BACKGROUND: Although many reports have described laparoscopic pancreatic surgery, pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) has not been widely accepted. The present study aimed to compare laparoscopy-assisted and open pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPPD) to investigate the feasibility, safety, and tumor clearance. METHODS: Fifteen patients with periampullary disease underwent laparoscopy-assisted PPPD, in which resection was performed laparoscopically and the reconstruction was performed through a small midline incision. These patients were compared with 15 patients who, during the same period, underwent conventional open PPPD. RESULTS: Mean operative time and mean blood loss were similar between groups. No significant differences in the incidence of complications or hospital stay were noted between groups. Surgical margin and number of lymph nodes found in the resected specimen did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopy-assisted PPPD is on the same level with conventional open surgery in terms of perioperative outcomes or treatment efficacy.
BACKGROUND: Although many reports have described laparoscopic pancreatic surgery, pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) has not been widely accepted. The present study aimed to compare laparoscopy-assisted and open pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (PPPD) to investigate the feasibility, safety, and tumor clearance. METHODS: Fifteen patients with periampullary disease underwent laparoscopy-assisted PPPD, in which resection was performed laparoscopically and the reconstruction was performed through a small midline incision. These patients were compared with 15 patients who, during the same period, underwent conventional open PPPD. RESULTS: Mean operative time and mean blood loss were similar between groups. No significant differences in the incidence of complications or hospital stay were noted between groups. Surgical margin and number of lymph nodes found in the resected specimen did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopy-assisted PPPD is on the same level with conventional open surgery in terms of perioperative outcomes or treatment efficacy.
Authors: Tobias Keck; Simon Küsters; Ulrich Friedrich Wellner; Ulrich Theodor Hopt; Konrad Wojciech Karcz Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2012-05-31 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: Erin H Baker; Samuel W Ross; Ramanathan Seshadri; Ryan Z Swan; David A Iannitti; Dionisios Vrochides; John B Martinie Journal: J Gastrointest Oncol Date: 2015-08
Authors: Paolo Limongelli; Chiara Vitiello; Andrea Belli; Madhava Pai; Salvatore Tolone; Gianmattia Del Genio; Luigi Brusciano; Giovanni Docimo; Nagy Habib; Giulio Belli; Long Richard Jiao; Ludovico Docimo Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2014-12-14 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Amir Szold; Roberto Bergamaschi; Ivo Broeders; Jenny Dankelman; Antonello Forgione; Thomas Langø; Andreas Melzer; Yoav Mintz; Salvador Morales-Conde; Michael Rhodes; Richard Satava; Chung-Ngai Tang; Ramon Vilallonga Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2014-11-08 Impact factor: 4.584