Top

World Journal of Surgery

Published in:

01-05-2016 | Scientific Review

Systemic Review of the Feasibility and Advantage of Minimally Invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy

Authors: Chien-Hung Liao, Yu-Tung Wu, Yu-Yin Liu, Shang-Yu Wang, Shih-Ching Kang, Chun-Nan Yeh, Ta-Sen Yeh

Published in: World Journal of Surgery | Issue 5/2016

Abstract

Background

Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD), which includes laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) and robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD), is a complex procedure that needs to be performed by experienced surgeons. However, the safety and oncologic performance have not yet been conclusively determined.

Methods

A systematic literature search was performed using the Embase, Medline, and PubMed databases to identify all studies published up to March 2015. Articles written in English containing the keywords: “pancreaticoduodenectomy” or “Whipple operation” combined with “laparoscopy,” “laparoscopic,” “robotic,” “da vinci,” or “minimally invasive surgery” were selected. Furthermore, to increase the power of evidence, articles describing more than ten MIPDs were selected for this review.

Results

Twenty-six articles matched the review criteria. A total of 780 LPDs and 248 RPDs were included in the current review. The overall conversion rate to open surgery was 9.1 %. The weighted average operative time was 422.6 min, and the weighted average blood loss was 321.1 mL. The weighted average number of harvested lymph nodes was 17.1, and the rate of microscopically positive tumor margins was 8.4 %. The cumulative morbidity was 35.9 %, and a pancreatic fistula was reported in 17.0 % of cases. The average length of hospital stay was 12.4 days, and the mortality rate was 2.2 %.

Conclusions

In conclusion, after reviewing one-thousand cases in the current literature, we conclude that MIPD offers a good perioperative, postoperative, and oncologic outcome. MIPD is feasible and safe in well-selected patients.

Cameron JL, Riall TS, Coleman J et al (2006) One thousand consecutive pancreaticoduodenectomies. Ann Surg 244:10–15CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Yamaue H, Tani M, Kawai M et al (2012) Pancreatic dissection in the procedure of pancreaticoduodenectomy (with videos). J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 19:95–99CrossRefPubMed

Ramacciato G, Mercantini P, Petrucciani N et al (2011) Risk factors of pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a collective review. Am Surg 77:257–269PubMed

Croome KP, Farnell MB, Que FG et al (2014) Total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: oncologic advantages over open approaches? Ann Surg 260:633–638 discussion 638–640 CrossRefPubMed

Boggi U, Signori S, De Lio N et al (2013) Feasibility of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Br J Surg 100:917–925CrossRefPubMed

Asbun HJ, Stauffer JA (2012) Laparoscopic vs open pancreaticoduodenectomy: overall outcomes and severity of complications using the Accordion Severity Grading System. J Am Coll Surg 215:810–819CrossRefPubMed

Zenoni SA, Arnoletti JP, Sebastian G (2013) Recent developments in surgery: minimally invasive approaches for patients requiring pancreaticoduodenectomy. JAMA Surg 148:1154–1157CrossRefPubMed

Gagner M, Pomp A (1994) Laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy. Surg Endosc 8:408–410CrossRefPubMed

Fingerhut A (2011) Surgical ego, the good, the bad, and the ugly. Surg Innov 18:97–98CrossRefPubMed

10.

Boggi U, Amorese G, Vistoli F et al (2015) Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic literature review. Surg Endosc 29:9–23CrossRefPubMed

11.

Kendrick ML, Cusati D (2010) Total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: feasibility and outcome in an early experience. Surg Endosc 145:19–23

12.

Palanivelu C, Jani K, Senthilnathan P et al (2007) Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: technique and outcomes. J Am Coll Surg 205:222–230CrossRefPubMed

13.

Kim SC, Song KB, Jung YS et al (2013) Short-term clinical outcomes for 100 consecutive cases of laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy: improvement with surgical experience. Surg Endosc 27:95–103CrossRefPubMed

14.

Lei P, Wei B, Guo W et al (2014) Minimally invasive surgical approach compared with open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis on the feasibility and safety. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutaneous 24:296–305CrossRef

15.

Bao PQ, Mazirka PO, Watkins KT (2014) Retrospective comparison of robot-assisted minimally invasive versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary neoplasms. J Gastrointest Surg 18:682–689CrossRefPubMed

16.

