and multivariate regression analyses indicated that American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification IV [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.330-37.811, P = 0.049] and preoperative total bilirubin > 200 μmol/L (95%CI: 2.805-8.673, P < 0.001) were independent risk factors for IΔHb (P < 0.05), and ASA classification IV (95%CI: 45.934-105.485, P < 0.001), body mass index > 24 kg/m2 (95%CI: 1.285-9.890, P = 0.011), and preoperative total bilirubin > 200 μmol/L (95%CI: 6.948-16.797, P < 0.001) were independent risk factors for PΔHb (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

There is a correlation between IΔHb and EBL in PD, so we can assess the patients' intraoperative blood loss by the ΔHb method. ASA classification IV, body mass index > 24 kg/m², and preoperative total bilirubin > 200 μmol/L increased perioperative bleeding risk.

Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy is safe for the treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma treated by chemoradiotherapy compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy: A matched case-control study

BACKGROUND

Few studies compared laparoscopic and open pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort of patients who underwent laparoscopic or open pancreatoduodenectomy for resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma after chemoradiotherapy between 2012 and 2023 was analyzed. Open pancreatoduodenectomy patients could theoretically benefit from the laparoscopic approach. We used a 1:2 (laparoscopic-to-open pancreatoduodenectomy) propensity score matching analysis stratified on age, gender, and body mass index.

RESULTS

We included 128 patients (33 laparoscopic and 95 open pancreatoduodenectomy), and after propensity score matching, 33 laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and 66 open pancreatoduodenectomy were compared. There was no difference in demographic data except for lower tobacco use in laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy group (9% vs 30%, P = .023) with similar clinical presentation. Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy showed a longer median operative duration (380 vs 255 minutes, P < .001), shorter median length of resected vein (15 vs 23 mm, P = .01), longer median venous clamping time (29 vs 15 minutes, P = .005), similar median blood loss (300 vs 300 mL, P = .223), similar rate of hard pancreas (97% vs 85%, P = .094), and a larger median size of Wirsung duct (5 vs 4 mm, P = .02). Postoperative outcomes showed similar 90-day mortality rates (3% vs 3%, P > .99), Clavien-Dindo III-IV complications (6% vs 14%, P = .158), median lengths of hospital stay (12 vs 13 days, P = .409), and readmission rates (9% vs 18%, P = .366). Pathologic data showed similar R0 resection rates (88% vs 82%, P = .568). With a similar rate of adjuvant chemotherapy (P = .324) and shorter median follow-up with laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (18 vs 34 months, P = .004), 3-year overall (P = .768) and disease-free (P = .839) survival rates were similar.

CONCLUSION

In selected patients, laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy appears to be safe and feasible when performed in experienced centers.

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Non-Metastatic Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors (pNETs): A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background: This systematic review, using pairwise and network meta-analyses, aimed to compare the intraoperative, short-term, and long-term postoperative outcomes of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open surgery (OS) for the management of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs). Methods: Studies reporting on the effects of robotic, laparoscopic, and open surgery on pNETs published before November 2023 on PubMed, Scopus, and CENTRAL were analyzed. Results: Thirty-two studies with 5379 patients were included in this review, encompassing 2251 patients undergoing MIS (1334 laparoscopic, 508 robotic, and 409 unspecified MIS) and 3128 patients undergoing OS for pNETs management. Pairwise meta-analysis revealed that the MIS group had a significantly shorter length of hospital stay ((a low certainty of evidence), MD of -4.87 (-6.19 to -3.56)); less intraoperative blood loss ((a low certainty of evidence), MD of -108.47 (-177.47 to -39.47)); and decreased tumor recurrence ((a high certainty of evidence), RR of 0.46, 95% CI (0.33 to 0.63)). Subgroup analysis indicated a higher R0 resection rate and prolonged operative time for laparoscopic surgery than for OS. The network meta-analysis ranked the robotic approach as superior in terms of the length of hospital stay, followed by the laparoscopic and OS arms. Furthermore, it favored both MIS approaches over OS in terms of the R0 resection rate. No significant differences were found in severe postoperative complications, postoperative fistula formation, mortality, readmission, reoperation, or conversion rates. Conclusions: This review supports the safety of MIS for the treatment of pNETs. However, the varying certainty of evidence emphasizes the need for higher-quality studies.

Effectiveness and economic outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with a new surgical shear with an integrated energy system: A retrospective study based on a tertiary hospital database in China

Objective

This study aimed to demonstrate a new surgical shear with an integrated energy system (Harmonic ACE®+7) value by determining its effectiveness and economic outcomes compared with conventional ultrasonic shears (CUSs) in a real-world setting.

Methods

This was a retrospective study of adults with prostate cancer undergoing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with the ACE®+7 shear or CUSs between August 2019 and April 2021 at Shanghai Ruijin Hospital (the headquarters and Luwan Center in China). Demographic and diagnosis information, intraoperative and postoperative clinical outcomes, and total and categorical costs were collected. Propensity score matching was performed to form the study population for each clinical group. Data were compared between the two groups using t-test and Chi-squared test.

Results

The ACE®+7 was associated with a lower mean number of hemostatic clips used per surgery compared with CUSs (12.8 vs. 19.8, p<0.001), a moderate but not significant difference in mean postoperative drainage duration (6.6 [standard deviation, SD 2.2] days vs. 7.9 [SD 4.1] days, p=0.082), a reduction on mean total drainage volume (275.5 [SD 374.3 mL vs. 492.9 [SD 1495.0] mL, p=0.321), and a lower mean rate of postoperative hemostatic drug usage (16.0% vs. 52.0%, p<0.001). There was no significant difference in total costs between the ACE®+7 and CUS groups.

Conclusion

This study provides real-world data demonstrating that the ACE®+7 shear with an integrated energy system improves clinical outcomes compared with CUSs and can offer cost savings for hospitals and health systems. Using the ACE®+7 during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy allows physicians to help their patients achieve better outcomes and not spend additional money.

Outcome and survival were similar with laparoscopic and open pancreatectomy in 102 solid pseudopapillary neoplasms

BACKGROUND

Solid pseudopapillary neoplasms of the pancreas (SPNP) are rare tumors predominantly in young women. We report the largest single-center cohort study comparing resection of SPNP by laparoscopic approach (LA) and the open approach (OA).

METHOD

Between 2001 and 2021, 102 patients (84% women, median age: 30) underwent pancreatectomy for SPNP and were retrospectively studied. Demographic, perioperative, pathological, early and the long-term results were evaluated between patients operated by LA and those by OA.

RESULTS

Population included 40 LA and 62 OA. There were no significant differences in demographics data between the groups. A preoperative biopsy by endoscopic ultrasound was performed in 45 patients (44%) with no difference between the groups. Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) was less frequently performed by LA (25 vs 53%, p = 0.004) and distal pancreatectomy (DP) was more frequently performed by LA (40 vs 16%, p = 0.003). In the subgroup analysis by surgical procedure, LA-PD was associated with one mortality, less median blood loss (180 vs 200 ml, p = 0.034) and fewer harvested lymph nodes (11 vs 15, p = 0.02). LA-DP was associated with smaller median tumor size on imaging (40 vs 80mm, p = 0.048), shorter surgery (135 vs 190 min, p = 0.028), and fewer complications according to the median comprehensive complication index score (0 vs 8.7, p = 0.048). LA-Central pancreatectomy was associated with shorter surgery (160 vs 240, p = 0.037), less median blood loss (60 vs 200, p = 0.043), and less harvested lymph nodes (5 vs 2, p = 0.025). After a median follow-up of 60 months, two recurrences (2%) were observed and were unrelated to the approach.

CONCLUSIONS

The LA for SPNP appears to be safe, should be applied cautiously in case of PD for large lesion, and was not associated with recurrence.

Comparison of Educational and Academic Quality of Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy Videos on WebSurg® and YouTube® Platforms

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare the educational and academic quality of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) videos on YouTube® and WebSurg® platforms.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

YouTube and WebSurg platforms were searched with the keyword "laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy". According to the exclusion criteria, 12 videos were found on WebSurg. To ensure a 1:1 ratio, the first 12 videos that met the criteria on YouTube were also analyzed. Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria were used to evaluate the reliability of the videos. The non-educational quality of the videos was calculated using the Global Quality Score (GQS), the educational and academic quality of videos was calculated using Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy-specific score (LDP-SS) and Laparoscopic Surgery Video Educational Guidelines scoring system (LAP-VEGaS).

RESULTS

The mean JAMA score was 1.58 on YouTube and 2.83 on WebSurg (P < .001). The median GQS was 2 on YouTube and 5 on WebSurg (P < .001). The median LAP-VEGaS score was 8 on YouTube and 14.5 on WebSurg (P < .001). The median LDP-SS score was 6 on YouTube and 9.5 on WebSurg (P = .001). According to the LAP-VEGaS, eleven (91.7%) of the WebSurg videos had a high score of 11 or more (P = .04). According to Spearman correlation analysis, there was a statistically significant positive correlation between LDP-SS and JAMA, GQS and LAP-VEGaS (r: .589, P = .002; r: .648, P = .001; r: .848, P < .001 respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The WebSurg is superior to the YouTube in terms of educational and academic value, quality, accuracy, reliability and usability in scientific meetings for LDP videos.

