Literature DB >> 28849407

Conversion of Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy: Predictors and Outcomes.

Ibrahim Nassour1, Sam C Wang1, Matthew R Porembka1, Mathew M Augustine1, Adam C Yopp1, John C Mansour1, Rebecca M Minter1, Michael A Choti1, Patricio M Polanco2,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Data on the risk factors for conversion during minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) and its effect on postoperative outcomes are limited.
METHODS: This retrospective study used the pancreas-targeted American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database to compare MIDP requiring unplanned conversion with completed MIDP and open distal pancreatectomy (ODP).
RESULTS: Of the 2926 cases identified in this study, 48.8% had ODP, 42.8% had MIDP, and 7.9% had conversion to MIDP. The conversion rate was 15.3% overall, 17.3% for laparoscopic surgery, and 8.5% for robotic surgery (p < 0.001). The risk factors associated with conversion were higher body mass index (BMI), low preoperative albumin level, a current smoking habit, and malignant T3/T4 disease or chronic pancreatitis compared with benign tumor smaller than 5 cm. A robotic approach was associated with a lower adjusted conversion rate than laparoscopy (odds ratio [OR] 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.19-0.52). After adjustment, conversion was associated with a higher overall complication rate than MIDP (OR 1.89; 95% CI 1.35-2.66) or ODP (OR 1.41; 95% CI 1.00-1.98).
CONCLUSIONS: Chronic pancreatitis, large malignant tumors, higher BMI, lower serum albumin, and a current smoking habit were shown to be independent risk factors for conversion during MIDP. A robotic approach was associated with a lower conversion rate than laparoscopic MIDP. Conversion of MIDP was associated with a higher overall complication rate than completed MIDP or ODP. Adequate patient selection for MIDP may prevent conversion and associated increased morbidity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28849407     DOI: 10.1245/s10434-017-6062-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1068-9265            Impact factor:   5.344


  13 in total

Review 1.  State of the art robotic distal pancreatectomy: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Amr I Al Abbas; Herbert J Zeh Iii; Patricio M Polanco
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2021-05-29

2.  Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic left pancreatectomy at a high-volume, minimally invasive center.

Authors:  William B Lyman; Michael Passeri; Amit Sastry; Allyson Cochran; David A Iannitti; Dionisios Vrochides; Erin H Baker; John B Martinie
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-11-12       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  National Trends in Robotic Pancreas Surgery.

Authors:  Richard S Hoehn; Ibrahim Nassour; Mohamed A Adam; Sharon Winters; Alessandro Paniccia; Amer H Zureikat
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2020-04-20       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  Predictors and outcomes of converted minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy: a propensity score matched analysis.

Authors:  Caitlin A Hester; Ibrahim Nassour; Alana Christie; Mathew M Augustine; John C Mansour; Patricio M Polanco; Matthew R Porembka; Thomas H Shoultz; Sam C Wang; Adam C Yopp; Herbert J Zeh; Rebecca M Minter
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-04-23       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  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

6.  A National Assessment of Optimal Oncologic Surgery for Distal Pancreatic Adenocarcinomas.

Authors:  Katherine Hrebinko; Samer Tohme; Richard S Hoehn; Samer AlMasri; Sidrah Khan; Christof Kaltenmeier; Kenneth K Lee; Alessandro Paniccia; Amer Zureikat; Ibrahim Nassour
Journal:  Pancreas       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 3.327

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.  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.  The oncological safety in minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Du-Jiang Yang; Jun-Jie Xiong; Hui-Min Lu; Yi Wei; Ling Zhang; Shan Lu; Wei-Ming Hu
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-02-04       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Safety and effectiveness of the da Vinci robot with the "3+2" mode for distal pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Weipeng Zhan; Ming Hu; Caiwen Han; Hongwei Tian; Wutang Jing; Xiaofei Li; Hao Shi; Xiaojun Yang; Tiankang Guo; He Su; Yuntao Ma
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2019-06-18       Impact factor: 4.452

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.