Invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy Research Articles

Intraperitoneal prophylactic drain after pancreaticoduodenectomy: an Italian survey.

Intraperitoneal prophylactic drain (IPD) use in pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is still controversial. A survey was designed to investigate surgeons' use of IPD in PD patients through 23 questions and one clinical vignette. For the clinical scenario, respondents were asked to report their regret of omission and commission regarding the use of IPD elicited on a scale between 0 (no regret) and 100 (maximum regret). The threshold model and a multilevel mixed regression were applied. One hundred three (97.2%) respondents confirmed using at least two IPDs. The median regret due to the omission of IPD was 84 (67-100, IQR). The median regret due to the commission of IPD was 10 (3.5-20, IQR). The CR-POPF probability threshold at which drainage omission was the less regrettable choice was 3% (1-50, IQR). The threshold was lower for those surgeons who performed minimally invasive PD (P = 0.048), adopted late removal (P = 0.002), perceived FRS able to predict the risk (P = 0.006), and IPD able to avoid relaparotomy P = 0.036). Drain management policies after PD remain heterogeneous among surgeons. The regret model suggested that IPD omission could be performed in low-risk patients.

Analysis of factors influencing pancreatic fistula after minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy and establishment of a new prediction model for clinically relevant pancreatic fistula

BackgroundPostoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is the most prevalent complications following minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD). Only one model related to MIPD exists, and previous POPF scoring prediction methods are based on open pancreaticoduodenectomy patients. Our objectives are to determine the variables that may increase the probability of pancreatic fistula following MIPD and to develop and validate a POPF predictive risk model.MethodsData from 432 patients who underwent MIPD between July 2015 and May 2022 were retrospectively collected. A nomogram prediction model was created using multivariate logistic regression analysis to evaluate independent factors for POPF in patients undergoing MIPD in the modeling cohort. The area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) and the calibration curve were used to verify the nomogram prediction model internally and externally within the modeling cohort and the verification cohort.ResultsMultivariate logistic regression analysis showed that body mass index (BMI), albumin, triglycerides, pancreatic duct diameter, pathological diagnosis and intraoperative bleeding were independent variables for POPF. On the basis of this information, a model for the prediction of risks associated with POPF was developed. In accordance with the ROC analysis, the modeling cohort's AUC was 0.819 (95% CI 0.747–0.891), the internal validation cohort's AUC was 0.830 (95% CI 0.747–0.912), and the external validation cohort's AUC was 0.793 (95% CI 0.671–0.915). Based on the calibration curve, the estimated values of POPF have a high degree of concordance with the actual values that were measured.ConclusionsThis model for predicting the probability of pancreatic fistula following MIPD has strong predictive capacity and can provide a trustworthy predictive method for the early screening of high-risk patients with pancreatic fistula after MIPD and timely clinical intervention.

Minimally Invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy in Elderly versus Younger Patients: A Meta-Analysis.

(1) Background: With ageing, the number of pancreaticoduodenectomies (PD) for benign or malignant disease is expected to increase in elderly patients. However, whether minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) should be performed in the elderly is not clear yet and it is still debated. (2) Materials and Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted including seven published articles comparing the technical and post-operative outcomes of MIPD in elderly versus younger patients up to December 2022. (3) Results: In total, 1378 patients were included in the meta-analysis. In term of overall and Clavien-Dindo I/II complication rates, post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) grade > A rates and biliary leakage, abdominal collection, post-operative bleeding and delayed gastric emptying rates, no differences emerged between the two groups. However, this study showed slightly higher intraoperative blood loss [MD 43.41, (95%CI 14.45, 72.38) p = 0.003], Clavien-Dindo ≥ III complication rates [OR 1.87, (95%CI 1.13, 3.11) p = 0.02] and mortality rates [OR 2.61, (95%CI 1.20, 5.68) p = 0.02] in the elderly compared with the younger group. Interestingly, as a minor endpoint, no differences in terms of the mean number of harvested lymphnode and of R0 resection rates were found. (4) Conclusion: MIPD seems to be relatively safe; however, there are slightly higher major morbidity, lung complication and mortality rates in elderly patients, who potentially represent the individuals that may benefit the most from the minimally invasive approach.

