TY - JOUR
T1 - Outcomes After Minimally-invasive Versus Open Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Pan-European Propensity Score Matched Study
AU - European Consortium on Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery (E-MIPS)
AU - Klompmaker, Sjors
AU - van Hilst, Jony
AU - Wellner, Ulrich F.
AU - Busch, Olivier R.
AU - Coratti, Andrea
AU - D'Hondt, Mathieu
AU - Dokmak, Safi
AU - Festen, Sebastiaan
AU - Kerem, Mustafa
AU - Khatkov, Igor
AU - Lips, Daan J.
AU - Lombardo, Carlo
AU - Luyer, Misha
AU - Manzoni, Alberto
AU - Molenaar, Izaäk Q.
AU - Rosso, Edoardo
AU - Saint-Marc, Olivier
AU - Vansteenkiste, Franky
AU - Wittel, Uwe A.
AU - Bonsing, Bert
AU - Groot Koerkamp, Bas
AU - Abu Hilal, Mohammed
AU - Fuks, David
AU - Poves, Ignasi
AU - Keck, Tobias
AU - Boggi, Ugo
AU - Besselink, Marc G.
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2019-2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/2/1
Y1 - 2020/2/1
N2 - Objective:To assess short-term outcomes after minimally invasive (laparoscopic, robot-assisted, and hybrid) pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) among European centers.Background:Current evidence on MIPD is based on national registries or single expert centers. International, matched studies comparing outcomes for MIPD and OPD are lacking.Methods:Retrospective propensity score matched study comparing MIPD in 14 centers (7 countries) performing ≥10 MIPDs annually (2012-2017) versus OPD in 53 German/Dutch surgical registry centers performing ≥10 OPDs annually (2014-2017). Primary outcome was 30-day major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo ≥3).Results:Of 4220 patients, 729/730 MIPDs (412 laparoscopic, 184 robot-assisted, and 130 hybrid) were matched to 729 OPDs. Median annual case-volume was 19 MIPDs (interquartile range, IQR 13-22), including the first MIPDs performed in 10/14 centers, and 31 OPDs (IQR 21-38). Major morbidity (28% vs 30%, P = 0.526), mortality (4.0% vs 3.3%, P = 0.576), percutaneous drainage (12% vs 12%, P = 0.809), reoperation (11% vs 13%, P = 0.329), and hospital stay (mean 17 vs 17 days, P > 0.99) were comparable between MIPD and OPD. Grade-B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) (23% vs 13%, P < 0.001) occurred more frequently after MIPD. Single-row pancreatojejunostomy was associated with POPF in MIPD (odds ratio, OR 2.95, P < 0.001), but not in OPD. Laparoscopic, robot-assisted, and hybrid MIPD had comparable major morbidity (27% vs 27% vs 35%), POPF (24% vs 19% vs 25%), and mortality (2.9% vs 5.2% vs 5.4%), with a fewer conversions in robot-assisted- versus laparoscopic MIPD (5% vs 26%, P < 0.001).Conclusions:In the early experience of 14 European centers performing ≥10 MIPDs annually, no differences were found in major morbidity, mortality, and hospital stay between MIPD and OPD. The high rates of POPF and conversion, and the lack of superior outcomes (ie, hospital stay, morbidity) could indicate that more experience and higher annual MIPD volumes are needed.
AB - Objective:To assess short-term outcomes after minimally invasive (laparoscopic, robot-assisted, and hybrid) pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) among European centers.Background:Current evidence on MIPD is based on national registries or single expert centers. International, matched studies comparing outcomes for MIPD and OPD are lacking.Methods:Retrospective propensity score matched study comparing MIPD in 14 centers (7 countries) performing ≥10 MIPDs annually (2012-2017) versus OPD in 53 German/Dutch surgical registry centers performing ≥10 OPDs annually (2014-2017). Primary outcome was 30-day major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo ≥3).Results:Of 4220 patients, 729/730 MIPDs (412 laparoscopic, 184 robot-assisted, and 130 hybrid) were matched to 729 OPDs. Median annual case-volume was 19 MIPDs (interquartile range, IQR 13-22), including the first MIPDs performed in 10/14 centers, and 31 OPDs (IQR 21-38). Major morbidity (28% vs 30%, P = 0.526), mortality (4.0% vs 3.3%, P = 0.576), percutaneous drainage (12% vs 12%, P = 0.809), reoperation (11% vs 13%, P = 0.329), and hospital stay (mean 17 vs 17 days, P > 0.99) were comparable between MIPD and OPD. Grade-B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) (23% vs 13%, P < 0.001) occurred more frequently after MIPD. Single-row pancreatojejunostomy was associated with POPF in MIPD (odds ratio, OR 2.95, P < 0.001), but not in OPD. Laparoscopic, robot-assisted, and hybrid MIPD had comparable major morbidity (27% vs 27% vs 35%), POPF (24% vs 19% vs 25%), and mortality (2.9% vs 5.2% vs 5.4%), with a fewer conversions in robot-assisted- versus laparoscopic MIPD (5% vs 26%, P < 0.001).Conclusions:In the early experience of 14 European centers performing ≥10 MIPDs annually, no differences were found in major morbidity, mortality, and hospital stay between MIPD and OPD. The high rates of POPF and conversion, and the lack of superior outcomes (ie, hospital stay, morbidity) could indicate that more experience and higher annual MIPD volumes are needed.
KW - Whipple
KW - hybrid
KW - laparoscopic
KW - minimally invasive
KW - pancreas
KW - pancreatic cancer
KW - pancreatic tumors
KW - propensity score matching
KW - robot
KW - robotic
KW - surgery
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85077726969&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002850
DO - https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002850
M3 - Article
C2 - 29864089
SN - 0003-4932
VL - 271
SP - 356
EP - 363
JO - Annals of surgery
JF - Annals of surgery
IS - 2
ER -