The Comparison of Miniinvasive and Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Cancer Pancreaticobiliary Zone

Overview

The Comparison of Miniinvasive and Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Cancer Pancreaticobiliary Zone

Minimally invasive surgery is undoubtedly the method of choice for multiple gastrointestinal surgical procedures because of its minimally invasive nature and number of benefits such as reducing postoperative pain, shorter hospital stays, and earlier return to work. Current advances in technological innovation and surgical strategies have made surgical procedures on the pancreas a routine practice. However, the use of new surgical techniques in pancreatic surgery has been slow due to the complexity of the operations and the steep learning curve required for their use. For example, minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomies (MIPD) have not yet become widespread. Due to these interventions have a complex reconstructive stage MIPD are still performed in a very few centers by specialized surgeons. Although laparoscopic PD was first described in 1994 and the robotic approach in 2003, MIPD still account for less than 14% of all DPE cases. The multicenter randomized controlled trial (LEOPARD-2) for the first time compared laparoscopic and open pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic or periampullary tumors. The study that involved 99 patients did not reveal the superiority of laparoscopic PD (LPD) and provided an estimated mortality of 6%; 5 patients died in the laparoscopy group and 1 patient died in the group open PD. The trial was stopped early due to high mortality in the migratory invasive interventions group. Therefore, advantages of minimally invasive procedures for removal of pancreato-biliary zone tumors remain controversial. In our study, we analyzed perioperative surgical outcomes and short-term survival outcomes in patients undergoing MIPD, including LPD and robotic PD (RPD), as well as "open" proximal pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD).

Conditions

Interventions

Eligibility

Locations (1)

Outcomes