Literature DB >> 26160714

Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for benign or premalignant pancreatic neoplasms: a two-center comparative study.

Jia-fei Yan1, Tian-tao Kuang, Da-yong Ji, Xiao-wu Xu, Dan-song Wang, Ren-chao Zhang, Wei-wei Jin, Yi-ping Mou, Wen-hui Lou.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the peri-operative outcomes for laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) and open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) for benign or premalignant pancreatic neoplasms in two institutions.
METHODS: This prospective comparative study included 91 consecutive patients who underwent LDP (n=45) or ODP (n=46) from Jan. 2010 to Dec. 2012. Demographics, intra-operative characteristics, and post-operative outcomes were compared.
RESULTS: The median operating time in the LDP group was (158.7±38.3) min compared with (92.2±24.1) min in the ODP group (P<0.001). Patients had lower blood loss in LDP than in the ODP ((122.6±61.1) ml vs. (203.1±84.8) ml, P<0.001). The rates of splenic conservation between the LDP and ODP groups were similar (53.3% vs. 47.8%, P=0.35). All spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomies were conducted with vessel preservation. LDP also demonstrated better post-operative outcomes. The time to oral intake and normal daily activities was faster in the LDP group than in the ODP group ((1.6±0.5) d vs. (3.2±0.7) d, P<0.01; (1.8±0.4) d vs. (2.1±0.6) d, P=0.02, respectively), and the post-operative length of hospital stay in LDP was shorter than that in ODP ((7.9±3.8) d vs. (11.9±5.8) d, P=0.006). No difference in tumor size ((4.7±3.2) cm vs. (4.5±1.8) cm, P=0.77) or overall pancreatic fistula rate (15.6% vs. 19.6%, P=0.62) was found between the groups, while the overall post-operative complication rate was lower in the LDP group (26.7% vs. 47.8%, P=0.04).
CONCLUSIONS: LDP is safe and effective for benign or premalignant pancreatic neoplasms, featuring lower blood loss and substantially faster recovery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Distal pancreatic resection; Laparoscopy; Pancreatic benign tumors; Pancreatic neoplasm; Splenic preservation

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26160714      PMCID: PMC4506947          DOI: 10.1631/jzus.B1400257

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Zhejiang Univ Sci B        ISSN: 1673-1581            Impact factor:   3.066


  28 in total

1.  Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy: a clinical and cost-effectiveness study.

Authors:  Mohammad Abu Hilal; Mohammed Hamdan; Francesco Di Fabio; Neil W Pearce; Colin D Johnson
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-12-17       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Comparison of outcomes and costs between laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and open resection at a single center.

Authors:  Adrian M Fox; Kristen Pitzul; Faizal Bhojani; Max Kaplan; Carol-Anne Moulton; Alice C Wei; Ian McGilvray; Sean Cleary; Allan Okrainec
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-12-17       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 3.  Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is associated with significantly less overall morbidity compared to the open technique: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Raghunandan Venkat; Barish H Edil; Richard D Schulick; Anne O Lidor; Martin A Makary; Christopher L Wolfgang
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 12.969

4.  Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy in pancreatic tumours: a case-control study.

Authors:  Riccardo Casadei; Claudio Ricci; Marielda D'Ambra; Nicola Marrano; Vincento Alagna; Daniela Rega; Francesco Monari; Francesco Minni
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2010-12

5.  Perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy: our institution's 5-year experience.

Authors:  Yu Feng Soh; Alfred Wei Chieh Kow; Kar Yong Wong; Bei Wang; Chung Yip Chan; Kui Hin Liau; Choon Kiat Ho
Journal:  Asian J Surg       Date:  2012-05-25       Impact factor: 2.767

6.  Laparoscopic vs open distal pancreatectomy: a single-institution comparative study.

Authors:  Sandeep S Vijan; Kamran A Ahmed; William S Harmsen; Florencia G Que; Kaye M Reid-Lombardo; David M Nagorney; John H Donohue; Michael B Farnell; Michael L Kendrick
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2010-07

7.  Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: the Brisbane experience of forty-six cases.