A Prospective comparative study of enhanced recovery after surgery vs standard perioperative protocol in patients undergoing minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy in a high volume centre

A Prospective comparative study of enhanced recovery after surgery vs standard perioperative protocol in patients undergoing minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy in a high volume centre

Trends in access to minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancers

BackgroundMinimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD), including robotic (RPD) and laparoscopy (LPD), is becoming more frequently employed in the management of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), though the majority of operations are still performed via open approach (OPD). Access to technologic advances often neglect the underserved. Whether disparities in access to MIPD exist, remain unclear. MethodsThe National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried (2010–2020) for patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for PDAC. Cochran–Armitage tests assessed for trends over time. Social determinants of health (SDH) were compared between approaches. Multinomial logistic models identified predictors of MIPD. ResultsOf 16,468 patients, 80.03 % underwent OPD and 19.97 % underwent MIPD (22.60 % robotic; 77.40 % laparoscopic). Black race negatively predicted LPD (vs white (OR 0.822; 95 % CI 0.701–0.964)). Predictors of RPD included Medicare/other government insurance (vs uninsured or Medicaid (OR 1.660; 95 % CI 1.123–2.454)) and private insurance (vs uninsured or Medicaid (OR 1.597; 95 % CI 1.090–2.340)). Early (2010–2014) vs late (2015–2020) diagnosis, stratified by race, demonstrated an increase in Non-White patients undergoing OPD (13.15 % vs 14.63 %; p = 0.016), but not LPD (11.41 % vs 13.57 %;p = 0.125) or RPD (14.15 % vs 15.23 %; p = 0.774). ConclusionSDH predict surgical approach more than clinical stage, facility type, or comorbidity status. Disparities in race and insurance coverage are different between surgical approaches.

A narrative review of the history and recent advances in minimally invasive pancreatic resection

Pancreatic resections are complex operations that carry the potential for long-term and life-threatening complications. Over the past several decades, improved surgical techniques and perioperative care have decreased the morbidity and mortality associated with these operations. As laparoscopic and robotic-assisted surgery has been increasingly used in other specialties, the role of minimally invasive techniques in pancreatic surgery remains unclear. We aimed to review the evolution of pancreatic surgery and summarize current data comparing outcomes between open and minimally invasive pancreatic techniques. A comprehensive review was performed using MEDLINE/PubMed with the search dates of January 1, 2018 to February 28, 2023. In PubMed, the terms “pancreas”, “minimally invasive surgery”, and “robotic surgery” were searched. Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (DP) is associated with decreased length of hospital stay and intraoperative blood loss with similar morbidity and mortality when compared to open DP. While randomized data supports decreased length of stay for minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), the LEOPARD 2 trial was terminated early due to increased mortality among patients undergoing laparoscopic PD. Minimally invasive DP appears safe and efficacious compared to open surgery, whereas additional ongoing randomized studies from experienced centers are needed to determine the role of minimally invasive surgery for PD.

Risk stratification of clinically relevant delayed gastric emptying after pancreaticoduodenectomy

BackgroundDelayed gastric emptying (DGE) remains one of the major complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), with discrepant reports of its contributing factors. This study aimed to develop a nomogram to identify potential predictors and predict the probability of DGE after PD.MethodsThis retrospective study enrolled 422 consecutive patients who underwent PD from January 2019 to December 2021 at our institution. The LASSO algorithm and multivariate logistic regression were performed to identify independent risk and protective factors associated with clinically relevant delayed gastric emptying (CR-DGE). A nomogram was established based on the selected variables. Then, the calibration curve, ROC curve, decision curve analysis (DCA), and clinical impact curve (CIC) were applied to evaluate the predictive performance of our model. Finally, an independent cohort of 45 consecutive patients from January 2022 to March 2022 was enrolled to further validate the nomogram.ResultsAmong 422 patients, CR-DGE occurred in 94 patients (22.2%). A previous history of chronic gastropathy, intraoperative plasma transfusion ≥ 400 ml, end-to-side gastrointestinal anastomosis, intra-abdominal infection, incisional infection, and clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) were identified as risk predictors. Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) was demonstrated to be a protective predictor of CR-DGE. The areas under the curve (AUCs) were 0.768 (95% CI, 0.706–0.830) in the development cohort, 0.766 (95% CI, 0.671–0.861) in the validation cohort, and 0.787 (95% CI, 0.633–0.940) in the independent cohort. Then, we built a simplified scale based on our nomogram for risk stratification.ConclusionsOur study identified seven predictors and constructed a validated nomogram that effectively predicted CR-DGE for patients who underwent PD.

