Literature DB >> 31668841

Efficacy of extended versus standard lymphadenectomy in pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic head adenocarcinoma. An update meta-analysis.

Wei Wang1, Ying He2, Lun Wu1, Lin Ye1, Lichao Yao1, Zhigang Tang3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection is the only possible cure for pancreatic cancer, it remains controversial whether extend lymphadenectomy in pancreatoduodenectomy (EPD) is better than standard lymphadenectomy in pancreatoduodenectomy (SPD). The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of EPD with SPD for pancreatic head adenocarcinoma.
METHODS: A specific search of online databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane library was conducted from January 1990 to October 2018. Relative perioperative outcomes were synthesized. Single-arm meta-analysis was also performed.
RESULTS: A total of eight studies involving 687 (342 vs 345) patients were included for analysis in our study. The number of lymph nodes harvested [24.54 vs 13.29; weighted mean difference (WMD) -10.69, P = 0.000], operative time (469.84 min vs 354.85 min; WMD -99.09, P = 0.000), and diarrhea (postoperative three months) [45.1% vs 18.2%; odds radio (OR) 0.20, P = 0.014] were significantly higher in patients who underwent EPD than SPD. The perioperative complications (35% vs 28.8%; OR 0.79, P = 0.186), tumor size (3.27 cm vs 3.248 cm; WMD -0.11, P = 0.256), lymph node metastasis (66% vs 55.9%; OR 0.71, P = 0.105), and positive margin (10.4% vs 11.3%; OR 1.28, P = 0.392) were no significant differences between EPD group and SPD group. Extended lymphadenectomy in pancreatoduodenectomy dose not contribute to the overall survival of patients with adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head [hazard ratio (HR) 0.95; 95% CI 0.78-1.15; P = 0.61].
CONCLUSION: The update meta-analysis shows that EPD failed to improve the overall survival, may even lead to increased morbidity.
Copyright © 2019 IAP and EPC. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Extended; Lymph node dissection; Pancreatic carcinoma; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Standard

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31668841     DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2019.10.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pancreatology        ISSN: 1424-3903            Impact factor:   3.996


  5 in total

1.  Predictors for Survival in an International Cohort of Patients Undergoing Distal Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  M Korrel; S Lof; J van Hilst; A Alseidi; U Boggi; O R Busch; S van Dieren; B Edwin; D Fuks; T Hackert; T Keck; I Khatkov; G Malleo; I Poves; M A Sahakyan; C Bassi; M Abu Hilal; M G Besselink
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-06-25       Impact factor: 5.344

2.  Korean Surgical Practice Guideline for Pancreatic Cancer 2022: A summary of evidence-based surgical approaches

Authors:  Seung Eun Lee; Sung-Sik Han; Chang Moo Kang; Wooil Kwon; Kwang Yeol Paik; Ki Byung Song; Jae Do Yang; Jun Chul Chung; Chi-Young Jeong; Sun-Whe Kim
Journal:  Ann Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg       Date:  2022-02-28

3.  Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Munseok Choi; Seoung Yoon Rho; Sung Hyun Kim; Ho Kyoung Hwang; Woo Jung Lee; Chang Moo Kang
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Surg       Date:  2021-09-15

4.  Importance of Nodal Metastases Location in Pancreatoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Results from a Prospective, Lymphadenectomy Protocol.

Authors:  Giuseppe Malleo; Laura Maggino; Fabio Casciani; Gabriella Lionetto; Sara Nobile; Gianni Lazzarin; Salvatore Paiella; Alessandro Esposito; Paola Capelli; Claudio Luchini; Aldo Scarpa; Claudio Bassi; Roberto Salvia
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2022-02-21       Impact factor: 4.339

Review 5.  [Radiologic Evaluation for Resectability of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma].

Authors:  Shin Hye Hwang; Mi-Suk Park
Journal:  Taehan Yongsang Uihakhoe Chi       Date:  2021-03-31
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.