Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy.
Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.
Updates Surg. 2022 Feb;74(1):213-221. doi: 10.1007/s13304-021-01194-1. Epub 2021 Oct 23.
Several studies showed safety and feasibility of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) as compared to open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). Patients who underwent LDP or ODP (2015-2019) were included. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was used to reduce the effect of treatment selection bias. Aim of this study was to identify those factors influencing the loss of benefit (defined as a significantly better outcome compared to ODP) after LDP. Overall, 387 patients underwent DP (n = 250 LDP, n = 137 ODP). After PSM, 274 patients (n = 137 LDP, n = 137 ODP) were selected. LDP was associated with reduced intraoperative blood loss (median: 200 mL vs. 250 mL, p < 0.001), decreased wound infection rate (1% vs. 9%, p = 0.044) and shorter time to functional recovery (TFR) (median: 4 days vs. 5 days, p = 0.002). Consequently, TFR > 5 days and blood loss > 250 mL were defined as loss of benefit after LDP. In the LDP group, age > 70 years [Odds Ratio (OR) 2.744, p = 0.022] and duration of surgery > 208 min (OR 2.957, p = 0.019) were predictors of TFR > 5 days and intraoperative blood loss > 250 mL, respectively. No differences in terms of TFR were found between ODP and LDP groups in patients > 70 years (p = 0.102). Intraoperative blood loss was significantly higher in the ODP group, also when the analysis was limited to surgical procedures with operative time > 208 min (p = 0.003). In conclusion, LDP seems comparable to ODP in terms of TFR in patients aged > 70 years. This finding could be helpful in the choice of the best surgical approach in elderly patients undergoing potentially challenging DPs.
几项研究表明,与开腹胰体尾切除术(open distal pancreatectomy,ODP)相比,腹腔镜胰体尾切除术(laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy,LDP)具有安全性和可行性。纳入 2015 年至 2019 年间行 LDP 或 ODP 的患者。采用 1:1 倾向评分匹配(propensity score matching,PSM)以减少治疗选择偏倚的影响。本研究旨在确定 LDP 后获益丧失(定义为与 ODP 相比结局显著改善)的相关因素。总体而言,387 例患者行 DP 治疗(250 例行 LDP,137 例行 ODP)。PSM 后,274 例患者(137 例行 LDP,137 例行 ODP)被纳入研究。与 ODP 相比,LDP 术中出血量减少(中位数:200ml 比 250ml,p<0.001),切口感染率降低(1%比 9%,p=0.044),术后功能恢复时间(time to functional recovery,TFR)缩短(中位数:4 天比 5 天,p=0.002)。因此,LDP 后 TFR>5 天和术中出血量>250ml 定义为获益丧失。在 LDP 组中,年龄>70 岁(比值比(odds ratio,OR)2.744,p=0.022)和手术时间>208 分钟(OR 2.957,p=0.019)是 TFR>5 天和术中出血量>250ml 的预测因素。在>70 岁的患者中,LDP 组与 ODP 组的 TFR 无差异(p=0.102)。在手术时间>208 分钟的患者中,ODP 组的术中出血量显著高于 LDP 组(p=0.003)。总之,在>70 岁的患者中,LDP 与 ODP 的 TFR 相似。该结果有助于选择最佳手术方式治疗行挑战性 DP 的老年患者。