Comparison of the modified Blumgart mattress vs. interrupted suture pancreaticojejunostomy in minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy

Aim: The modified Blumgart mattress (BM) and conventional interrupted suture (IS) methods are currently the most widely adopted pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) techniques utilized during minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD). This study aimed to evaluate the postoperative outcomes between the two PJ techniques using robotic and laparoscopic approaches. Methods: This was a retrospective study involving patients who underwent robotic or laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) performed by two surgeons from two institutions. Surgical outcomes of the patients were compared according to the PJ techniques of robotic BM (Rob-BM), robotic IS (Rob-IS), and laparoscopic IS (Lap-IS), which were further analyzed among patients who had a soft pancreas and small pancreatic duct, while those with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were excluded from the study. Results: A total of 230 patients underwent MIPD with 63 Rob-BM, 48 Rob-IS, and 119 Lap-IS for PJ. Within the study population, clinically relevant-postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) rates were comparable between Rob-BM and Rob-IS (6.3% vs. 10.4%, P = 0.283) and between Rob-IS and Lap-IS (10.4% vs. 7.6%, P = 0.661). Comparing patients with soft pancreas and small pancreatic duct, CR-POPF rates were not statistically different among the groups [16.0% (Rob-BM) vs. 10.5% (Rob-IS), P = 0.055, and 10.5% (Rob-IS) vs. 10.1% (Lap-IS), P = 0.543]. In the multivariable analysis for risk factors of POPF, soft pancreatic textures and periampullary pathology other than pancreatic cancer were found to be risk factors. Conclusion: POPF rates after MIPD were not different according to the PJ methods of BM and IS when performed by skilled surgeons.

Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy and laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy with robotic reconstruction: single-surgeon experience and technical notes

Despite the increasing number of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomies, laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) and LPD with robotic reconstruction (LPD-RR) are still valuable surgical options for minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD). This study introduces the surgical techniques, tips, and outcomes of our experience with LPD and LPD-RR.Between March 2014 and July 2021, 122 and 48 patients underwent LPD and LPD-RR respectively, at CHA Bundang Medical Center in Korea. The operative settings, procedures, and trocar placements were identical in both approaches; however, different trocars were used. We introduced our techniques of retraction methods for Kocherization and uncinate process dissection, pancreatic reconstruction, pancreatic division, and protection using the round ligament. The perioperative surgical outcomes of LPD and LPD-RR were compared.Baseline demographics of patients in the LPD and LPD-RR groups were comparable, but the LPD group had older age (65.5 ± 11.6 years vs. 60.0 ± 14.1 years, p = 0.009) and lesser preoperative chemotherapy (15.6% vs. 35.4%, p = 0.008). The proportion of malignant disease was similar (LPD group, 86.1% vs. LPD-RR group, 83.3%; p = 0.759). Perioperative outcomes were also comparable, including operative time, estimated blood loss, clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (LPD group, 9.0% vs. LPD-RR group, 10.4%; p = 0.684), and major postoperative complication rates (LPD group, 14.8% vs. LPD-RR group, 6.2%; p = 0.082).Both LPD and LPR-RR can be safely performed by experienced surgeons with acceptable surgical outcomes. Further investigations are required to evaluate the objective benefits of robotic surgical systems in MIPD and establish widely acceptable standardized MIPD techniques.

The experiences of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy as young HBP surgeon: From hybrid procedure to totally robotic surgery

The experiences of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy as young HBP surgeon: From hybrid procedure to totally robotic surgery

ASO Author Reflections: A Novel Method for Predicting Clinically Relevant Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula following Minimally Invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy.

ASO Author Reflections: A Novel Method for Predicting Clinically Relevant Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula following Minimally Invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Multidimensional Nomogram to Predict Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula after Minimally Invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) is an inherently severe risk of pancreatic resection. Previous research has proposed models that identify risk factors and predict CR-POPF, although these are rarely applicable to minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD). This study aimed to evaluate the individual risks of CR-POPF and to propose a nomogram for predicting POPF in MIPD. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 429 patients who underwent MIPD. In the multivariate analysis, the Akaike information criterion stepwise logistic regression method was used to select the final model to develop the nomogram. Of 429 patients, 53 (12.4%) experienced CR-POPF. On multivariate analysis, pancreatic texture (p = 0.001), open conversion (p = 0.008), intraoperative transfusion (p = 0.011), and pathology (p = 0.048) were identified as independent predictors of CR-POPF. The nomogram was developed based on patient, pancreatic, operative, and surgeon factors by using the following four additional clinical factors as variables: American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥ III, size of pancreatic duct, type of surgical approach, and < 40 cases of MIPD experience. A multidimensional nomogram was developed to predict CR-POPF after MIPD. This nomogram and calculator can help surgeons anticipate, select, and manage critical complications.

