Eric Jinyi Wu1, Tousif Kabir2,3, Joseph J Zhao1, Brian K P Goh4,5. 1. Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, Singapore, Singapore. 2. Department of General Surgery, Sengkang General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore. 3. Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore. 4. Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary and Transplant Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore. bsgkp@hotmail.com. 5. Duke NUS Medical School, Singapore, Singapore. bsgkp@hotmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) was introduced to improve the tangential resection margin rates and N1 node clearance following resection of malignancies of the pancreatic body and tail. Owing to its technical complexity, minimally invasive RAMPS (MI-RAMPS) has only been reported by a few centers worldwide. We performed this meta-analysis to compare both short- and long-term outcomes between open RAMPS (O-RAMPS) and minimally invasive RAMPS (MI-RAMPS). METHODS: A systematic search of the electronic databases PubMed, Medline (via PubMed), Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, Scopus and Web of Science was performed to identify eligible studies published in the English language regardless of study design. The outcomes of interest were operation time, estimated blood loss, transfusion rates, overall complications, Grade B/C post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) rates, post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), length of stay (LOS), R0 resection rates, lymph node (LN) yield and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Five non-randomized studies comprising of a total 229 patients (89 MI-RAMPS, 140 O-RAMPS) were included for analysis. Intra-operative blood loss was observed to be significantly reduced in MI-RAMPS as compared to O-RAMPS (MD -256.16, P < 0.001), while LN yield was higher in O-RAMPS as compared to MI-RAMPS (MD -2.73, P = 0.02). There were no statistically significant differences observed for the other perioperative, oncologic and survival outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis provides early evidence to suggest that MI-RAMPS may produce comparable short- and long-term outcomes to O-RAMPS, when undertaken by appropriately skilled surgeons in well-selected patients. Further large-scale prospective studies are required to corroborate these findings.
BACKGROUND: Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) was introduced to improve the tangential resection margin rates and N1 node clearance following resection of malignancies of the pancreatic body and tail. Owing to its technical complexity, minimally invasive RAMPS (MI-RAMPS) has only been reported by a few centers worldwide. We performed this meta-analysis to compare both short- and long-term outcomes between open RAMPS (O-RAMPS) and minimally invasive RAMPS (MI-RAMPS). METHODS: A systematic search of the electronic databases PubMed, Medline (via PubMed), Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, Scopus and Web of Science was performed to identify eligible studies published in the English language regardless of study design. The outcomes of interest were operation time, estimated blood loss, transfusion rates, overall complications, Grade B/C post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) rates, post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), length of stay (LOS), R0 resection rates, lymph node (LN) yield and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Five non-randomized studies comprising of a total 229 patients (89 MI-RAMPS, 140 O-RAMPS) were included for analysis. Intra-operative blood loss was observed to be significantly reduced in MI-RAMPS as compared to O-RAMPS (MD -256.16, P < 0.001), while LN yield was higher in O-RAMPS as compared to MI-RAMPS (MD -2.73, P = 0.02). There were no statistically significant differences observed for the other perioperative, oncologic and survival outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis provides early evidence to suggest that MI-RAMPS may produce comparable short- and long-term outcomes to O-RAMPS, when undertaken by appropriately skilled surgeons in well-selected patients. Further large-scale prospective studies are required to corroborate these findings.
Authors: J P Neoptolemos; D D Stocken; J A Dunn; J Almond; H G Beger; P Pederzoli; C Bassi; C Dervenis; L Fernandez-Cruz; F Lacaine; J Buckels; M Deakin; F A Adab; R Sutton; C Imrie; I Ihse; T Tihanyi; A Olah; S Pedrazzoli; D Spooner; D J Kerr; H Friess; M W Büchler Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2001-12 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Ioannis T Konstantinidis; Vikram Deshpande; Hui Zheng; Jennifer A Wargo; Carlos Fernandez-del Castillo; Sarah P Thayer; Vasiliki Androutsopoulos; Gregory Y Lauwers; Andrew L Warshaw; Cristina R Ferrone Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2009-11-25 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Cristina R Ferrone; Murray F Brennan; Mithat Gonen; Daniel G Coit; Yuman Fong; Sun Chung; Laura Tang; David Klimstra; Peter J Allen Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2007-11-20 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Andrew McGuigan; Paul Kelly; Richard C Turkington; Claire Jones; Helen G Coleman; R Stephen McCain Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2018-11-21 Impact factor: 5.742