Local resection for solid pseudopapillary neoplasms of the pancreas shows improved postoperative gastrointestinal function and reduced mental stress: a multiquestionnaire survey from a large cohort

BACKGROUND

Solid pseudopapillary neoplasm (SPN) of the pancreas is a rare, low-grade malignant pancreatic tumor with a highly favorable prognosis. Most SPN patients are young and middle-aged women. The main controversial topic for SPN is local resection (LR) versus radical resection (RR). Theoretically, LR could lead to better gastrointestinal function (GIF) and less mental stress. However, no data is available to support this hypothesis.

METHODS

All SPN patients undergoing surgical treatment in Peking Union Medical College Hospital from 2001 to 2021 were included in the study. A cross-sectional online multiquestionnaire survey containing 110 questions was sent to them (Clinicaltrial.org, NCT05604716). This online multiquestionnaire survey focused on GIF and mental stress and consisted of eight questionnaires. Multiple linear regression analysis was conducted to identify independent factors impacting GIF and mental stress.

RESULTS

A total of 183 cases provided valid results. Among them, 46 patients (25.1%) underwent LR, and 137 (74.9%) underwent RR. Ninety-four cases (51.4%) underwent minimally invasive surgery (MIS), while 89 (48.6%) underwent open surgery. The average GSRS score of the patients was 1.9±0.7, indicating that most suffered from mild gastrointestinal dysfunction. The scores of PHQ-9 and GAD-7 in 16 patients (8.7%) and 27 (14.8%) patients, respectively, were beyond 10.0, which indicated clinical depression and anxiety. Additionally, 19 (10.4%) patients reported poor ability to work, and 31(16.9%) patients had significant body image concerns. Compared to other clinicopathological characteristics, LR (LR vs. RR: PHQ-9 score, P =0.018; WAI average score, P =0.010; EORTC QLQ-C30, nine subdomains, P <0.05; GSRS average score, P =0.006) and MIS (MIS vs. open surgery: EORTC QLQ-C30, three subdomains, P <0.05; GSRS average score, P =0.006) were the most significant factors predicting improved GIF and reduced mental stress.

CONCLUSIONS

This study systematically presents postoperative GIF and mental stress of SPN patients using validated multiquestionnaires for the first time. It provides solid evidence that LR and MIS can improve GIF and reduce mental stress after surgery for SPN patients, which could be helpful for the surgeons to make more personalized surgical plans for their patients.

Safe implementation of a minimally invasive hepatopancreatobiliary program, a narrative review and institutional experience

Laparoscopic and robotic-assisted approaches to hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) operations have expanded worldwide. As surgeons and medical centers contemplate initiating and expanding minimally invasive surgical (MIS) programs for complex HPB surgical operations, there are many factors to consider. This review highlights the key components of developing an MIS HPB program and shares our recent institutional experience with the adoption and expansion of an MIS approach to pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Analysis of the clinical efficacy of laparoscopic middle pancreatectomy in the treatment of benign or low-grade malignant tumors of the pancreas

Objective

The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical efficacy of laparoscopic middle pancreatectomy in the treatment of benign and junctional tumors of the pancreas.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of basic data, tumor diameter, statistical analysis, and evaluation of efficacy-related indicators such as operative time, intraoperative bleeding, pathological findings, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative pancreatic fistula incidence, and pancreatic endocrine function was carried out on 17 patients diagnosed with benign or low-grade malignant tumors of the pancreas and laparoscopic middle pancreatic resection from January 2018 to January 2023 at the First Affiliated Hospital of Hunan Normal University.

Results

A total of 17 patients were screened. There were eight males and nine females; mean age was 42.8 ± 17.4 years (range: 15-69 years); BMI was 22.6 ± 2.5 kg/m2 (range: 18.4-27.5 kg/m2), and the tumor size was 3.4 ± 1.2 cm (range: 1.5-5.5 cm). Preoperative glycan antigen CA19-9 was negative and CA125 was negative. Surgical time was 393.2 ± 57.9 min; intraoperative bleeding was 211.7 ± 113.9 ml; tumor diameter size was 3.4 ± 1.2 cm; postoperative admission time was 19.4 ± 7.6 days; postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) grading was 17 cases, including nine cases of A-grade fistula, three cases of B-grade fistula, and none of C-grade fistula; postoperative pathology results were five cases of plasmacytoma, three cases of mucinous cystadenoma, four cases of SPN (solid pseudopapillary neoplasm), one case of Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasm (IPMN), three cases of pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasm (pNEN), one case of inflammatory myofibroblastic osteoblastoma. All cases did not develop pancreatic origin diabetes or exacerbation of previous diabetes, and no cases presented symptoms of exocrine insufficiency such as dyspepsia and diarrhea.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic middle pancreatectomy is safe and feasible in the treatment of benign or low-grade malignant tumors in the body of the pancreatic neck and is not accompanied by increased risk of intraoperative and postoperative complications and endocrine dysfunction of the pancreas.

Minimally invasive enucleation of pancreatic tumors: The main pancreatic duct is no longer a restricted area

BACKGROUND

Tumors involving the main pancreatic duct (MPD) used to be a contraindication for enucleation.

METHODS

Clinical data of consecutive patients with pancreatic tumors who received laparoscopic or robotic enucleation (LEN or REN) between January 2019 and December 2021 at Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center were analyzed.

RESULTS

Ninety-six patients were included in the analysis, with 55 in the LEN group and 41 in the REN group, and no conversion to laparotomy. Most tumors were located in the head of pancreas (71.9 %). The tumor diameter (3.1 vs. 1.9 cm) was larger, and more cystic tumors (92.7 % vs. 56.4 %) and more tumors involving the MPD (34.1 % vs. 3.6 %) were observed in the REN group. MPD support tube insertion was performed in 15 cases, with 11 in the REN group and 4 in the LEN group. The incidence of biochemical and grade B postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) was both 46.9 %, and no grade C POPF occurred. Among the 45 patients with grade B POPF, 28 cases (62.2 %) were due to carrying drainage tube >3 weeks without additional treatment, and only 4 cases required invasive treatment. For patients with MPD support tube implantation (n = 15), support tube fall-offs were observed in 12 cases, 2 patients had MPD dilatation, and no MPD stricture, stone formation or pancreatic atrophy was observed during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of POPF was high but still controllable without serious complications after minimally invasive enucleation. The MPD is no longer a restricted area, and the robotic system has advantages in handling complex enucleations.

Short-term Outcomes of Laparoscopic and Open Distal Pancreatectomy Using Propensity Score Analysis: A Real-world Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the short-term outcomes between laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy for lesions of the distal pancreas from a real-world database.

BACKGROUND

Reports on the benefits of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy include 2 randomized controlled trials; however, large-scale, real-world data are scarce.

METHODS

We analyzed the data of patients undergoing laparoscopic or open distal pancreatectomy for benign or malignant pancreatic tumors from April 2008 to May 2020 from a Japanese nationwide inpatient database. We performed propensity score analyses to compare the inhospital mortality, morbidity, readmission rate, reoperation rate, length of postoperative stay, and medical cost between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

From 5502 eligible patients, we created a pseudopopulation of patients undergoing laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy was associated with lower inhospital mortality during the period of admission (0.0% vs 0.7%, P <0.001) and within 30 days (0.0% vs 0.2%, P =0.001), incidence of reoperation during the period of admission (0.7% vs 1.7%, P =0.018), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (0.4% vs 2.0%, P <0.001), ileus (1.1% vs 2.8%, P =0.007), and shorter postoperative length of stay (17 vs 20 d, P <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The propensity score analysis revealed that laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy was associated with better outcomes than open surgery in terms of inhospital mortality, reoperation rate, postoperative length of stay, and incidence of postoperative complications such as postpancreatectomy hemorrhage and ileus.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy versus laparoscopic central pancreatectomy for benign or low-grade malignant tumors in the pancreatic neck

AIMS

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) and laparoscopic central pancreatectomy (LCP) are two surgical methods that can remove pancreatic neck lesions. However, their benefits remain controversial. We aimed to compare the benefits and limitations of LDP and LCP.

METHODS

In total, 50 patients who underwent LDP (n = 34) or LCP (n =16) between January 2014 and November 2019 were retrospectively reviewed using our database. We analyzed their preoperative characteristics, operative data, pathological features, and postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

The baseline features of patients did not differ significantly between the two groups (P < 0.05). Compared with the LDP group, the LCP group showed significantly prolonged operation time (392 ± 144 vs. 269 ± 130 min, P = 0.007), time to oral intake (3.8 ± 1.3 vs. 2.8 ± 0.9 days, P = 0.017), and hospital stay (19.6 ± 5.1 vs. 15.4 ± 4.1 days, P = 0.008) as well as increased hospital expenses (10.1 ± 6.2 vs. 6.6 ± 1.5 WanRMB, P = 0.023). However, no significant differences were observed in conversion rate (0/16 vs. 0/34), blood loss (154 ± 93 vs. 211 ± 170 mL, P = 0.224), postoperative white blood cell count (10.3 ± 2.7 vs. 11.1 ± 3.1, P = 0.432), first random blood glucose level after operation (8.2 ± 2.1 vs. 8.6 ± 2.6 mmol/L, P = 0.696), and ascites amylase level on day 3 after operation (5212 [3110-14,176] vs. 3142 [604-13,761] U/L, P = 0.167) between the two groups. Moreover, no significant differences were noted in the incidence of postoperative diabetes (1/16 vs. 5/34) between the two groups. However, LCP was associated with significantly higher incidences of pancreatic fistula grades B and C (P = 0.005) and postoperative hemorrhage (P = 0.031).