Gagner M, Pomp A (1997) Laparoscopic pancreatic resection: is it worthwhile? J Gastrointest Surg 1:20–25 discussion 25–6 CrossRefPubMed

17.

Dulucq JL, Wintringer P, Mahajna A (2006) Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for benign and malignant diseases. Surg Endosc 20:1045–1050CrossRefPubMed

18.

Pugliese R, Scandroglio I, Sansonna F et al (2008) Laparoscopic ancreaticoduodenectomy: a retrospective review of 19 cases. Surg Endosc 18:13–18

19.

Zureikat AH, Breaux JA, Steel JL et al (2011) Can laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy be safely implemented? J Gastrointest Surg 15:1151–1157CrossRefPubMed

20.

Kuroki T, Adachi T, Okamoto T et al (2012) A non-randomized comparative study of laparoscopy-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy and open pancreaticoduodenectomy. Hepato Gastroenterol 59:570–573

21.

Corcione F, Pirozzi F, Cuccurullo D et al (2013) Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: experience of 22 cases. Surg Endosc 27:2131–2136CrossRefPubMed

22.

Lei Z, Zhifei W, Jun X et al (2013) Pancreaticojejunostomy sleeve reconstruction after pancreaticoduodenectomy in laparoscopic and open surgery. J Soc Laparoend 17:68–73CrossRef

23.

Lee JS, Han JH, Na GH et al (2013) Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy assisted by mini-laparotomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutaneous 23:e98–e102CrossRef

24.

Cho A, Yamamoto H, Nagata M et al (2009) Comparison of laparoscopy-assisted and open pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary disease. Am J Surg 198:445–449CrossRefPubMed

25.

Langan RC, Graham JA, Chin AB et al (2014) Laparoscopic-assisted versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: early favorable physical quality-of-life measures. Surgery 156:379–384CrossRefPubMed

26.

Wang Y, Bergman S, Piedimonte S et al (2014) Bridging the gap between open and minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy: the hybrid approach. Can J Surg 57:263–270CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Liu Z, Yu M-C, Zhao R et al (2015) Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy via a reverse-’’V” approach with four ports: initial experience and perioperative outcomes. World J Gastroenterol 21:1588–1594CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Senthilnathan P, Srivatsan Gurumurthy S, Gul SI et al (2015) Long-term results of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic and periampullary cancer-experience of 130 cases from a tertiary-care center in South India. J Laparoendosc Adv S 25:295–300CrossRef

29.

Wang M, Zhang H, Wu Z et al (2015) Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: single-surgeon experience. Surg Endosc. doi:10.1007/s00464-015-4154-5

30.

Giulianotti PC, Sbrana F, Bianco FM et al (2010) Robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreatic surgery: single-surgeon experience. Surg Endosc 24:1646–1657CrossRefPubMed

31.

Lai ECH, Yang GPC, Tang CN (2012) Robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy–a comparative study. Int J Surg 10:475–479CrossRefPubMed

32.

Chalikonda S, Aguilar-Saavedra JR, Walsh RM (2012) Laparoscopic robotic-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy: a case-matched comparison with open resection. Surg Endosc 26:2397–2402CrossRefPubMed

33.

Zhan Q, Deng X-X, Han B et al (2013) Robotic-assisted pancreatic resection: a report of 47 cases. Int J Med Robot Comput 9:44–51CrossRef

34.

Chen S, Chen J-Z, Zhan Q et al (2015) Robot-assisted laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a prospective, matched, mid-term follow-up study. Surg Endosc. doi:10.1007/s00464-015-4140-y

35.

Speicher PJ, Nussbaum DP, White RR et al (2014) Defining the learning curve for team-based laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Ann Surg Oncol 21(12):4014–4019CrossRefPubMed

36.

Bassi C, Dervenis C, Butturini G et al (2005) Postoperative pancreatic fistula: an international study group (ISGPF) definition. Surgery 138:8–13CrossRefPubMed

37.

Park A, Schwartz R, Tandan V et al (1999) Laparoscopic pancreatic surgery. Am J Surg 177:158–163CrossRefPubMed

38.

Underwood RA, Soper NJ (1999) Current status of laparoscopic surgery of the pancreas. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 6:154–164CrossRef

39.

Lai ECH, Tang CN (2013) Current status of robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy: a comprehensive review. Asian J Endosc Surg 6:158–164CrossRefPubMed

40.

