TY - JOUR
T1 - The clinical implication of minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for non-pancreatic periampullary cancer
T2 - a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis
AU - Uijterwijk, Bas A.
AU - Kasai, Meidai
AU - Lemmers, Daniel H. L.
AU - Chinnusamy, Palanivelu
AU - van Hilst, Jony
AU - Ielpo, Benedetto
AU - Wei, Kongyuan
AU - Song, Ki Byung
AU - Kim, Song C.
AU - Klompmaker, Sjors
AU - Jang, Jin-Young
AU - Herremans, Kelly M.
AU - Bencini, Lapo
AU - Coratti, Andrea
AU - Mazzola, Michele
AU - Menon, Krishna V.
AU - Goh, Brian K. P.
AU - Qin, Renyi
AU - Besselink, Marc G.
AU - Abu Hilal, Mohammed
N1 - Funding Information: Kelly M. Herremans is supported by the National Human Genome Research Institute (T32 HG0008958). Marc G. Besselink has received grants from Intuitive for the LEARNBOT European robot Whipple training program, the DIPLOMA-2 trial, and the E-MIPS quality registry, from Medtronic for the investigator-initiated DIPLOMA trial and from Ethicon for the PANDORA trial and the E-MIPS quality registry. Bas A. Uijterwijk, Meidai Kasai, Daniel H.L. Lemmers, Palanivelu Chinnusamy, Jony van Hilst, Benedetto Ielpo, Kongyuan Wei, Ki Byung Song, Song C Kim, Sjors Klompmaker, Jin-Young Jang, Kelly M. Herremans, Lapo Bencini, Andrea Coratti, Michele Mazzola, Krishna V. Menon, Brian KP Goh, Renyi Qin, Marc G. Besselink, and Mohammed Abu Hilal have no conflicts of interests or financial ties to disclose. Publisher Copyright: © 2023, The Author(s).
PY - 2023/12/1
Y1 - 2023/12/1
N2 - Background: Most studies on minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) combine patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancers even though there is substantial heterogeneity between these tumors. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the role of MIPD compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) in patients with non-pancreatic periampullary cancer (NPPC). Methods: A systematic review of Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases was performed by two independent reviewers to identify studies comparing MIPD and OPD for NPPC (ampullary, distal cholangio, and duodenal adenocarcinoma) (01/2015–12/2021). Individual patient data were required from all identified studies. Primary outcomes were (90-day) mortality, and major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo 3a-5). Secondary outcomes were postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), blood-loss, length of hospital stay (LOS), and overall survival (OS). Results: Overall, 16 studies with 1949 patients were included, combining 928 patients with ampullary, 526 with distal cholangio, and 461 with duodenal cancer. In total, 902 (46.3%) patients underwent MIPD, and 1047 (53.7%) patients underwent OPD. The rates of 90-day mortality, major morbidity, POPF, DGE, PPH, blood-loss, and length of hospital stay did not differ between MIPD and OPD. Operation time was 67 min longer in the MIPD group (P = 0.009). A decrease in DFS for ampullary (HR 2.27, P = 0.019) and distal cholangio (HR 1.84, P = 0.025) cancer, as well as a decrease in OS for distal cholangio (HR 1.71, P = 0.045) and duodenal cancer (HR 4.59, P < 0.001) was found in the MIPD group. Conclusions: This individual patient data meta-analysis of MIPD versus OPD in patients with NPPC suggests that MIPD is not inferior in terms of short-term morbidity and mortality. Several major limitations in long-term data highlight a research gap that should be studied in prospective maintained international registries or randomized studies for ampullary, distal cholangio, and duodenum cancer separately. Protocol registration: PROSPERO (CRD42021277495) on the 25th of October 2021.
AB - Background: Most studies on minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) combine patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancers even though there is substantial heterogeneity between these tumors. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the role of MIPD compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) in patients with non-pancreatic periampullary cancer (NPPC). Methods: A systematic review of Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases was performed by two independent reviewers to identify studies comparing MIPD and OPD for NPPC (ampullary, distal cholangio, and duodenal adenocarcinoma) (01/2015–12/2021). Individual patient data were required from all identified studies. Primary outcomes were (90-day) mortality, and major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo 3a-5). Secondary outcomes were postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), blood-loss, length of hospital stay (LOS), and overall survival (OS). Results: Overall, 16 studies with 1949 patients were included, combining 928 patients with ampullary, 526 with distal cholangio, and 461 with duodenal cancer. In total, 902 (46.3%) patients underwent MIPD, and 1047 (53.7%) patients underwent OPD. The rates of 90-day mortality, major morbidity, POPF, DGE, PPH, blood-loss, and length of hospital stay did not differ between MIPD and OPD. Operation time was 67 min longer in the MIPD group (P = 0.009). A decrease in DFS for ampullary (HR 2.27, P = 0.019) and distal cholangio (HR 1.84, P = 0.025) cancer, as well as a decrease in OS for distal cholangio (HR 1.71, P = 0.045) and duodenal cancer (HR 4.59, P < 0.001) was found in the MIPD group. Conclusions: This individual patient data meta-analysis of MIPD versus OPD in patients with NPPC suggests that MIPD is not inferior in terms of short-term morbidity and mortality. Several major limitations in long-term data highlight a research gap that should be studied in prospective maintained international registries or randomized studies for ampullary, distal cholangio, and duodenum cancer separately. Protocol registration: PROSPERO (CRD42021277495) on the 25th of October 2021.
KW - Ampulla of Vater carcinoma
KW - Distal cholangiocarcinoma
KW - Duodenal adenocarcinoma
KW - Individual patient data meta-analysis
KW - Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy
KW - Minimally invasive surgery
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85168216774&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-023-03047-4
DO - https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-023-03047-4
M3 - Review article
C2 - 37581763
SN - 1435-2443
VL - 408
JO - Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery
JF - Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery
IS - 1
M1 - 311
ER -