CONCLUSION

Compared with the LCP, LDP is a useful and safer technique for benign or low-grade malignant tumors in the pancreatic neck.

Teaching modern pancreatic surgery: close relationship between centralization, innovation, and dissemination of care

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic surgery is increasingly moving towards centralization in high-volume centres, supported by evidence on the volume-outcome relationship. At the same time, minimally invasive pancreatic surgery is becoming more and more established worldwide, and interest in new techniques, such as robotic pancreatoduodenectomy, is growing. Such recent innovations are reshaping modern pancreatic surgery, but they also represent new challenges for surgical training in its current form.

METHODS

This narrative review presents a chosen selection of literature, giving a picture of the current state of training in pancreatic surgery, together with the authors' own views, and in the context of centralization and innovation towards minimally invasive techniques.

RESULTS

Centralization of pancreatic surgery at high-volume centres, volume-outcome relationships, innovation through minimally invasive technologies, learning curves in both traditional and minimally invasive surgery, and standardized training paths are the different, but deeply interconnected, topics of this article. Proper training is essential to ensure quality of care, but innovation and centralization may represent challenges to overcome with new training models.

CONCLUSION

Innovations in pancreatic surgery are introduced with the aim of increasing the quality of care. However, their successful implementation is deeply dependent on dissemination and standardization of surgical training, adapted to fit in the changing landscape of modern pancreatic surgery.

Long-term Outcomes After Laparoscopic, Robotic, and Open Pancreatoduodenectomy for Distal Cholangiocarcinoma: An International Propensity Score-matched Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare surgical and oncological outcomes after minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) for distal cholangiocarcinoma (dCCA).

BACKGROUND

A dCCA might be a good indication for MIPD, as it is often diagnosed as primary resectable disease. However, multicenter series on MIPD for dCCA are lacking.

METHODS

This is an international multicenter propensity score-matched cohort study including patients after MIPD or OPD for dCCA in 8 centers from 5 countries (2010-2021). Primary outcomes included overall survival (OS) and disease-free interval (DFI). Secondary outcomes included perioperative and postoperative complications and predictors for OS or DFI. Subgroup analyses included robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD).

RESULTS

Overall, 478 patients after pancreatoduodenectomy for dCCA were included of which 97 after MIPD (37 RPD, 60 LPD) and 381 after OPD. MIPD was associated with less blood loss (300 vs 420 mL, P =0.025), longer operation time (453 vs 340 min; P <0.001), and less surgical site infections (7.8% vs 19.3%; P =0.042) compared with OPD. The median OS (30 vs 25 mo) and DFI (29 vs 18) for MIPD did not differ significantly between MIPD and OPD. Tumor stage (Hazard ratio: 2.939, P <0.001) and administration of adjuvant chemotherapy (Hazard ratio: 0.640, P =0.033) were individual predictors for OS. RPD was associated with a higher lymph node yield (18.0 vs 13.5; P =0.008) and less major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo 3b-5; 8.1% vs 32.1%; P =0.005) compared with LPD.

DISCUSSION

Both surgical and oncological outcomes of MIPD for dCCA are acceptable as compared with OPD. Surgical outcomes seem to favor RPD as compared with LPD but more data are needed. Randomized controlled trials should be performed to confirm these findings.

The influence of institutional pancreaticoduodenectomy volume on short-term outcomes in the Brazilian public health system: 2008-2021

INTRODUCTION

pancreaticoduodenectomy is a complex surgical procedure that can result in high rates of complications and morbimortality. Due to its complexity, the establishment of referral centers has increased in recent decades. This study aims to evaluate the influence of the institutional volume of pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary cancer on short-term outcomes in the Brazilian public health system.

METHODS

this study used a population-based approach and investigated the number of pancreaticoduodenectomies performed by institutions within Brazil's public health system between 2008 and 2021. High-volume institutions were defined as those that performed more than two standard deviations above the mean number of procedures per year. Specifically, if a center performed eight or more pancreaticoduodenectomies annually, it was considered a high-volume institution.

RESULTS

in Brazil, 283 public hospitals performed pancreaticoduodenectomy for cancer between 2008 and 2021. Only ten hospitals performed at least eight pancreaticoduodenectomies per year, accounting for approximately 3.5% of the institutions. High-volume institutions had a significantly lower in-hospital mortality rate than low-volume institutions (8 vs. 17%). No significant differences between groups were observed for length of stay, hospitalizations using the ICU, and ICU length of stay. The linear regression model showed that the number of hospital admissions for pancreaticoduodenectomy and age were significantly associated with hospital mortality.

CONCLUSION

institutional pancreaticoduodenectomy volume implies a lowering of in-hospital mortality. The findings of this nationwide study can affect how the public health system manages pancreaticoduodenectomy care.

The clinical implication of minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for non-pancreatic periampullary cancer: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Most studies on minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) combine patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancers even though there is substantial heterogeneity between these tumors. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the role of MIPD compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) in patients with non-pancreatic periampullary cancer (NPPC).

METHODS

A systematic review of Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases was performed by two independent reviewers to identify studies comparing MIPD and OPD for NPPC (ampullary, distal cholangio, and duodenal adenocarcinoma) (01/2015-12/2021). Individual patient data were required from all identified studies. Primary outcomes were (90-day) mortality, and major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo 3a-5). Secondary outcomes were postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), blood-loss, length of hospital stay (LOS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Overall, 16 studies with 1949 patients were included, combining 928 patients with ampullary, 526 with distal cholangio, and 461 with duodenal cancer. In total, 902 (46.3%) patients underwent MIPD, and 1047 (53.7%) patients underwent OPD. The rates of 90-day mortality, major morbidity, POPF, DGE, PPH, blood-loss, and length of hospital stay did not differ between MIPD and OPD. Operation time was 67 min longer in the MIPD group (P = 0.009). A decrease in DFS for ampullary (HR 2.27, P = 0.019) and distal cholangio (HR 1.84, P = 0.025) cancer, as well as a decrease in OS for distal cholangio (HR 1.71, P = 0.045) and duodenal cancer (HR 4.59, P < 0.001) was found in the MIPD group.

CONCLUSIONS

This individual patient data meta-analysis of MIPD versus OPD in patients with NPPC suggests that MIPD is not inferior in terms of short-term morbidity and mortality. Several major limitations in long-term data highlight a research gap that should be studied in prospective maintained international registries or randomized studies for ampullary, distal cholangio, and duodenum cancer separately.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42021277495) on the 25th of October 2021.

Minimally-invasive versus open pancreatic enucleation: systematic review and metanalysis of short-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Enucleation, either laparoscopic or robot-assisted, is rarely performed. The aim of this study was to offer the current available evidence about the outcomes of minimally invasive pancreatic enucleations and explore the possible advantage of this approach over traditional surgery.

METHODS

PubMed (MEDLINE), Cochrane Library and Embase (ELSEVIER) medical databases were searched for articles published from January 1990 to March 2022. Studies which included more than 10 cases of minimally-invasive pancreatic enucleation were included. Data on the outcomes were synthetized and meta-analyzed when appropriate.

RESULTS

Twenty studies published between 2009 and 2022 with a total of 552 patients were included in the systematic review: three hundred fifty-one patients (63.5%) had a laparoscopic intervention, two hundred and one (36.5%) robot-assisted with a cumulative incidence of conversion rate of 5%. Minimally-invasive surgery was performed in 63% of cases on the body/tail of the Pancreas and in 37% of the cases on the head/uncinate process of the Pancreas. The cumulative post-operative 30 days - mortality rate was 0.2% and the major postoperative morbidity (Clavien-Dindo III-IV-V) 35%. Clinically relevant pancreatic fistula was observed in 17% of the patients. Compared with the standardized open approach (n: 366 patients), mean length of hospital stay was significantly reduced in patients undergoing minimally invasive pancreatic enucleation (2.45 days, p = 0.003) with a favorable trend for post-operative major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo III-IV) (- 24% RR, p: 0.13). Operative time, blood loss and clinically relevant pancreatic fistula rate were comparable between the two groups. One hundred and fourteen robot-assisted enucleations entered in a subgroup analysis with comparable results to open surgery.

CONCLUSION

Minimally-Invasive approach for pancreatic enucleation is safe, feasible and offers short-term clinical outcomes comparable with open surgery. The potential benefit of robotic surgery will need to be verified in further studies.

Comparison of different pancreatic stump management strategies during robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) represents the most feared complication after distal pancreatectomy, and the possible role of robotic assistance in this setting is poorly investigated so far.

