Literature DB >> 28486387

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Propensity-matched Study From a National Cohort of Patients.

Ibrahim Nassour1, Sam C Wang1,2, Alana Christie3, Mathew M Augustine1,2, Matthew R Porembka1,2, Adam C Yopp1,2, Michael A Choti1,2, John C Mansour1,2, Xian-Jin Xie3, Patricio M Polanco1,2, Rebecca M Minter1,2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) in comparison with open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) in a national cohort of patients.
BACKGROUND: Limited well-controlled studies exist comparing perioperative outcomes between MIPD and OPD.
METHODS: Patients who underwent MIPD and OPD were abstracted from the 2014 to 2015 pancreas-targeted American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. OPD and MIPD patients were matched 3:1 using propensity score, and perioperative outcomes were compared.
RESULTS: A total of 4484 patients were identified with 334 (7.4%) undergoing MIPD. MIPD patients were younger, more likely to be White, and had a lower rate of weight loss. They were more likely to undergo classic Whipple and to have a drain placed. After 3:1 matching, 1002 OPD patients were compared with 334 MIPD patients. MIPD was associated with longer mean operative time (426.6 vs 359.6 minutes; P < 0.01), higher readmission rate (19.2% vs 14.3%; P = 0.04) and lower rate of prolonged length of stay >14 days (16.5% vs 21.6%; P = 0.047). The 2 groups had a similar rate of 30-day mortality (MIPD 1.8% vs OPD 1.3%; P = 0.51), overall complications, postoperative pancreatic fistula, and delayed gastric emptying. A secondary analysis comparing MIPD without conversion or open assist with OPD showed that MIPD patients had lower rates of overall surgical site infection (13.4% vs 19.6%; P = 0.04) and transfusion (7.9% vs 14.4%; P = 0.02).
CONCLUSIONS: MIPD had an equivalent morbidity and mortality rate to OPD, with the benefit of a decreased rate of prolonged length of stay, though this is partially offset by an increased readmission rate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 28486387     DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002259

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  27 in total

Review 1.  Pancreatic cancer treatment: better, but a long way to go.

Authors:  Robert J Torphy; Yuki Fujiwara; Richard D Schulick
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2020-05-30       Impact factor: 2.549

Review 2.  Robotic gastrointestinal surgery: learning curve, educational programs and outcomes.

Authors:  Charles C Vining; Kinga B Skowron; Melissa E Hogg
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2021-01-23

3.  Hospital Volume and the Costs Associated with Surgery for Pancreatic Cancer.

Authors:  Faiz Gani; Fabian M Johnston; Howard Nelson-Williams; Marcelo Cerullo; Mary E Dillhoff; Carl R Schmidt; Timothy M Pawlik
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2017-06-29       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  Risk Factors and Management of Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula Following Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Single-center Experience.

Authors:  Zun-Xiang Ke; Jiong-Xin Xiong; Jin Hu; Heng-Yu Chen; Qin Li; Yi-Qing Li
Journal:  Curr Med Sci       Date:  2019-12-16

5.  Composite Length of Stay, An Outcome Measure of Postoperative and Readmission Length of Stays in Pancreatoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Gregory A Williams; Jingxia Liu; William C Chapman; William G Hawkins; Ryan C Fields; Dominic E Sanford; Majella B Doyle; Chet W Hammill; Adeel S Khan; Steven M Strasberg
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2019-12-16       Impact factor: 3.452

6.  The role of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy-how take care of patient security?

Authors:  Trond A Buanes
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2019-07

7.  Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy: a NSQIP Analysis.

Authors:  Ibrahim Nassour; Sam C Wang; Matthew R Porembka; Adam C Yopp; Michael A Choti; Mathew M Augustine; Patricio M Polanco; John C Mansour; Rebecca M Minter
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2017-08-17       Impact factor: 3.452

8.  Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: oncological outcomes.

Authors:  Ibrahim Nassour; Michael A Choti; Matthew R Porembka; Adam C Yopp; Sam C Wang; Patricio M Polanco
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-12-26       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Image-guided minimally invasive endopancreatic surgery using a computer-assisted navigation system.

Authors:  Philip C Müller; Caroline Haslebacher; Daniel C Steinemann; Beat P Müller-Stich; Thilo Hackert; Matthias Peterhans; Benjamin Eigl
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-04-06       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Mortality after pancreaticoduodenectomy: assessing early and late causes of patient death.

Authors:  Sowmya Narayanan; Allison N Martin; Florence E Turrentine; Todd W Bauer; Reid B Adams; Victor M Zaydfudim
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2018-06-27       Impact factor: 2.192

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.