BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) is a safe procedure. Oncological safety of LPD is still a matter for debate. This study aimed to compare the oncological outcomes, in terms of adequacy of resection and recurrence rate following LPD and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). METHODS: Between November 2005 and April 2009, 12 LPDs (9 ampullary and 3 distal common bile duct tumors) were performed. A cohort of 12 OPDs were matched for age, gender, body mass index (BMI) and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score and tumor site. RESULTS: Mean tumor size LPD vs OPD (19.8 vs 19.2 mm, P=0.870). R0 resection was achieved in 9 LPD vs 8 OPD (P=1.000). The mean number of metastatic lymph nodes and total number resected for LPD vs OPD were 1.1 vs 2.1 (P=0.140) and 20.7 vs 18.5 (P=0.534) respectively. Clavien complications grade I/II (5 vs 8), III/IV (2 vs 6) and pancreatic leak (2 vs 1) were statistically not significant (LPD vs OPD). The mean high dependency unit (HDU) stay was longer in OPD (3.7 vs 1.4 days, P<0.001). There were 2 recurrences each in LPD and OPD (log-rank, P=0.983). Overall mortality for LPD vs OPD was 3 vs 6 (log-rank, P=0.283) and recurrence-related mortality was 2 vs 1. There was one death within 30 days in the OPD group secondary to severe sepsis and none in the LPD group. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to open procedure, LPD achieved a similar rate of R0 resection, lymph node harvest and long-term recurrence for tumors less than 2 cm. Though technically challenging, LPD is safe and does not compromise oncological outcome.
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) is a safe procedure. Oncological safety of LPD is still a matter for debate. This study aimed to compare the oncological outcomes, in terms of adequacy of resection and recurrence rate following LPD and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). METHODS: Between November 2005 and April 2009, 12 LPDs (9 ampullary and 3 distal common bile duct tumors) were performed. A cohort of 12 OPDs were matched for age, gender, body mass index (BMI) and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score and tumor site. RESULTS: Mean tumor size LPD vs OPD (19.8 vs 19.2 mm, P=0.870). R0 resection was achieved in 9 LPD vs 8 OPD (P=1.000). The mean number of metastatic lymph nodes and total number resected for LPD vs OPD were 1.1 vs 2.1 (P=0.140) and 20.7 vs 18.5 (P=0.534) respectively. Clavien complications grade I/II (5 vs 8), III/IV (2 vs 6) and pancreatic leak (2 vs 1) were statistically not significant (LPD vs OPD). The mean high dependency unit (HDU) stay was longer in OPD (3.7 vs 1.4 days, P<0.001). There were 2 recurrences each in LPD and OPD (log-rank, P=0.983). Overall mortality for LPD vs OPD was 3 vs 6 (log-rank, P=0.283) and recurrence-related mortality was 2 vs 1. There was one death within 30 days in the OPD group secondary to severe sepsis and none in the LPD group. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to open procedure, LPD achieved a similar rate of R0 resection, lymph node harvest and long-term recurrence for tumors less than 2 cm. Though technically challenging, LPD is safe and does not compromise oncological outcome.
Authors: Claudio Ricci; Riccardo Casadei; Giovanni Taffurelli; Carlo Alberto Pacilio; Marco Ricciardiello; Francesco Minni Journal: World J Surg Date: 2018-03 Impact factor: 3.352