Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy: a matched analysis using ACS-NSQIP.

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is gaining popularity due to improved perioperative outcomes over open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). The purpose of this study is to compare outcomes of MIDP and ODP using patients within a nationwide cohort.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons' National Quality Improvement Program (2014-2018) was used to evaluate incidence of post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) as well as 30-day composite major morbidity for patients undergoing MIDP vs. ODP. Matching was performed with a Mahalanobis-distance model for demographic characteristics, preoperative risk factors, and benign versus malignant pathology. Outcomes were assessed via weighted multiple logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 3940 patients underwent distal pancreatectomy (1978 MIDP, 1962 ODP). After matching, 2985 patients were included (1978 MIDP, 1007 ODP). The rates of major morbidity (8.65% MIDP vs. 9.76% ODP, p = 0.37) were similar between groups. The MIDP group was found to have significantly decreased length of stay (5.6 vs. 7 days, p ≤ 0.001), but greater rates (12.54% MIDP vs. 9.35% ODP, p = 0.02) of post-operative fistula.

CONCLUSIONS

When matched for baseline patient characteristics, MIDP was associated with shorter length of hospitalization with similar rates of morbidity compared to ODP. However, MIDP was associated with significantly increased rates of POPF. Further studies are needed to investigate this difference in POPF rate, and determine how to optimize MIDP surgical technique to reduce this risk.