Impact of conversion at time of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy on perioperative and long-term outcomes: Review of the National Cancer Database.

Current literature presents limited data regarding outcomes following conversion at the time of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MI-PD). The National Cancer Database was queried for patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy. Patients were stratified into three groups: MI-PD, converted to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (CO-PD), and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (O-PD). Multivariable modeling was applied to compare outcomes of MI-PD and CO-PD to those of O-PD. Of 17,570 patients identified, 12.5%, 4.2%, and 83.4% underwent MI-PD, CO-PD, and O-PD, respectively. Robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (R-PD) resulted in a higher lymph node yield (n = 23.2 ± 12.2) even when requiring conversion (n = 22.4 ± 13.2, p < 0.001). Margin positivity was higher in the CO-PD group (26.6%) than in the MI-PD group (21.3%) and the O-PD (22.6%) group (p = 0.017). Length of stay was shorter in the MI-PD group (laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy 10.4 ± 8.6, R-PD 10.6 ± 8.8) and the robotic converted to open group (10.7 ± 6.4) than in the laparoscopic converted to open group (11.2 ± 9) and the O-PD group (11.5 ± 8.9) (p < 0.001). After adjusting for patient and tumor characteristics, both MI-PD (odds ratio = 1.40; p < 0.001) and CO-PD (odds ratio = 1.24; p = 0.020) were significantly associated with an increased likelihood of long-term survival. CO-PD does not negatively impact perioperative or oncologic outcomes.

Improved Outcomes with Minimally Invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy in Patients With Dilated Pancreatic Ducts: A NSQIP Analysis

Rodriguez, Jorge MD; Felipe, Heidy Cos MD; Leigh, Natasha MD; Hawkins, William MD, FACS; Hammill, Chet MD, FACS; Sanford, Dominic MD Author Information

Feasibility of simultaneous development of laparoscopic and robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy

Laparoscopic (LPD) and robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) are both challenging procedures. The feasibility and safety of simultaneously developing LPD and RPD remain unreported. We retrospectively reviewed the data of patients undergoing LPD or RPD between 2014 and 2021. A total of 114 patients underwent minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD): 39 LPDs and 75 RPDs. The learning process of LPD and RPD were similar. The cutoff points of the learning curve were LPD, 13th patient (the 27th patient of MIPD), and RPD, 18th patient (the 31st patient of MIPD) according the cumulative sum analysis of operative time. A decrease in the operative time was associated with the case sequence (p < 0.001) but not with the surgical approach (p = 0.36). The overall surgical outcomes were comparable between both the LPD and RPD groups. When evaluating the learning curve impact on MIPD, LPD had higher major complication (≧ Clavien–Dindo grade III), bile leak and wound infection rates in the pre-learning curve phase than those in the after-learning curve phase, while RPD had similar surgical outcomes between two phases. Simultaneous development of LPD and RPD is feasible and safe for experienced surgeons, with similar learning process and comparable surgical outcomes.

Current status and hotspot of minimally invasive surgery for pancreatic head carcinoma

With the improvement of laparoscopic equipment and surgical technology,pancreatic surgery has entered the "minimally invasive era".However,the use of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with pancreatic head cancer remains controversial.In recent years,China's pancreatic surgeons have been at the forefront of the world in terms of surgical technology,however,surgical philosophy, selection of indication,and perioperative management should be further stregthened. Additionally, the development of medical standards in various regions of China is seriously uneven,and minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy still needs to be further standardized and popularized.Through this article,the author discusses the development status of minimally invasive surgery for pancreatic head cancer and related hot topics with fellow surgeons,in order to further improve the standard diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic cancer in China.

External pancreatic ductal stenting in minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy: How to do it?

