Literature DB >> 28126547

Single-Surgeon Learning Curve in 111 Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomies: Does Operative Time Tell the Whole Story?

Thijs de Rooij1, Federica Cipriani2, Majd Rawashdeh2, Susan van Dieren3, Salvatore Barbaro2, Mahmoud Abuawwad2, Jony van Hilst3, Martina Fontana2, Marc G Besselink3, Mohammed Abu Hilal4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is becoming the standard treatment for left-sided pancreatic disease. Learning curve identification is essential to ensure a safe and steady expansion. However, large (n > 30) single-surgeon learning curve series are lacking. STUDY
DESIGN: Data of all patients undergoing LDP between June 2007 and March 2016 by a single surgeon were collected prospectively. For learning curve analysis, the first 10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 LDPs were compared with LDPs performed thereafter.
RESULTS: In total, 111 LDPs were performed, of which 2 (2%) were converted. Median operative time was 200 minutes (interquartile range [IQR] 150 to 245 minutes) and median blood loss was 200 mL (IQR 100 to 300 mL). Learning curve analysis did not show improvements in operative time or blood loss. However, the number of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma increased after 30 cases and a significant reduction of Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher complications was seen; from 30% (n = 9) for cases 1 to 30 to 5% (n = 4) for cases 31 to 111 (p < 0.001). Similarly, the International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula grade B/C fistulas (33% [n = 10] vs 9% [n = 7]; p = 0.001) and percutaneous drainage rate (23% [n = 7] vs 4% [n = 3]; p = 0.001) were lower. Hospital stay was 7 days (IQR 5 to 13 days) for cases 1 to 30 vs 5 days (IQR 4 to 6 days) for cases 31 to 111 (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Operative outcomes of LDP remained stable with increasing surgical complexity over time. Postoperative outcomes, such as complications and length of hospital stay, improved after the first 30 cases. When describing learning curves, short- and long-term outcomes should be considered.
Copyright © 2017 American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28126547     DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2017.01.023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Surg        ISSN: 1072-7515            Impact factor:   6.113


  16 in total

1.  Technique and audited outcomes of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy combining the clockwise approach, progressive stepwise compression technique, and staple line reinforcement.

Authors:  Horacio J Asbun; Jony Van Hilst; Levan Tsamalaidze; Yoshikuni Kawaguchi; Dominic Sanford; Lucio Pereira; Marc G Besselink; John A Stauffer
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-05-28       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Surgical outcomes of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy in elderly and octogenarian patients: a single-center, comparative study.

Authors:  Ke Chen; Yu Pan; Yi-Ping Mou; Jia-Fei Yan; Ren-Chao Zhang; Miao-Zun Zhang; Jia-Yu Zhou; Xian-Fa Wang; Hendi Maher; Qi-Long Chen
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-10-25       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Evaluation of factors predicting loss of benefit provided by laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy compared to open approach.

Authors:  Stefano Partelli; Lorenzo Cinelli; Valentina Andreasi; Paola Maria Vittoria Rancoita; Nicolò Pecorelli; Domenico Tamburrino; Stefano Crippa; Massimo Falconi
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2021-10-23

4.  Surgical Management of Solid Pseudopapillary Tumor of the Pancreas.

Authors:  Julio C U Coelho; Marco A R da Costa; Eduardo J B Ramos; André Ritzmann Torres; Mariane Christina Savio; Christiano M P Claus
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2018 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.172

5.  A blunt dissection technique using the LigaSure vessel-sealing device improves perioperative outcomes and postoperative splenic-vessel patency after laparoscopic spleen- and splenic-vessel-preserving distal pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Sungho Kim; Yoo-Seok Yoon; Ho-Seong Han; Jai Young Cho; YoungRok Choi; In Gun Hyun; Kil Hwan Kim
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-02-27       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  True learning curve of laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with splenic vessel preservation.

Authors:  Hyung Sun Kim; Joon Seong Park; Dong Sup Yoon
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-06-22       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  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

8.  Splenic preservation versus splenectomy in laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a propensity score-matched study.

Authors:  Alma L Moekotte; Sanne Lof; Steve A White; Ravi Marudanayagam; Bilal Al-Sarireh; Sakhanat Rahman; Zahir Soonawalla; Mark Deakin; Somaiah Aroori; Basil Ammori; Dhanny Gomez; Gabriele Marangoni; Mohammed Abu Hilal
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-06-24       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Changing trends and outcomes associated with the adoption of minimally-invasive pancreato-biliary surgery: Contemporary experience of a 'self-taught' early adopter in Southeast Asia.

Authors:  Brian K P Goh; Gerald Zeng; Tze-Yi Low; Darren W Chua; Ye-Xin Koh; Kai-Inn Lim
Journal:  J Minim Access Surg       Date:  2020 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 1.407

10.  Reduced port minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: single-port laparoscopic versus robotic single-site plus one-port distal pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Hyung Joon Han; Chang Moo Kang
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-07-11       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.