METHODS

We analysed short-term outcomes of 88 patients who had undergone robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy (RDP), dividing them according to pancreatic stump management: selective Wirsung duct ligation/hand sewn suture (WirsLIG group), use of robotic EndoWrist staplers (RobSTAP group), and use of laparoscopic staplers (LapSTAP group).

RESULTS

Mean operative time resulted significantly longer in WirsLIG group (291.1 ± 77.21 min vs. 245 ± 56.22 min in RobSTAP group vs. 221.77 ± 64.64 min in LapSTAP group). No significant differences were found in median hospital stay and in POPF occurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

No strategy for pancreatic stump management during RDP has proven superior to the others in reducing POPF rates. The hand-sewn technique resulted more time consuming, nevertheless it remains essential where there is not enough space to insert the stapler.

Laparoscopic versus open central pancreatectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis in a single centre

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic central pancreatectomy (LCP) has been implemented in pancreatic surgery; however, open surgery is still the predominant approach for central pancreatectomy (CP). Our objective was to compare LCP with open CP (OCP).

METHODS

Data were collected from patients with tumours located in the pancreatic neck and proximal body who underwent CP in the Department of Pancreatic Surgery West China Hospital from January 1, 2010, to June 30, 2019. A comparison between the LCP and OCP groups was performed.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients underwent CP via the laparoscopic approach, and 96 patients underwent CP via the open approach. Using 1:2 propensity score matching (PSM), 12 patients in the LCP group were matched to 21 in the OCP group. Regarding safety, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) was not significantly different between the two groups (13.3% vs. 12.5%, P = 1.000), even with PSM (16.7% vs. 14.3%, P = 1.000). However, regarding effectiveness, the operative time in the OCP group was significantly shorter than that in the LCP group before (307.0 ± 92.3 ml vs. 220.6 ± 63.6 ml, P < 0.000) and after (300.3 ± 90.2 ml vs. 212.7 ± 44.4 ml, P = 0.002) PSM. Regarding length of stay (LOS), there was no difference between the two groups before (13.1 ± 13.7 days vs. 12.7 ± 10.1 days, P = 0.376) and after PSM (14.4 ± 15.1 days vs. 14.5 ± 16.2 days, P = 0.985). The length of the resected pancreas was shorter in the OCP group than in the LCP group before PSM (50.0 ± 13.2 mm vs. 41.1 ± 11.1 mm, P = 0.043). However, there was no difference between the two groups after PSM (47.9 ± 12.5 mm vs. 37.9 ± 10.4 mm, P = 0.084). Moreover, the other variables showed no difference between the two groups before and after PSM.

CONCLUSION

LCP can demonstrate similar safety and effectiveness to OCP, even in the early stages of the learning curve.

Laparoscopic pancreatic enucleation: cystic lesions and proximity to the Wirsung duct increase postoperative pancreatic fistula

BACKGROUND

Risk factors for postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) following pancreatic enucleation by the open approach (OpenEN) are well known. However, ENs are more frequently performed laparoscopically (LapEN). The aim of this study was to analyze the risk factors of POPF following LapEN.

METHODS AND PATIENTS

All patients in our prospective database who underwent LapEN were evaluated. We report the demographics, surgical, early and long-term outcomes. Numerous variables were analyzed to identify the risk factors of POPF.

RESULTS

From 2008 to 2020, 650 laparoscopic pancreatic resections were performed including 64 EN (10%). The median age was 51 years old (17-79), median BMI was 24 (19-48), and 44 patients were women (69%). The main presentation was an incidental diagnosis (n = 40; 62%), pain (n= 10;16%), and hypoglycemia (n = 8;12%). The main indications were neuroendocrine tumors (40; 63%), mucinous cystadenomas (15; 23%), intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasie (3; 5%), and other benign cysts (6; 9%). Lesions were located on the distal pancreas (43; 67%), head (n = 17; 27%), and neck (4; 6%). The median size was 20 mm (9-110); 30 mm (20-110) for mucinous cystadenoma and 18 mm (8-33) for NET. The median operative time was 90 mn (30-330), median blood loss was 20 ml (0-800) ml, and there were no transfusions and one conversion. There were no mortalities and overall morbidity (n = 22; 34%) included grades B and C POPF (10;16%) and post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (4; 6%). The median hospital stay was 7 days (3-42). There were no invaded lymph nodes and all cystic lesions were nonmalignant. After a mean follow-up of 24 months, there was no recurrence. The risk factors for grades B/C POPF were mucinous cystadenoma and proximity to the Wirsung duct < 3 mm.

CONCLUSION

In this series, the outcome of LapEN was excellent with no mortality and a low rate of morbidity. However, the risk of POPF is increased with cystic lesions and those close to the Wirsung duct.

Laparoscopic-assisted liver transplantation: A realistic perspective

Laparoscopic approach was rarely described in recipients for liver transplantation (LT). We report the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic-assisted LT (LA-LT) in patients with unresectable liver metastases of neuroendocrine tumors. Total hepatectomy was performed laparoscopically with graft implantation through an upper midline incision. Liver grafts were retrieved from deceased donors. From July 2019 to July 2021, six patients (4 women, 2 men) underwent LA-LT. Median age and BMI were 46 (29-54) and 24 (19-35) kg/m² , respectively. Implanted grafts were reduced (n = 3), full (n = 2), and a right split liver (n = 1). Median surgical time was 405 min (390-450) and median blood loss was 425 ml (250-600). Median cold and warm ischemia times were 438 min (360-575) and 35 min (30-40), respectively. Median anhepatic phase was 51 min (40-67) and midline incision was 14 cm (13-20) long. On postoperative day 5, median prothrombin index and serum bilirubin levels were 95% (70-117) and 11 (10-37) μmol/L, respectively. No Clavien-Dindo > III complications were encountered. Median hospital stay was 12 days (10-14). After a median follow-up of 8 (8-32) months, all patients were alive without tumor recurrence or adverse event. This preliminary series suggests that in selected patients, LA-LT is a safe and effective option.

401 consecutive minimally invasive distal pancreatectomies: lessons learned from 20 years of experience

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to discuss and report the trend, outcomes, and learning curve effect after minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) at two high-volume centres.

METHODS

Patients undergoing MIDP between January 1999 and December 2018 were retrospectively identified from prospectively maintained electronic databases. The entire cohort was divided into two groups constituting the "early" and "recent" phases. The learning curve effect was analyzed for laparoscopic (LDP) and robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP). The follow-up was at least 2 years.

RESULTS

The study population included 401 consecutive patients (LDP n = 300, RDP n = 101). Twelve surgeons performed MIDP during the study period. Although patients were more carefully selected in the early phase, in terms of median age (49 vs. 55 years, p = 0.026), ASA class higher than 2 (3% vs. 9%, p = 0.018), previous abdominal surgery (10% vs. 34%, p < 0.001), and pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) (7% vs. 15%, p = 0.017), the recent phase had similar perioperative outcomes. The increase of experience in LDP was inversely associated with the operative time (240 vs 210 min, p < 0.001), morbidity rate (56.5% vs. 40.1%, p = 0.005), intra-abdominal collection (28.3% vs. 17.3%, p = 0.023), and length of stay (8 vs. 7 days, p = 0.009). Median survival in the PDAC subgroup was 53 months.

CONCLUSION

In the setting of high-volume centres, the surgical training of MIDP is associated with acceptable rates of morbidity. The learning curve can be largely achieved by several team members, improving outcomes over time. Whenever possible resection of PDAC guarantees adequate oncological results and survival.

Minimally invasive versus open central pancreatectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to give an overview on the postoperative outcome after a minimally invasive (ie, laparoscopic and robot-assisted) central pancreatectomy and open central pancreatectomy with a specific emphasis on the postoperative pancreatic fistula. For benign and low-grade malignant lesions in the pancreatic neck and body, central pancreatectomy may be an alternative to distal pancreatectomy. Exocrine and endocrine insufficiency occur less often after central pancreatectomy, but the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula is higher.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed for studies on elective minimally invasive central pancreatectomy and open central pancreatectomy, which reported on major morbidity and postoperative pancreatic fistula in PubMed, Cochrane Register, Embase, and Google Scholar until June 1, 2021. A review protocol was developed a priori and registered in PROSPERO as CRD42021259738. A meta-regression was performed by using a random effects model.

RESULTS

Overall, 41 studies were included involving 1,004 patients, consisting of 158 laparoscopic minimally invasive central pancreatectomies, 80 robot-assisted minimally invasive central pancreatectomies, and 766 open central pancreatectomies. The overall rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula was 14%, major morbidity 14%, and 30-day mortality 1%. The rates of postoperative pancreatic fistula (17% vs 24%, P = .194), major morbidity (17% vs 14%, P = .672), and new-onset diabetes (3% vs 6%, P = .353) did not differ significantly between minimally invasive central pancreatectomy and open central pancreatectomy, respectively. Minimally invasive central pancreatectomy was associated with significantly fewer blood transfusions, less exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, and fewer readmissions compared with open central pancreatectomy. A meta-regression was performed with a random effects model between minimally invasive central pancreatectomy and open central pancreatectomy and showed no significant difference for postoperative pancreatic fistula (random effects model 0.16 [0.10; 0.24] with P = .789), major morbidity (random effects model 0.20 [0.15; 0.25] with P = .410), and new-onset diabetes mellitus (random effects model 0.04 [0.02; 0.07] with P = .651).