Ammori BJ, Ayiomamitis GD (2011) Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy: a UK experience and a systematic review of the literature. Surg Endosc 25:2084–2099CrossRefPubMed

41.

Farnell MB, Pearson RK, Sarr MG et al (2005) A prospective randomized trial comparing standard pancreatoduodenectomy with pancreatoduodenectomy with extended lymphadenectomy in resectable pancreatic head adenocarcinoma. Surgery 138:618–628 discussion 628–30 CrossRefPubMed

42.

Pedrazzoli S, DiCarlo V, Dionigi R et al (1998) Standard versus extended lymphadenectomy associated with pancreatoduodenectomy in the surgical treatment of adenocarcinoma of the head of the pancreas: a multicenter, prospective, randomized study. Lymphadenectomy Study Group. Ann Surg 228:508–517CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

43.

Zeh HJ, Zureikat AH, Secrest A et al (2012) Outcomes after robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary lesions. Ann Surg Oncol 19:864–870CrossRefPubMed

44.

Yeo CJ, Cameron JL, Sohn TA et al (1999) Pancreaticoduodenectomy with or without extended retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy for periampullary adenocarcinoma: comparison of morbidity and mortality and short-term outcome. Ann Surg 229:613–622 discussion 622–4 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

45.

Fernández-Cruz L, Cosa R, Blanco L et al (2007) Curative laparoscopic resection for pancreatic neoplasms: a critical analysis from a single institution. J Gastrointest Surg 11:1607–1622 discussion 1621–2 CrossRefPubMed

46.

Kang CM, Lee SH, Chung MJ et al (2015) Laparoscopic pancreatic reconstruction technique following laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 22:202–210CrossRefPubMed

47.

Honda G, Kurata M, Okuda Y et al (2013) Novel device for pancreaticojejunostomy via a pure laparoscopic approach. J Am Coll Surg 216:e73–e76CrossRefPubMed

48.

Sánchez-Cabús S, Pittau G et al (2015) Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: hybrid surgical technique. J Am Coll Surg 220:e7–e11CrossRefPubMed

49.

Cho A, Yamamoto H, Kainuma O et al (2014) Performing simple and safe dunking pancreaticojejunostomy using mattress sutures in pure laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surg Endosc 28:315–318CrossRefPubMed

50.

Nakamura Y, Matsumoto S, Matsushita A et al (2012) Pancreaticojejunostomy with closure of the pancreatic stump by endoscopic linear stapler in laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a reliable technique and benefits for pancreatic resection. Asian J Endosc Surg 5:191–194CrossRefPubMed

51.

Fisher WE, Hodges SE, Wu MF et al (2012) Assessment of the learning curve for pancreaticoduodenectomy. Am J Surg 203:684–690CrossRefPubMed

52.

Matsuoka L, Parekh D (2012) The minimally invasive approach to surgical management of pancreatic diseases. Gastroenterol Clin N Am 41:77–101CrossRef

53.

Dokmak S, Ftériche FS, Aussilhou B et al (2015) Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy should not be routine for resection of periampullary tumors. J Am Coll Surg 220:831–838CrossRefPubMed

Title: Systemic Review of the Feasibility and Advantage of Minimally Invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy
Authors: Chien-Hung Liao
Yu-Tung Wu
Yu-Yin Liu
Shang-Yu Wang
Shih-Ching Kang
Chun-Nan Yeh
Ta-Sen Yeh
Publication date: 01-05-2016
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Published in: World Journal of Surgery / Issue 5/2016
Print ISSN: 0364-2313
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2323
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-016-3433-1

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Systemic Review of the Feasibility and Advantage of Minimally Invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 5/2016

Where Oncologic and Surgical Complication Scoring Systems Collide: Time for a New Consensus for CRS/HIPEC

Intrapleural Fibrinolytic Therapy for Residual Coagulated Hemothorax After Lung Surgery

Absence of Benefit of Transcatheter Arterial Chemoembolization (TACE) in Patients with Resectable Solitary Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Clinical Significance of Splenic Hilar Dissection with Splenectomy in Advanced Proximal Gastric Cancer: An Analysis at a Single Institution in Japan

Surgical and Survival Outcome Following Truly Palliative Gastrectomy in Patients with Incurable Gastric Cancer

Surgical Apgar Score Predicted Postoperative Morbidity After Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer