Critical appraisal of the adoption of minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomies at a single institution: Initial experience with the first 120 consecutive cases

Résumé fourni par la source

Abstract Background: We analysed the evolution and outcomes of minimally-invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) during our initial adoption of this approach. We also compared the outcomes between the different approaches used to perform the pancreatic anastomoses. Methods: A retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent MIPD between 2013 to 2022 was performed. Comparison of pancreato-enteric anastomotic outcomes were performed using one-to-one propensity matched analysis. Results: 120 patients underwent MIPD including 14 (11.7%) total pancreatectomies (TP) and 17 (14.2%) with concomitant vascular reconstructions. The number of patients who had laparoscopic (L) or robotic (R) PD were 77 (64.2%) and 43 (35.8%) respectively. There were 32 (26.7%) patients with post-operative pancreatic fistulas (POPF), of which 28 (23.3%) were grade B and 4 (3.3%) were grade C. There were no 30-day mortalities. Comparisons between open and minimally invasive pancreatojejunostomy (PJ) showed a higher likelihood of intra-operative blood loss (500mls vs 275mls, p<0.001) and intra-operative blood transfusion (12(40%) vs 3(10%), p=0.015). Patients who had robotic PJ reconstruction demonstrated fewer pseudoaneurysms (1(4%) vs 7(28%), p=0.049) and lesser intra-operative blood loss (250mls vs 300mls, p = 0.023) when compared to laparoscopic PJ reconstruction, but tended to be associated with a longer operation time (665min vs 550min, p<0.001). Comparison with international benchmark outcomes for open PD demonstrated that except for a higher-Grade B POPF rate; the postoperative morbidity, major morbidity, Grade C POPF and in-hospital mortality rates of MIPD were within international benchmark cutoffs. Conclusion: Our initial experience demonstrated that MIPD can be safely adopted. Robotic reconstruction may reduce the risk of pseudoaneurysm compared to laparoscopy.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.