CONCLUSION

In selected patients and in experienced hands, minimally invasive central pancreatectomy is a safe alternative to open central pancreatectomy for benign and low-grade malignant lesions of the neck and body. Ideally, further research should confirm this with the main focus on postoperative pancreatic fistula and endocrine and exocrine insufficiency.

Minimally Invasive vs Open Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: Multi-Institutional 10-Year Experience of 1,023 Patients

BACKGROUND

Resection of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) may be associated with adverse perioperative outcomes compared with pancreatic adenocarcinoma given the high-risk nature of soft glands with small pancreatic ducts. The effect of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) pancreatectomy on outcomes of PNETs remains to be examined, which is the aim of this study.

STUDY DESIGN

Between 2009 and 2019, 1,023 patients underwent pancreatectomy for PNETs at 4 institutions. Clinicopathologic data and perioperative outcomes of patients who underwent MIS (n = 447) and open resections (n = 576) were compared.

RESULTS

Of the 1,023 patients, 51% were male, the mean age was 58, the median tumor size was 2.1 cm, and 73% were grade 1 PNETs. There were 318 (31%) pancreatoduodenectomies (PDs), 541 (53%) distal pancreatectomies (DPs), 80 (7.8%) enucleation (ENs), 72 (7%) central pancreatectomies (CPs), and 12 (1.2%) total pancreatectomies. Almost half of the patients (N = 447, 44%) had MIS operations, of which 230 (51%) were robotic and 217 (49%) were laparoscopic. Compared with open operations, MIS PDs had significantly lower operative blood loss (150 vs 400 mL, p < 0.001) and rate of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistulas (CR-POPFs; 13% vs 27%, p = 0.030), and MIS DPs had a shorter length of stay (5 vs 6 days, p < 0.001). Although MIS DPs and ENs had CR-POPFs comparable with open operations, MIS CPs had a higher CR-POPF rate (45% vs 15%, p = 0.013). After adjusting for pathological differences, MIS pancreatectomy was associated with recurrence-free survival and overall survival comparable with open pancreatectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

MIS pancreatectomy for PNETs is associated with improved outcomes or outcomes comparable with open resection.

Current status of robotic surgery for hepato-pancreato-biliary malignancies

INTRODUCTION

Robotic surgery is an emerging aspect of gastrointestinal surgery. Hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery is currently being explored for a broad spectrum of indications, entities, and postoperative outcomes. Noninferiority and financial aspects are the focus of studies. In this review, the impact on oncological therapies is assessed.

AREAS COVERED

An extensive literature review was conducted, and relevant studies and articles and reviews for robotic surgery in the field of hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery were examined. Special attention was given to the oncological aspects of robotic surgery and its possible impact on the therapy of malignant neoplasms.

EXPERT OPINION

Robotic-assisted surgery for oncological indications is promising, in part, an established technique that has already shown its advantages in the last decade, although high-quality studies are missing. Upcoming experience must consider the oncological benefit and putative new indications in a rapidly changing field of anti-neoplastic regimens. Also, robotic surgery may possess the ability to accelerate digitalization and AI-based augmentation in this context.

Resection of the splenic vessels during laparoscopic central pancreatectomy is safe and does not compromise preservation of the distal pancreas

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of low potential malignant diseases is increasingly frequent, and laparoscopic central pancreatectomy can be indicated in these patients. Laparoscopic central pancreatectomy that usually preserves the splenic vessels results in a low risk of new-onset diabetes but high morbidity, mainly due to postoperative pancreatic fistula and postpancreatectomy hemorrhage. In this study, we evaluated the short and long-term complications after laparoscopic central pancreatectomy with splenic vessel resection.

METHODS

This retrospective single-center cohort study included 650 laparoscopic pancreatic resections from 2008 to 2020 with 84 laparoscopic central pancreatectomy; 15 laparoscopic central pancreatectomy with splenic vessel resection; and 69 laparoscopic central pancreatectomy with preservation of the splenic vessels. Pancreaticogastrostomy was routinely performed, and the patients were discharged after complications had been treated. The 15 laparoscopic central pancreatectomy with splenic vessel resection were matched for age, sex, body mass index, and tumor characteristics [1:2] and compared with 30 laparoscopic central pancreatectomy with the preservation of the splenic vessels.

RESULTS

In the laparoscopic central pancreatectomy with splenic vessel resection group, resection of splenic vessels was performed due to tumoral or inflammatory adhesions (n = 11) or accidental vascular injury (n = 4). The demographic characteristics of the groups were similar. Tumors were larger in the laparoscopic central pancreatectomy with splenic vessel resection group (40 vs 21 mm; P = .008), and right transection on the body of the pancreas (53% vs 13%; P = .01) was more frequent. There were no differences in the characteristics of the pancreas (Wirsung duct size or consistency). The median operative time (minutes) was longer in the laparoscopic central pancreatectomy with splenic vessel resection group than in the laparoscopic central pancreatectomy with preservation of the splenic vessels group (210 vs 180, respectively; P = .15) with more blood loss (100 mL vs 50 mL, respectively; P = .012). The lengths (mm) of the resected pancreas and remnant distal pancreas in the 2 groups were 65 vs 50 (P = .053) and 40 vs 65 (P = .006), respectively. There were no differences in postoperative mortality (0% vs 3%; P = .47), grade B-C postoperative pancreatic fistula (27% vs 27%; P = 1), reintervention (7% vs 13%; P = .50), grade B-C postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (0% vs 13%; P = .13), length of hospital stay (20 days vs 22 days; P = .15), or new-onset diabetes (7% vs 10%; P = .67) between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic central pancreatectomy with splenic vessel resection is a safe technical modification of central pancreatectomy that does not prevent preservation of the distal pancreas and does not influence postoperative pancreatic fistula or endocrine insufficiency. Furthermore, it could reduce the risk of postpancreatectomy hemorrhage.

Performance with robotic surgery versus 3D- and 2D-laparoscopy during pancreatic and biliary anastomoses in a biotissue model: pooled analysis of two randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery may improve surgical performance during minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy as compared to 3D- and 2D-laparoscopy but comparative studies are lacking. This study assessed the impact of robotic surgery versus 3D- and 2D-laparoscopy on surgical performance and operative time using a standardized biotissue model for pancreatico- and hepatico-jejunostomy using pooled data from two randomized controlled crossover trials (RCTs).

METHODS

Pooled analysis of data from two RCTs with 60 participants (36 surgeons, 24 residents) from 11 countries (December 2017-July 2019) was conducted. Each included participant completed two pancreatico- and two hepatico-jejunostomies in biotissue using 3D-robotic surgery, 3D-laparoscopy, or 2D-laparoscopy. Primary outcomes were the objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS: 12-60) rating, scored by observers blinded for 3D/2D and the operative time required to complete both anastomoses. Sensitivity analysis excluded participants with excess experience compared to others.

RESULTS

A total of 220 anastomoses were completed (robotic 80, 3D-laparoscopy 70, 2D-laparoscopy 70). Participants in the robotic group had less surgical experience [median 1 (0-2) versus 6 years (4-12), p < 0.001], as compared to the laparoscopic group. Robotic surgery resulted in higher OSATS ratings (50, 43, 39 points, p = .021 and p < .001) and shorter operative time (56.5, 65.0, 81.5 min, p = .055 and p < .001), as compared to 3D- and 2D-laparoscopy, respectively, which remained in the sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSION

In a pooled analysis of two RCTs in a biotissue model, robotic surgery resulted in better surgical performance scores and shorter operative time for biotissue pancreatic and biliary anastomoses, as compared to 3D- and 2D-laparoscopy.

Intraoperative navigation system with a multi-modality fusion of 3D virtual model and laparoscopic real-time images in laparoscopic pancreatic surgery: a preclinical study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy is widely used in pancreatic surgeries nowadays. The efficient and correct judgment of the location of the anatomical structures is crucial for a safe laparoscopic pancreatic surgery. The technologies of 3-dimensional(3D) virtual model and image fusion are widely used for preoperative planning and intraoperative navigation in the medical field, but not in laparoscopic pancreatic surgery up to now. We aimed to develop an intraoperative navigation system with an accurate multi-modality fusion of 3D virtual model and laparoscopic real-time images for laparoscopic pancreatic surgery.

METHODS

The software for the navigation system was developed ad hoc. The preclinical study included tests with the laparoscopic simulator and pilot cases. The 3D virtual models were built using preoperative Computed Tomography (CT) Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) data. Manual and automatic real-time image fusions were tested. The practicality of the navigation system was evaluated by the operators using the National Aeronautics and Space Administration-Task Load Index (NASA-TLX) method.

RESULTS

The 3D virtual models were successfully built using the navigation system. The 3D model was correctly fused with the real-time laparoscopic images both manually and automatically optical orientation in the preclinical tests. The statistical comparative tests showed no statistically significant differences between the scores of the rigid model and those of the phantom model(P > 0.05). There was statistically significant difference between the total scores of automatic fusion function and those of manual fusion function (P = 0.026). In pilot cases, the 3D model was correctly fused with the real-time laparoscopic images manually. The Intraoperative navigation system was easy to use. The automatic fusion function brought more convenience to the user.

