This study aimed to determine whether registrar involvement in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) was associated with adverse outcomes.
From January 2009 to March 2020, data of all consecutive patients requiring distal pancreatectomy in our public tertiary hospital were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. Registrars were progressively involved for MIDP since 2009 and their experience was: \< 5 open pancreatic resections, \< 5 MIDP and at least 30 advanced minimally invasive gastrointestinal resections. Outcome of patients who underwent either distal pancreatectomy by the consultant or registrars were compared. Our primary outcome was the conversion rate. The secondary outcomes were 90-days postoperative outcomes including CR-POPF defined and classified according to the 2016 ISGPF definition.
Study Type
OBSERVATIONAL
Enrollment
71
Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy
Uhmontpellier
Montpellier, France
open conversion rate
Necessity to swith from minimally invasive approach to open approach during laparoscopy
Time frame: 1 day
Duration of surgery
Duration of surgery
Time frame: 1 day
Intraoperative bloodloss
Intraoperative bloodloss
Time frame: 1 day
Intraoperative transfusion
Intraoperative transfusion
Time frame: 1 day
severe complications Clavien Dindo>3
severe complications Clavien Dindo\>3
Time frame: 90 days postoperative
postoperative complications
postoperative complications
Time frame: 90 days postoperative
clinically relevant postoperative fistula
clinically relevant postoperative fistula (2016 ISGPF definition)
Time frame: 90 days postoperative
lenght of hospital stay
lenght of hospital stay
Time frame: 90 days postoperative
readmission rate
readmission rate
Time frame: 90 days postoperative
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
reoperation rate
reoperation rate
Time frame: 90 days postoperative