Laparoscopic versus open pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy. The first meta-analyse of retrospective matched cases.

PURPOSE

To compare the safety, feasibility, and short-term clinical benefits of laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (L-PPPD) to open pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy (O-PPPD) through retrospective matched cases.

METHODS

Web of Science, Cochrane, PubMed, CNKI were searched systematically identify studies published between January and December 2017 comparing L-PPPD to O-PPPD. The meta-analysis was performed by using Review Manager 5.3.

RESULTS

Two studies matched the selection criteria, including 108 (50%) cases of laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy and 108(50%) cases of open pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy. None of the included studies were randomized, which were both retrospective matched cases. There was no difference in the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula, blood loss, diet start and lymph nodes. However, L-PPPD has a shorter hospital stay (p=0.0003) and O-PPPD has a shorter operative time (p=0.02) and tend to decrease the delayed gastric emptying.

CONCLUSIONS

The perioperative safety of laparoscopic surgery, which also has advantages of minimal invasion and shorter hospital stay, is comparable to that of open surgery. Laparoscopic surgery could be operated if the patients matched the indication and operation difficulty is not so great. However, blind pursuits of L-PPPD should be restrained because there is no essential difference between these two in terms of feasibility, safety and short-term complication.