CONCLUSIONS

The intraoperative navigation system applied in laparoscopic pancreatic surgery clearly and correctly showed the covered anatomical structures. It has the potentiality of helping achieve a more safe and efficient laparoscopic pancreatic surgery.

Learning Curves in Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Pancreatic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Proposal of a Standardization

Objective

To depict and analyze learning curves for open, laparoscopic, and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and distal pancreatectomy (DP).

Background

Formal training is recommended for safe introduction of pancreatic surgery but definitions of learning curves vary and have not been standardized.

Methods

A systematic search on PubMed, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases identified studies on learning curves in pancreatic surgery. Primary outcome was the number needed to reach the learning curve as defined by the included studies. Secondary outcomes included endpoints defining learning curves, methods of analysis (statistical/arbitrary), and classification of learning phases.

Results

Out of 1115 articles, 66 studies with 14,206 patients were included. Thirty-five studies (53%) based the learning curve analysis on statistical calculations. Most often used parameters to define learning curves were operative time (n = 51), blood loss (n = 17), and complications (n = 10). The number of procedures to surpass a first phase of learning curve was 30 (20-50) for open PD, 39 (11-60) for laparoscopic PD, 25 (8-100) for robotic PD (P = 0.521), 16 (3-17) for laparoscopic DP, and 15 (5-37) for robotic DP (P = 0.914). In a three-phase model, intraoperative parameters improved earlier (first to second phase: operating time -15%, blood loss -29%) whereas postoperative parameters improved later (second to third phase: complications -46%, postoperative pancreatic fistula -48%). Studies with higher sample sizes showed higher numbers of procedures needed to overcome the learning curve (rho = 0.64, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

This study summarizes learning curves for open-, laparoscopic-, and robotic pancreatic surgery with different definitions, analysis methods, and confounding factors. A standardized reporting of learning curves and definition of phases (competency, proficiency, mastery) is desirable and proposed.

Updated Principles of Surgical Management of Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumours (pNETs): What Every Surgeon Needs to Know

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (pNETs) represent 1 to 2% of all pancreatic neoplasm with an increasing incidence. They have a varied clinical, biological and radiological presentation, depending on whether they are sporadic or genetic in origin, whether they are functional or non-functional, and whether there is a single or multiple lesions. These pNETs are often diagnosed at an advanced stage with locoregional lymph nodes invasion or distant metastases. In most cases, the gold standard curative treatment is surgical resection of the pancreatic tumour, but the postoperative complications and functional consequences are not negligible. Thus, these patients should be managed in specialised high-volume centres with multidisciplinary discussion involving surgeons, oncologists, radiologists and pathologists. Innovative managements such as "watch and wait" strategies, parenchymal sparing surgery and minimally invasive approach are emerging. The correct use of all these therapeutic options requires a good selection of patients but also a constant update of knowledge. The aim of this work is to update the surgical management of pNETs and to highlight key elements in view of the recent literature.

The long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for ampullary carcinoma showed similar survival: a case-matched comparative study

BACKGROUND

Few studies have compared the oncological benefit of laparoscopic (LPD) and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) for ampullary carcinoma. The aim of this study was to compare the oncological results of these two approaches.

METHODS

Between 2011 and 2020, 103 patients who underwent PD for ampullary carcinoma, including 31 LPD and 72 OPD, were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were matched on a 1:2 basis for age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anaesthesiologists score, and preoperative biliary drainage. Short- and long-term outcomes of LPD and OPD were compared.

RESULTS

The 31 LPD were matched (1:2) to 62 OPD. LPD was associated with a shorter operative time (298 vs. 341 min, p = 0.02) than OPD and similar blood loss (361 vs. 341 mL, p = 0.747), but with more intra- and post-operative transfusions (29 vs. 8%, p = 0.008). There was no significant difference in postoperative mortality (6 vs. 2%), grades B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula (22 vs. 21%), delayed gastric emptying (23 vs. 35%), bleeding (22 vs. 11%), Clavien ≥ III morbidity (22 vs. 19%), or the length of hospital stay (26 vs. 21 days) between LPD and OPD, respectively, but there were more reinterventions (22 vs. 5%, p = 0.009). Pathological characteristics were similar for tumor size (21 vs. 22 mm), well differentiated tumors (41 vs. 38%), the number of harvested (23 vs. 26) or invaded lymph nodes (48 vs. 52%), R0 resection (84 vs. 90%), and other subtypes (T1/2, T3/4, phenotype). With a comparable mean follow-up (41 vs. 37 months, p = 0.59), there was no difference in 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall (p = 0.725) or recurrence-free survival (p = 0.155) which were (93, 74, 67% vs. 97, 79, 76%) and (85, 58, 58% vs. 90, 73, 73%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study showed a similar long-term oncological results between LPD and OPD for ampullary carcinoma. However, the higher morbidity observed with LPD compared to OPD, restricting its use to experienced centers.

Assessment of difficulty in laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: A modification of the Japanese difficulty scoring system - A single-center high-volume experience

BACKGROUND

The Japanese difficulty scoring system (DSS) was developed to assess the difficulty of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP). The study aimed to validate a modified DSS (mDSS) in a European high-volume center.

METHODS

Patients' clinical data underwent LDP for benign and malignant pancreatic lesion between September 2013 and February 2020 were reviewed. Expert laparoscopic surgeons performed the procedures. The mDSS consisted of seven variables, such as type of operation, malignancy, neoadjuvant therapy, pancreatic resection line, tumor close to major vessels, tumor extension to peripancreatic tissue, and left-sided portal hypertension and/or splenomegaly. According to the difficulty level and previous score, the mDSS was subdivided into three classes: low, intermediate, and high. Surrogates of case complexity (operative time, intraoperative blood loss and blood transfusion requirements, conversion rate) were used to validate the new scoring system.

RESULTS

The study population included 140 LDP. Ninety-five (68%), 35 (25%) and 10 (7%) patients belonged to low, intermediate, and high difficulty groups. The mDSS identified the complexity of the surgical case of the series for all the surrogates of complexity considered, namely conversion rate (P = .004), operative time (P = .033) and intraoperative blood loss (P = .009). No differences were recorded in the postoperative outcomes (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

The mDSS for LDP better stratified the pancreatic procedures according to their complexity. The new scoring system may allow an appropriate preoperative evaluation of surgical difficulty, facilitating LDP's training program. Future prospective studies are needed to validate the mDSS.

Learning curve of laparoscopic and robotic pancreas resections: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive pancreatic resection has been shown recently in some randomized trials to be superior in selected perioperative outcomes compared with open resection when performed by experienced surgeons. However, minimally invasive pancreatic resection is associated with a long learning curve. This study aims to summarize the current evidence on the learning curve of minimally invasive pancreatic resection and define the number of cases required to surmount the learning curve.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed on PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane database using a detailed search strategy. Studies that did not describe the learning curve were excluded from the study. Data on the method of learning curve analysis, single surgeon versus institutional learning curve, and outcome measures were extracted and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 32 studies were included in the pooled analysis: 12 on laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy, 9 on robotic pancreatoduodenectomy, 12 on laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy, and 3 on robotic distal pancreatectomy. Sample population was comparable between laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (median 63 vs 65). Six of 12 studies and 7 of 9 studies used nonarbitrary methods of analysis in laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy, respectively. Operating time was used as the single outcome measure in 4 of 12 studies in laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and 5 of 9 studies in robotic pancreatoduodenectomy. Overall, there was no significant difference between the number of cases required to surmount the learning curve for laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy versus robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy 34.1 [95% confidence interval 30.7-37.7] versus robotic pancreatoduodenectomy 36.7 [95% confidence interval 32.9-41.0]; P = .8241) and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy versus robotic distal pancreatectomy (laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy 25.3 [95% confidence interval 22.5-28.3] versus robotic distal pancreatectomy 20.7 [95% confidence interval 15.8-26.5]; P = .5997.) CONCLUSION: This study provides a detailed summary of existing evidence around the learning curve in minimally invasive pancreatic resection. There was no significant difference between the learning curve for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy versus laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and robotic distal pancreatectomy versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. These findings were limited by the retrospective nature and heterogeneity of the studies published to date.

Early Drain Removal is Safe in Patients With Low or Intermediate Risk of Pancreatic Fistula After Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

This multi-center randomized controlled trial (RCT) was designed to test the hypothesis that early drain removal (EDR) could decrease the incidence of grade 2-4 complications for patients undoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) with low or intermediate risk of postoperative fistula (POPF).

BACKGROUND

The safety and effects of EDR on postoperative complications after PD are still controversial.

