Suppr超能文献

里程碑系列:微创胰腺切除术。

The Landmark Series: Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Resection.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Ann Surg Oncol. 2021 Mar;28(3):1447-1456. doi: 10.1245/s10434-020-09335-3. Epub 2020 Dec 19.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic resections are among the most technically demanding procedures, including a high risk of potentially life-threatening complications and outcomes strongly correlated to hospital volume and individual surgeon experience. Minimally invasive pancreatic resections (MIPRs) have become a part of standard surgical practice worldwide over the last decade; however, in comparison with other surgical procedures, the implementation of minimally invasive approaches into clinical practice has been rather slow.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to highlight and summarize the available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the role of minimally invasive approaches in pancreatic surgery.

METHODS

A WHO trial registry and Pubmed database literature search was performed to identify all RCTs comparing MIPRs (robot-assisted and/or laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy [DP] or pancreatoduodenectomy [PD]) with open pancreatic resections (OPRs).

RESULTS

Overall, five RCTs on MIPR versus OPR have been published and seven RCTs are currently recruiting. For DP, the results of two RCTs were in favor of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) in terms of shorter hospital stay and less intraoperative blood loss, with comparable morbidity and mortality. Regarding PD, two RCTs showed similar advantages for MIPD. However, concerns were raised after the early termination of the third multicenter RCT on MIPD versus open PD due to higher complication-related mortality in the laparoscopic group and no clear other demonstrable advantages. No RCTs on robot-assisted pancreatic procedures are available as yet.

CONCLUSION

At the current level of evidence, MIDP is thought to be safe and feasible, although oncological safety should be further evaluated. Based on the results of the RCTs conducted for PD, MIPD cannot be proclaimed as the superior alternative to open PD, although promising outcomes have been demonstrated by experienced centers. Future studies should provide answers to the role of robotic approaches in pancreatic surgery and aim to identity the subgroups of patients or indications with the greatest benefit of MIPRs.

摘要

背景

胰腺切除术是技术要求最高的手术之一,包括发生潜在威胁生命的并发症的高风险,以及与医院容量和个体外科医生经验密切相关的结果。微创胰腺切除术 (MIPR) 在过去十年已成为全球标准外科手术实践的一部分;然而,与其他外科手术相比,微创方法在临床实践中的应用进展相当缓慢。

目的

本研究旨在强调和总结评估微创方法在胰腺外科中作用的现有随机对照试验 (RCT)。

方法

对世界卫生组织试验注册处和 Pubmed 数据库文献进行检索,以确定所有比较微创胰腺切除术 (机器人辅助和/或腹腔镜胰体尾切除术 [DP] 或胰十二指肠切除术 [PD]) 与开腹胰腺切除术 (OPR) 的 RCT。

结果

总体而言,已经发表了五项关于 MIPR 与 OPR 的 RCT,还有七项 RCT 正在招募中。对于 DP,两项 RCT 的结果支持微创胰体尾切除术 (MIDP) 在住院时间更短和术中出血量更少方面的优势,且发病率和死亡率相当。关于 PD,两项 RCT 表明 MIPD 具有相似的优势。然而,由于腹腔镜组并发症相关死亡率较高且没有其他明显的优势,第三个关于 MIPD 与开腹 PD 的多中心 RCT 提前终止,引起了人们的关注。目前尚无关于机器人辅助胰腺手术的 RCT。

结论

在现有证据水平上,MIDP 被认为是安全可行的,尽管其肿瘤学安全性应进一步评估。基于针对 PD 进行的 RCT 结果,MIPD 不能被宣布为开腹 PD 的优势替代方案,尽管经验丰富的中心已经展示了有前途的结果。未来的研究应该为机器人辅助胰腺手术的作用提供答案,并旨在确定 MIPR 受益最大的患者亚组或适应证。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9c2f/7892688/4c51f48603e2/10434_2020_9335_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验