BACKGROUND: Increasingly, surgeons apply minimally invasive and parenchyma-sparing techniques to the management of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (PNET). The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of these approaches on patient outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively collected data on patients with PNET and compared perioperative and pathologic variables. Survival was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Factors influencing survival were evaluated using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: One hundred thirty patients underwent resection for PNET. Traditional resections included 43 pancreaticoduodenectomies (PD), 38 open distal pancreatectomies (DP), and four total pancreatectomies. Minimally invasive and parenchyma-sparing resections included 25 laparoscopic DP, 11 central pancreatectomies, five enucleations, three partial pancreatectomies, and one laparoscopic-assisted PD. Compared to traditional resections, the minimally invasive and parenchyma-sparing resections had shorter hospital stays. By univariate analysis of neuroendocrine carcinoma, liver metastases and positive resection margins correlated with poor survival. There was an increase in minimally invasive or parenchyma-sparing resections over the study period with no differences in morbidity, mortality, or survival. CONCLUSION: In this series, there has been a significant increase in minimally invasive and parenchyma-sparing techniques for PNET. This shift did not increase morbidity or compromise survival. In addition, minimally invasive and parenchyma-sparing operations yielded shorter hospital stays.
BACKGROUND: Increasingly, surgeons apply minimally invasive and parenchyma-sparing techniques to the management of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (PNET). The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of these approaches on patient outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively collected data on patients with PNET and compared perioperative and pathologic variables. Survival was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Factors influencing survival were evaluated using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: One hundred thirty patients underwent resection for PNET. Traditional resections included 43 pancreaticoduodenectomies (PD), 38 open distal pancreatectomies (DP), and four total pancreatectomies. Minimally invasive and parenchyma-sparing resections included 25 laparoscopic DP, 11 central pancreatectomies, five enucleations, three partial pancreatectomies, and one laparoscopic-assisted PD. Compared to traditional resections, the minimally invasive and parenchyma-sparing resections had shorter hospital stays. By univariate analysis of neuroendocrine carcinoma, liver metastases and positive resection margins correlated with poor survival. There was an increase in minimally invasive or parenchyma-sparing resections over the study period with no differences in morbidity, mortality, or survival. CONCLUSION: In this series, there has been a significant increase in minimally invasive and parenchyma-sparing techniques for PNET. This shift did not increase morbidity or compromise survival. In addition, minimally invasive and parenchyma-sparing operations yielded shorter hospital stays.
Authors: Paulus G Schurr; Tim Strate; Kim Rese; Jussuf T Kaifi; Uta Reichelt; Susanne Petri; Helge Kleinhans; Emre F Yekebas; Jakob R Izbicki Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: John D Allendorf; Beth A Schrope; Margaret H Lauerman; William B Inabnet; John A Chabot Journal: World J Surg Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: David A Kooby; William G Hawkins; C Max Schmidt; Sharon M Weber; David J Bentrem; Theresa W Gillespie; Johnita Byrd Sellers; Nipun B Merchant; Charles R Scoggins; Robert C G Martin; Hong Jin Kim; Syed Ahmad; Clifford S Cho; Alexander A Parikh; Carrie K Chu; Nicholas A Hamilton; Courtney J Doyle; Scott Pinchot; Amanda Hayman; Rebecca McClaine; Attila Nakeeb; Charles A Staley; Kelly M McMasters; Keith D Lillemoe Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Nicholas N Nissen; Amanda S Kim; Run Yu; Edward M Wolin; Marc L Friedman; Simon K Lo; Ashley M Wachsman; Steven D Colquhoun Journal: Am Surg Date: 2009-10 Impact factor: 0.688
Authors: Joshua S Hill; James T McPhee; Theodore P McDade; Zheng Zhou; Mary E Sullivan; Giles F Whalen; Jennifer F Tseng Journal: Cancer Date: 2009-02-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: G Rindi; G Klöppel; H Alhman; M Caplin; A Couvelard; W W de Herder; B Erikssson; A Falchetti; M Falconi; P Komminoth; M Körner; J M Lopes; A-M McNicol; O Nilsson; A Perren; A Scarpa; J-Y Scoazec; B Wiedenmann Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2006-09-12 Impact factor: 4.064
Authors: James R Howe; Nipun B Merchant; Claudius Conrad; Xavier M Keutgen; Julie Hallet; Jeffrey A Drebin; Rebecca M Minter; Terry C Lairmore; Jennifer F Tseng; Herbert J Zeh; Steven K Libutti; Gagandeep Singh; Jeffrey E Lee; Thomas A Hope; Michelle K Kim; Yusuf Menda; Thorvardur R Halfdanarson; Jennifer A Chan; Rodney F Pommier Journal: Pancreas Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 3.327
Authors: Richard A Burkhart; Susan M Gerber; Renee M Tholey; Kathleen M Lamb; Anitha Somasundaram; Caitlin A McIntyre; Eliza C Fradkin; Annie P Ashok; Robert F Felte; Jaya M Mehta; Ernest L Rosato; Harish Lavu; Serge A Jabbour; Charles J Yeo; Jordan M Winter Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2014-10-15 Impact factor: 3.452