Authors:  C Taylor; N O'Rourke; L Nathanson; I Martin; G Hopkins; L Layani; M Ghusn; G Fielding
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 3.647

8.  Conservation of the spleen with distal pancreatectomy.

Authors:  A L Warshaw
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  1988-05

9.  Single-center experience of laparoscopic left pancreatic resection in 359 consecutive patients: changing the surgical paradigm of left pancreatic resection.

Authors:  Ki Byung Song; Song Cheol Kim; Jae Berm Park; Young Hoon Kim; Young Soo Jung; Myung-Hwan Kim; Sung-Koo Lee; Dong-Wan Seo; Sang Soo Lee; Do Hyun Park; Duck Jong Han
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-05-10       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: results on a consecutive series of 58 patients.

Authors:  Gianluigi Melotti; Giovanni Butturini; Micaela Piccoli; Luca Casetti; Claudio Bassi; Barbara Mullineris; Maria Grazia Lazzaretti; Paolo Pederzoli
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 12.969

View more
  9 in total

1.  Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy-a propensity score-matched analysis from the German StuDoQ|Pancreas registry.

Authors:  Ulrich Friedrich Wellner; Hryhoriy Lapshyn; Detlef K Bartsch; Ioannis Mintziras; Ulrich Theodor Hopt; Uwe Wittel; Hans-Jörg Krämling; Hubert Preissinger-Heinzel; Matthias Anthuber; Bernd Geissler; Jörg Köninger; Katharina Feilhauer; Merten Hommann; Luisa Peter; Natascha C Nüssler; Thomas Klier; Ulrich Mansmann; Tobias Keck
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2016-11-04       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 2.  Attempts to prevent postoperative pancreatic fistula after distal pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Yoshihiro Miyasaka; Yasuhisa Mori; Kohei Nakata; Takao Ohtsuka; Masafumi Nakamura
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2016-06-20       Impact factor: 2.549

3.  Primary splenic carcinosarcoma with local invasion of chest wall: a rare case.

Authors:  Ting Sun; Gui-Feng Wang; Yun Zhang
Journal:  J Zhejiang Univ Sci B       Date:  2017 Aug.       Impact factor: 3.066

4.  Laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a single-center experience.

Authors:  Ai-Bin Zhang; Ye Wang; Chen Hu; Yan Shen; Shu-Sen Zheng
Journal:  J Zhejiang Univ Sci B       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 3.066

5.  Laparoscopic surgery for pancreatic neoplasms: the European association for endoscopic surgery clinical consensus conference.

Authors:  Bjørn Edwin; Mushegh A Sahakyan; Mohammad Abu Hilal; Marc G Besselink; Marco Braga; Jean-Michel Fabre; Laureano Fernández-Cruz; Brice Gayet; Song Cheol Kim; Igor E Khatkov
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-02-15       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  The Clinical Implications of Peripancreatic Fluid Collection After Distal Pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Jun Yoshino; Daisuke Ban; Toshiro Ogura; Kosuke Ogawa; Hiroaki Ono; Yusuke Mitsunori; Atsushi Kudo; Shinji Tanaka; Minoru Tanabe
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Enucleation of non-invasive tumors in the proximal pancreas: indications and outcomes compared with standard resections.

Authors:  Wen-Jie Lu; Hao-Lei Cai; Ma-Dong Ye; Yu-Lian Wu; Bin Xu
Journal:  J Zhejiang Univ Sci B       Date:  2017 Oct.       Impact factor: 3.066

8.  Risk factors for postoperative pancreatic fistula after laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy using stapler closure technique from one single surgeon.

Authors:  Tao Xia; Jia-Yu Zhou; Yi-Ping Mou; Xiao-Wu Xu; Ren-Chao Zhang; Yu-Cheng Zhou; Rong-Gao Chen; Chao Lu; Chao-Jie Huang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-02-24       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Pancreatic stump closure techniques and pancreatic fistula formation after distal pancreatectomy: Meta-analysis and single-center experience.

Authors:  Elke Tieftrunk; Ihsan Ekin Demir; Stephan Schorn; Mine Sargut; Florian Scheufele; Lenika Calavrezos; Rebekka Schirren; Helmut Friess; Güralp O Ceyhan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-06-13       Impact factor: 3.240

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.