Literature DB >> 27444856

Factors associated with and consequences of open conversion after laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: initial experience at a single institution.

Brian K P Goh1,2, Chung Yip Chan1, Ser Yee Lee1, Weng Hoong Chan3, Peng Chung Cheow1, Pierce K H Chow1,2, London L P J Ooi1,2, Alexander Y F Chung1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is increasingly adopted today. This study aims to determine factors associated with and consequences of open conversion after LDP.
METHODS: Retrospective review of the first 40 consecutive LDP performed for pancreatic tumors from 2006 to 2015 was performed. Individual surgeon volume was stratified by ≤5 versus >5 cases and institution experience was stratified by two time periods 2006-2010 and 2011-2015.
RESULTS: Two high-volume surgeons performed 19 cases with an average case volume of ≥2/year whereas 10 low-volume surgeons performed 21 cases with an average case volume of <1/year. Median age of patients was 57.6 (range, 21-78) years. LDP was performed for malignancy in four (10%) patients. The median tumor size was 25 (range, 8-75) mm. Eight patients (20%) underwent subtotal pancreatectomies and seven (17.5%) had concomitant surgeries. Eleven (27.5%) LDP were spleen-saving procedures. Ten (25%) procedures were converted to open. Twenty-nine (72.5%) patients experienced 90-day/in-hospital morbidity of which eight (20%) were major (>grade II). There were 24 (60%) pancreatic fistulas of which 10 (25%) were grade B. Univariate analyses demonstrated that splenectomy (10 (34.5%) versus 0, P = 0.025), individual surgeon volume (<5 cases) (8 (38.1%) versus 2 (10.15%), P = 0.044) and institution experience (5 (55.6%) versus 5 (16.1%), P = 0.016) were factors associated with open conversion after LDP. Open conversion was associated with an increased rate of intra-operative blood transfusion (P = 0.053).
CONCLUSIONS: Splenectomy, institution experience and individual surgeon volume were the factors associated with open conversion after LDP.
© 2016 Royal Australasian College of Surgeons.

Entities:  

Keywords:  conversion; laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy; laparoscopic pancreatectomy; outcome; robotic pancreatectomy

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27444856     DOI: 10.1111/ans.13661

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  ANZ J Surg        ISSN: 1445-1433            Impact factor:   1.872


  12 in total

Review 1.  Surgical resection of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm by minimally invasive surgery-the robotic approach?

Authors:  Roxanne Y A Teo; Brian K P Goh
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2018-02

2.  First experience with robotic pancreatoduodenectomy in Singapore.

Authors:  Tze-Yi Low; Ye-Xin Koh; Brian Kp Goh
Journal:  Singapore Med J       Date:  2019-09-19       Impact factor: 1.858

3.  Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: which factors are related to open conversion? Lessons learned from 68 consecutive procedures in a high-volume pancreatic center.

Authors:  Riccardo Casadei; Claudio Ricci; Carlo Alberto Pacilio; Carlo Ingaldi; Giovanni Taffurelli; Francesco Minni
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-02-12       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  A single institution experience with robotic and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies.

Authors:  Shi Qing Lee; Tousif Kabir; Ye-Xin Koh; Jin-Yao Teo; Ser-Yee Lee; Juinn-Huar Kam; Peng-Chung Cheow; Prema Raj Jeyaraj; Pierce K H Chow; London L Ooi; Alexander Y F Chung; Chung-Yip Chan; Brian K P Goh
Journal:  Ann Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg       Date:  2020-08-31

5.  Critical Appraisal of the Impact of the Systematic Adoption of Advanced Minimally Invasive Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery on the Surgical Management of Mirizzi Syndrome.

Authors:  Ye-Xin Koh; Pallavi Basu; Yi-Xin Liew; Jin-Yao Teo; Juinn-Huar Kam; Ser-Yee Lee; Peng-Chung Cheow; Premaraj Jeyaraj; Pierce K H Chow; Alexander Y F Chung; London L P J Ooi; Chung-Yip Chan; Brian K P Goh
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 3.352

6.  Risk factors and outcomes of conversion in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review.

Authors:  A Balduzzi; N van der Heijde; A Alseidi; S Dokmak; M L Kendrick; P M Polanco; D E Sandford; S V Shrikhande; C M Vollmer; S E Wang; H J Zeh; M Abu Hilal; H J Asbun; M G Besselink
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2020-12-10       Impact factor: 3.445

7.  Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy Following Prior Upper Abdominal Surgery (Pancreatectomy and Prior Surgery).

Authors:  Mushegh A Sahakyan; Tore Tholfsen; Dyre Kleive; Sheraz Yaqub; Airazat M Kazaryan; Trond Buanes; Bård Ingvald Røsok; Knut Jørgen Labori; Bjørn Edwin
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2020-11-10       Impact factor: 3.452

8.  Converted laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: is there an impact on patient outcome and total cost?

Authors:  Riccardo Casadei; Carlo Ingaldi; Claudio Ricci; Emilio De Raffele; Laura Alberici; Francesco Minni
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2022-02-07       Impact factor: 2.895

9.  Evolution of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomies at a single institution.

Authors:  Brian K P Goh; Ser-Yee Lee; Juinn-Huar Kam; Hui Ling Soh; Peng-Chung Cheow; Pierce K H Chow; London L P J Ooi; Alexander Y F Chung; Chung-Yip Chan
Journal:  J Minim Access Surg       Date:  2018 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 1.407

10.  Minimally-invasive versus open enucleation for pancreatic tumours: A propensity-score adjusted analysis.

Authors:  Tousif Kabir; Zoe Z X Tan; Nicholas Syn; Alexander Y F Chung; London L P J Ooi; Brian K P Goh
Journal:  Ann Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg       Date:  2019-08-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.