METHODS

A multi-center RCT at six tertiary referral hospitals was carried out (NCT03055676). Patients who met the inclusion criteria, including drain amylase level less than 5000 U/L on postoperative day (POD) 1 and POD 3, and drain output less than 300 ml per day within 3 days after surgery, were enrolled. Patients were then randomized to the EDR group or the routine drain removal (RDR) group. In the EDR group, all drainage tubes were removed on POD3. In the RDR group, drainage tubes were removed on POD 5 or beyond. Primary outcome was the incidence of Clavien-Dindo grade 2-4 complications. Secondary outcomes were comprehensive complication index (CCI), grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), total medical expenses and post-operative in-hospital stay etc., within 90 days after surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 692 patients were screened, and 312 patients were eligible for randomization. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the two groups and 96.8% of these 312 patients had low or intermediate risk of POPF, according to the 10-point fistula risk score. A total of 20.5% of the patients in the EDR group suffered at least one grade 2-4 complication, versus 26.3% in the RDR group (P = 0.229). Multi-variate analysis showed older age (> 65 years old) and blood transfusion were independent risk factors for grade 2-4 complications. The rate of grade B/C POPF was low in either group (3.8% vs 6.4%, P = 0.305). The CCI of the two groups was also comparable (20.9 vs 20.9, P = 0.253). Total medical expenses were not significantly different. Post-operative in-hospital stay was clinically similar (15 d vs 16 d, P = 0.010).

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly half of the patients undergoing PD met the inclusion criteria, predicting low incidence of grade B/C POPF and major complications. EDR was safe in these patients but did not significantly decrease major complications.

The outcome of laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy is improved with patient selection and the learning curve

BACKGROUND

In our first experience, laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) was associated with higher morbidity than open PD. Since, the surgical technique has been improved and LPD was avoided in some patients at very high risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). We provide our most recent results.

METHOD

Between 2011 and 2018, 130 LPD were performed and divided into 3 consecutive periods based on CUSUM analysis and compared: first period (n = 43), second period (n = 43), and third period (n = 44).

RESULTS

In the third period of this study, LPD was more frequently performed in women (46%, 39%, 59%, p = 0.21) on dilated Wirsung duct > 3 mm (40%, 44%, 57%; p = 0.54). Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) became the primary indication (12%, 39%, 34%; p = 0.037) compared to pancreatic adenocarcinoma (35%, 16%, 16%; p = 0.004). Malignant ampulloma re-increased during the third period (30%, 9%, 20%; p = 0.052) with the amelioration of surgical technique. The operative time increased during the second period and decreased during the third period (330, 345, 270; p < 0.001) with less blood loss (300, 200, 125; p < 0.001). All complications decreased, including POPF grades B/C (44%, 28%, 20%; p = 0.017), bleeding (28%, 21%, 14%; p = 0.26), Clavien-Dindo III-IV (40%, 33%, 16%; p = 0.013), re-interventions (19%, 14%, 9%; p = 0.43), and the hospital stay (26, 19, 18; p = 0.045). Less patients with similar-sized adenocarcinoma were operated during the second period (70%, 33%, 59%; p = 0.002) with more harvested lymph nodes in the third period (21,19, 25; p = 0.031) and higher R0 resection (70%, 79%, 84%; p = 0.5). On multivariate analysis the protective factors against POPF of grades B/C were pancreatic adenocarcinoma and invasive IPMN, BMI < 22.5 kg/m², and patients operated in the third period.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that the outcome of LPD significantly improves with the learning curve and patient selection. For safe implementation and during the early learning period, LPD should be indicated in patients at lower risk of POPF.

Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: multicentre analysis

BACKGROUND

The role of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy is still unclear, and whether robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) offers benefits over laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is unknown because large multicentre studies are lacking. This study compared perioperative outcomes between RDP and LDP.

METHODS

A multicentre international propensity score-matched study included patients who underwent RDP or LDP for any indication in 21 European centres from six countries that performed at least 15 distal pancreatectomies annually (January 2011 to June 2019). Propensity score matching was based on preoperative characteristics in a 1 : 1 ratio. The primary outcome was the major morbidity rate (Clavien-Dindo grade IIIa or above).

RESULTS

A total of 1551 patients (407 RDP and 1144 LDP) were included in the study. Some 402 patients who had RDP were matched with 402 who underwent LDP. After matching, there was no difference between RDP and LDP groups in rates of major morbidity (14.2 versus 16.5 per cent respectively; P = 0.378), postoperative pancreatic fistula grade B/C (24.6 versus 26.5 per cent; P = 0.543) or 90-day mortality (0.5 versus 1.3 per cent; P = 0.268). RDP was associated with a longer duration of surgery than LDP (median 285 (i.q.r. 225-350) versus 240 (195-300) min respectively; P < 0.001), lower conversion rate (6.7 versus 15.2 per cent; P < 0.001), higher spleen preservation rate (81.4 versus 62.9 per cent; P = 0.001), longer hospital stay (median 8.5 (i.q.r. 7-12) versus 7 (6-10) days; P < 0.001) and lower readmission rate (11.0 versus 18.2 per cent; P = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

The major morbidity rate was comparable between RDP and LDP. RDP was associated with improved rates of conversion, spleen preservation and readmission, to the detriment of longer duration of surgery and hospital stay.

Association of Mentorship and a Formal Robotic Proficiency Skills Curriculum With Subsequent Generations' Learning Curve and Safety for Robotic Pancreaticoduodenectomy

Importance

Learning curves are unavoidable for practicing surgeons when adopting new technologies. However, patient outcomes are worse in the early stages of a learning curve vs after mastery. Therefore, it is critical to find a way to decrease these learning curves without compromising patient safety.

Objective

To evaluate the association of mentorship and a formal proficiency-based skills curriculum with the learning curves of 3 generations of surgeons and to determine the association with increased patient safety.

Design, Setting, and Participants

All consecutive robotic pancreaticoduodenectomies (RPDs) performed at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center between 2008 and 2017 were included in this study. Surgeons were split into generations based on their access to mentorship and a proficiency-based skills curriculum. The generations are (1) no mentorship or curriculum, (2) mentorship but no curriculum, and (3) mentorship and curriculum. Univariable and multivariable analyses were used to create risk-adjusted learning curves by surgical generation and to analyze factors associated with operating room time, complications, and fellows completing the full resection. The participants include surgical oncology attending surgeons and fellows who participated in an RPD at University of Pittsburgh Medical Center between 2008 and 2017.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was operating room time (ORT). Secondary outcomes were postoperative pancreatic fistula and Clavien-Dindo classification higher than grade 2.

Results

We identified 514 RPDs completed between 2008 and 2017, of which 258 (50.2%) were completed by first-generation surgeons, 151 (29.3%) were completed by the second generation, and 82 (15.9%) were completed by the third generation. There was no statistically significant difference between groups with respect to age (66.3-67.3 years; P = .52) or female sex (n = 34 [41.5%] vs n = 121 [46.9%]; P = .60). There was a significant decrease in ORT (P < .001), from 450.8 minutes for the first-generation surgeons to 348.6 minutes for the third generation. Additionally, across generations, Clavien-Dindo classification higher than grade 2 (n = 74 [28.7%] vs n = 30 [9.9%] vs n = 12 [14.6%]; P = .01), conversion rates (n = 18 [7.0%] vs n = 7 [4.6%] vs n = 0; P = .006), and estimated blood loss (426 mL vs 288.6 mL vs 254.7 mL; P < .001) decreased significantly with subsequent generations. There were no significant differences in postoperative pancreatic fistula.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, ORT, conversion rates, and estimated blood loss decreased across generations without a concomitant rise in adverse patient outcomes. These findings suggest that a proficiency-based curriculum coupled with mentorship allows for the safe introduction of less experienced surgeons to RPD without compromising patient safety.

Risk of conversion to open surgery during robotic and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and effect on outcomes: international propensity score-matched comparison study

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) is increasingly being performed because of perceived patient benefits. Whether conversion of MIPD to open pancreatoduodenectomy worsens outcome, and which risk factors are associated with conversion, is unclear.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of a European multicentre retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing MIPD (2012-2017) in ten medium-volume (10-19 MIPDs annually) and four high-volume (at least 20 MIPDs annually) centres. Propensity score matching (1 : 1) was used to compare outcomes of converted and non-converted MIPD procedures. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for conversion, with results presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95 per cent confidence intervals (c.i).

RESULTS

Overall, 65 of 709 MIPDs were converted (9.2 per cent) and the overall 30-day mortality rate was 3.8 per cent. Risk factors for conversion were tumour size larger than 40 mm (OR 2.7, 95 per cent c.i.1.0 to 6.8; P = 0.041), pancreatobiliary tumours (OR 2.2, 1.0 to 4.8; P = 0.039), age at least 75 years (OR 2.0, 1.0 to 4.1; P = 0.043), and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (OR 5.2, 2.5 to 10.7; P < 0.001). Medium-volume centres had a higher risk of conversion than high-volume centres (15.2 versus 4.1 per cent, P < 0.001; OR 4.1, 2.3 to 7.4, P < 0.001). After propensity score matching (56 converted MIPDs and 56 completed MIPDs) including risk factors, rates of complications with a Clavien-Dindo grade of III or higher (32 versus 34 per cent; P = 0.841) and 30-day mortality (12 versus 6 per cent; P = 0.274) did not differ between converted and non-converted MIPDs.

CONCLUSION

Risk factors for conversion during MIPD include age, large tumour size, tumour location, laparoscopic approach, and surgery in medium-volume centres. Although conversion during MIPD itself was not associated with worse outcomes, the outcome in these patients was poor in general which should be taken into account during patient selection for MIPD.

