Journal of the American College of Surgeons · 2015
Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy should not be routine for resection of periampullary tumors.
Сравнительное исследованиеОценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Dokmak Safi, Ftériche Fadhel Samir, Aussilhou Béatrice, Bensafta Yacine, Lévy Philippe, Ruszniewski Philippe, Belghiti Jacques, Sauvanet Alain
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) is a difficult procedure that has become increasingly popular. Nevertheless, comparative data on outcomes remain limited. Our aim was to compare the outcomes of LPD and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD).
STUDY DESIGN: Between April 2011 and April 2014, 46 LPD were performed and compared with 46 OPD, which theoretically can be done by the laparoscopic approach. Patients were also matched for demographic data, associated comorbidities, and underlying disease. Patient demographics and perioperative and postoperative outcomes were studied from our single center prospective database.
RESULTS: Lower BMI (23 vs 27 kg/m(2), p < 0.001) and a soft pancreas (57% vs 47%, p = 0.38) were observed in patients with LPD, but there were no differences in associated comorbidities or underlying disease. Surgery lasted longer in the LPD group (342 vs 264 minutes, p < 0.001). One death occurred in the LPD group (2.1% vs 0%, p = 0.28) and severe morbidity was higher (28% vs 20%, p = 0.32) in LPD due to grade C pancreatic fistula (PF) (24% vs 6%, p = 0.007), bleeding (24% vs 7%, p = 0.02), and revision surgery (24% vs 11%, p = 0.09). Pathologic examination for malignant diseases did not identify any differences between the LPD and OPD as far as size (2.51 vs 2.82 cm, p = 0.27), number of harvested (20 vs 23, p = 0.62) or invaded (2.4 vs 2, p = 0.22) lymph nodes, or R0 resection (80% vs 80%; p = 1). Hospital stays were similar (25 vs 23 days, p = 0.59). There was no difference in outcomes between approaches in patients at a lower risk of PF.
CONCLUSIONS: This study found that LPD is associated with higher morbidity, mainly due to more severe PF. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy should be considered only in the subgroup of patients with a low risk of PF.
STUDY DESIGN: Between April 2011 and April 2014, 46 LPD were performed and compared with 46 OPD, which theoretically can be done by the laparoscopic approach. Patients were also matched for demographic data, associated comorbidities, and underlying disease. Patient demographics and perioperative and postoperative outcomes were studied from our single center prospective database.
RESULTS: Lower BMI (23 vs 27 kg/m(2), p < 0.001) and a soft pancreas (57% vs 47%, p = 0.38) were observed in patients with LPD, but there were no differences in associated comorbidities or underlying disease. Surgery lasted longer in the LPD group (342 vs 264 minutes, p < 0.001). One death occurred in the LPD group (2.1% vs 0%, p = 0.28) and severe morbidity was higher (28% vs 20%, p = 0.32) in LPD due to grade C pancreatic fistula (PF) (24% vs 6%, p = 0.007), bleeding (24% vs 7%, p = 0.02), and revision surgery (24% vs 11%, p = 0.09). Pathologic examination for malignant diseases did not identify any differences between the LPD and OPD as far as size (2.51 vs 2.82 cm, p = 0.27), number of harvested (20 vs 23, p = 0.62) or invaded (2.4 vs 2, p = 0.22) lymph nodes, or R0 resection (80% vs 80%; p = 1). Hospital stays were similar (25 vs 23 days, p = 0.59). There was no difference in outcomes between approaches in patients at a lower risk of PF.
CONCLUSIONS: This study found that LPD is associated with higher morbidity, mainly due to more severe PF. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy should be considered only in the subgroup of patients with a low risk of PF.