It has been shown that external pancreatic ductal stenting (EPDS) can reduce the incidence of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula. Although studies have described EPDS in open pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), EPDS in minimally invasive PD has not been reported yet. Thus, the objective of this study was to describe the technique of EPDS in minimally invasive PD. The procedure was performed either laparoscopically or using a robot. Once PD was completed, key steps included triple enterotomy, threading of silk-suture through all enterotomies and exteriorization, completing posterior layer of pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ), railroading stent through preplaced silk-suture, intubation of stent into the pancreatic duct, completion of PJ, followed by hepaticojejunostomy and parietalization of jejunum at the stent exit site. EPDS in PD through a minimally invasive approach can be performed safely in selected cases with either a small-sized pancreatic duct or a soft pancreas.

A duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy for small main pancreatic duct and soft pancreas in minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy

BackgroundPostoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is often associated with significant morbidity and mortality after the Whipple operation. Patient-related factors associated with POPF include soft pancreatic texture and a small main pancreatic duct (MPD). The traditional duct-to-mucosa anastomosis was modified to be easily performed. The aim of the study was to evaluate the simplified pancreaticojejunostomy (PJ) method in the prevention of POPF after minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD).MethodsNinety-eight patients who underwent laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) and robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) with a simplified PJ procedure containing only two duct-to-mucosa sutures and four penetrating-sutures to anastomose the pancreatic parenchyma and jejunal seromuscular layer in our center were retrospectively studied. Demographics and clinical short-term safety were assessed.ResultsAll LPD and RPD procedures were successfully performed. The median time of PJ was 17 min, and the median blood loss was 60 mL, with only one patient requiring transfusion. Four patients (4.1%) suffered from clinically relevant POPF (CR-POPF), including four grade B cases and no grade C cases. For patients with an MPD diameter of 3 mm or less, POPF was noted in two (4%) of the fifty patients, with all cases being grade B. Of the patients with a soft pancreas, only two (4.5%) patients suffered from grade B POPF. One patient (1.0%) experienced a 90-day mortality. Neither the main pancreatic diameter nor pancreatic texture had an impact on postoperative outcomes.ConclusionsOur technique is a simple, safe and efficient alternative to prevent POPF after LPD and RPD. This method is suitable for almost all pancreatic conditions, including cases with a small main pancreatic duct and soft pancreas, and has the potential to become the preferred procedure in low-volume pancreatic surgery centers.Graphical abstractOur modified duct-to-mucosa PJ, which contains only two duct-to-mucosa sutures and four penetrating-sutures to anastomose the pancreatic parenchyma and jejunal seromuscular layer, is ideal for small MPD and soft pancreas when performing minimally invasive PD and has a low rate of POPF. PJ pancreaticojejunostomy, MPD main pancreatic diameter, PD pancreaticoduodenectomy, POPF postoperative pancreatic fistula

Strategy and technique of pancreatojejunostomy in minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy: clinical practice review

: With the spread of minimally invasive surgeries such as laparoscopic or robotic surgeries, they are increasingly being used for pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) as well, however pancreaticojejunum (PJ) anastomosis is quite challenging to perform in a minimally invasive surgery. We need to know more about methods in minimally invasive surgery PJ anastomosis. In this clinical practice review article, we present several papers about the technical aspects of PJ anastomosis in on laparoscopic and robotic PD, including a comparison of their surgical results, as well as initial results from our institution. There were more papers on laparoscopic PJ anastomosis than robotic PJ anastomosis. Some reports have shown that robotic surgery has a better outcome, and our institution’s results showed that robotic surgery significantly outperformed in terms of blood loss and length of hospital stay. This article summarizes the technical methods and comparative results of Laparoscopic and robotic PD, especially in PJ anastomosis. The results of the PJ anastomosis in robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) were seemed not inferior to those of the laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) in the past literature at least with respect to safety, and were superior than that of LPD in the results of our department. However, randomised controlled trial (RCT) is needed to clarify the true comparison between the results of LPD and RPD.

Usefulness of the new articulating laparoscopic instrument in laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy has been developed in two tracts of robotic and laparoscopic surgeries. Laparoscopic approach remains a frequently performed surgical method that accounts for a significant portion of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy. However, biliary and pancreatic reconstruction stages are still demanding procedures because of the inherent limitations of conventional laparoscopic instruments. Therefore, recently developed articulating laparoscopic instruments have greater dexterity similar to robotic instruments seem to be able to compensate for the weak points of conventional laparoscopic instruments. In this article, we demonstrate the hepaticojejunostomy and duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy technique using the new articulating laparoscopic instrument.