Changing trends and outcomes associated with the adoption of minimally invasive pancreatic surgeries: A single institution experience with 150 consecutive procedures in Southeast Asia

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive pancreatic surgeries (MIPS) are increasingly adopted worldwide. However, it remains uncertain if these reported experiences are reproducible throughout the world today. This study examines the safety and evolution of MIPS at a single institution in Southeast Asia.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of 150 consecutive patients who underwent MIPS between 2006 and 2018 of which 135 cases (90%) were performed since 2012. To determine the evolution of MIPS, the study population was stratified into 3 equal groups of 50 patients. Comparison was also made between pancreatoduodenectomies (PD), distal pancreatectomies (DP) and other pancreatic surgeries.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty patients underwent MIPS (103 laparoscopic, 45 robotic and 2 hand-assisted). Forty-three patients underwent PD, 93 DP and 14 other MIPS. There were 21 (14.0%) open conversions. There was an exponential increase in caseload over the study period. Comparison across the 3 time periods demonstrated that patients were significantly more likely to have a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists score, older, undergo PD and a longer operation time. The conversion rate decreased from 28% to 0% and increased again to 14% across the 3 time periods. Comparison between the various types of MIPS demonstrated that patients who underwent PD were significantly older, more likely to have symptomatic tumours, had longer surgery time, increased blood loss, increased frequency of extended pancreatectomies, increased frequency of hybrid procedures, longer post-operative stay, increased post-operative morbidity rate and increased post-operative major morbidity rate.

CONCLUSION

The case volume of MIPS increased rapidly at our institution over the study period. Furthermore, although the indications for MIPS expanded to include more complex procedures in higher risk patients, there was no change in key perioperative outcomes.

Changing trends and outcomes associated with the adoption of minimally-invasive pancreato-biliary surgery: Contemporary experience of a 'self-taught' early adopter in Southeast Asia

BACKGROUND

Minimally-invasive pancreato-biliary surgery (MIPBS) is increasingly reported worldwide. This study examines the changing trends, safety and outcomes associated with the adoption of MIPBS based on a contemporary experience of an early adopter in Southeast Asia.

METHODS

Retrospective review of 114 consecutive patients who underwent MIPBS by a single surgeon over 86 months from 2011. The study population was stratified into three equal groups of 38 patients. Comparison was also performed between minimally-invasive pancreato surgery (MIPS) and minimally-invasive biliary surgery (MIBS).

RESULTS

There were 70 MIPS and 44 MIBS. Sixty-three cases (55.3%) were performed using robotic assistance and fourteen (12.3%) were hybrid procedures with open reconstruction. Forty-four (38.6%) procedures were performed for malignancy. There were 8 (7.0%) open conversions and median operation time was 335 (range, 60-930) min. There were nine extended pancreatectomies including seven involving vascular reconstructions. Major morbidity (>Grade 2) occurred in 20 (17.5%) patients including 6 (5.3%) reoperations and there was no mortality. Comparison across the three groups demonstrated that with increasing experience, there was a significant trend in a higher proportion of higher ASA score patients, increasing frequency of procedures requiring anastomosis and increasing the use of robotic assistance without significant difference in key perioperative outcomes such as open conversion rate, morbidity and hospital stay. Comparison between MIPS and MIBS demonstrated that MIPS was associated with significantly longer operation time, increased blood loss, increased transfusion rate, longer hospital stay, increased readmission rate and increased morbidity.

CONCLUSION

MIPBS can be safely adopted today with a low open conversion rate.

Current statement and safe implementation of minimally invasive surgery in the pancreas

Minimally invasive pancreatic resection has become very popular in modern pancreatic surgery. Evidence of the benefits of a minimally invasive approach is accumulating thanks to prospective and randomized controlled studies. Minimally invasive surgery provides advantages to the surgeon due to the high definition of the surgical field and the freedom of fine movement of the robot, but should be considered only in selected patients and in high-volume centers. Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy for benign and low-grade malignant tumors has established a secure position over open distal pancreatectomy, since it is associated with a shorter hospital stay, reduced blood loss, and equivalent complication rates. Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma appears to be a feasible, safe, and oncologically equivalent technique in experienced hands. On the other hand, the feasibility and safety of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy are still controversial compared with open pancreaticoduodenectomy. The choice of either technique among open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches depends on surgeons' experience and hospital resources with a focus on patient safety. Further studies are needed to prove the perioperative and oncological advantages of minimally invasive surgery compared to open surgery in the pancreas. Here, we review the current status of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery and its safe implementation.

Evaluation of the learning curve for laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy by CUSUM analyses. Cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) remains an extremely demanding surgery. The purpose of this study was to describe the learning curve required for its safe implementation.

METHODS

Fifty consecutive patients undergoing LPD were retrospectively reviewed. The learning curve was clustered into 4 groups: A, B and C (initial phase, n = 10 each) and D (consolidation phase, n = 20). Cumulative Sum (CUSUM) analysis was applied to operative time, conversion rate and severe postoperative complications.

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed among groups and phases concerning specific and general postoperative complications, oncological outcomes or mortality. The conversion rate significantly reduced from 90% (9) in Group A to 40% (4) in Group C (p < 0.01). Operative time was longer in the consolidation phase (median of 506 vs 437 min, p < 0.01). Conversely, hospital stays were shorter during the consolidation phase (8 vs 15 days, p < 0.01). CUSUM analysis identified 20-25cases as being enough to complete the learning curve if operative time and severe complications are analysed, while 40 cases would be needed for considering the conversion rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The learning curve in LPD can be completed after 20-25 procedures. This information will help to design programmes for introducing new surgeons to this technique.

Achilles'heel of laparoscopic pancreatectomy: reconstruction of the remnant pancreas

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic pancreatic reconstruction is a challenging procedure and is considered the Achilles' heel of laparoscopic pancreatectomy. Multiple techniques of laparoscopic pancreatic reconstruction have been reported, but the optimal technique remains unclear.

AREAS COVERED

This paper provides a brief introduction to the developmental status and major related complications of laparoscopic pancreatic reconstruction. We reviewed all published literature on the technology of laparoscopic pancreatic reconstruction within the last 5 years and herein discuss the advantages and disadvantages of different reconstruction methods. We also discuss several details of different reconstruction techniques in terms of their significance to the operation and complications.

EXPERT OPINION

No individual method of laparoscopic pancreatic reconstruction is considered optimal for all conditions. The reconstruction strategy should be based on the surgeon's proficiency with laparoscopic technology and the patient's individual risk factors. Personalized methods of pancreatic reconstruction may more effectively reduce morbidity and mortality.

Management of the pancreatic transection plane after left (distal) pancreatectomy: Expert consensus guidelines by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS)

BACKGROUND

The aim was to evaluate the various operative techniques and outcomes used to manage the pancreatic transection plane (or stump) during a left (distal) pancreatectomy and to develop expert consensus guidelines.

METHODS

Evidence-based, clinically relevant questions were discussed and then were circulated among members of the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery. After agreement on the questions and statements, voting in a 9-point Likert scale was used to gauge the level of objective support for each.

RESULTS

Studies using the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery definition of postoperative pancreatic fistula including 16 randomized trials were reviewed to generate a series of statements set into 14 domains. There was strong consensus in the following statements: there was no difference in the postoperative pancreatic fistula rate after left pancreatectomy between the handsewn and stapler techniques; a stapling technique could not be used in all cases of left pancreatectomy; the use of an energy-based tissue sealant or a chemical sealant device or combinations of these did not impact the postoperative pancreatic fistula rate; there was no difference in the postoperative pancreatic fistula rate between the open, laparoscopic, or robotic approaches; and there are 1 or more clinically important, patient-related risk factors associated with the postoperative pancreatic fistula rate. There was weak or conditional agreement on the use of prophylactic somatostatin analogs, stents, stump closure, stump anastomosis, and the role of abdominal drains.

CONCLUSION

Areas of strong consensus suggests a change in clinical practice and priority setting. Eight domains with lower agreement will require novel approaches and large multicenter studies to determine future key areas of practice.

Current Status of Laparoscopic and Robotic Pancreatic Surgery and Its Adoption in Singapore

Despite the potential clinical advantages offered by laparoscopic pancreatic surgery (LPS), the main obstacle to its widespread adoption is the technically demanding nature of the procedure and its steep learning curve. LPS and robotic pancreatic surgery (RPS) have been proven to result in superior short-term perioperative outcomes and equivalent long-term oncological outcomes compared to the conventional open approach, with the caveat that they are performed by expert surgeons who have been trained to perform such procedures. The primary challenge faced by most pancreatic surgeons is the steep learning curve associated with these complex procedures and the need to undergo surgical training, especially with regards to laparoscopic and robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Current evidence suggests that RPS may help to shorten the lengthy learning curve required for LPS. More robust evidence—in the form of large randomised controlled trials—is needed to determine whether LPS and RPS can be safely adopted universally. Ann Acad Med Singapore 2020;49:377–83 Key words: Laparoscopic pancreatectomy, Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy, Minimally invasive pancreatic surgery, Robotic pancreatectomy, Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy