Yan Yong, Hua Yinggang, Chang Cheng, Zhu Xuanjin, Sha Yanhua, Wang Bailin
Department of General Surgery, Guangzhou Red Cross Hospital, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Department of Laboratory Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.
Front Oncol. 2023 Jan 25;12:1093395. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.1093395. eCollection 2022.
This meta-analysis compares the perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) to those of open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) for pancreatic and periampullary tumors.
LPD has been increasingly applied in the treatment of pancreatic and periampullary tumors. However, the perioperative outcomes of LPD versus OPD are still controversial.
PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized comparative trials (NRCTs) comparing LPD versus OPD for pancreatic and periampullary tumors. The main outcomes were mortality, morbidity, serious complications, and hospital stay. The secondary outcomes were operative time, blood loss, transfusion, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), bile leak (BL), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), lymph nodes harvested, R0 resection, reoperation, and readmission. RCTs were evaluated by the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. NRCTs were assessed using a modified tool from the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies. Data were pooled as odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD). This study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022338832).
Four RCTs and 35 NRCTs concerning a total of 40,230 patients (4,262 LPD and 35,968 OPD) were included. Meta-analyses showed no significant differences in mortality (OR 0.91, = 0.35), serious complications (OR 0.97, = 0.74), POPF (OR 0.93, = 0.29), PPH (OR 1.10, = 0.42), BL (OR 1.28, = 0.22), harvested lymph nodes (MD 0.66, = 0.09), reoperation (OR 1.10, = 0.41), and readmission (OR 0.95, = 0.46) between LPD and OPD. Operative time was significantly longer for LPD (MD 85.59 min, < 0.00001), whereas overall morbidity (OR 0.80, < 0.00001), hospital stay (MD -2.32 days, < 0.00001), blood loss (MD -173.84 ml, < 0.00001), transfusion (OR 0.62, = 0.0002), and DGE (OR 0.78, = 0.002) were reduced for LPD. The R0 rate was higher for LPD (OR 1.25, = 0.001).
LPD is associated with non-inferior short-term surgical outcomes and oncologic adequacy compared to OPD when performed by experienced surgeons at large centers. LPD may result in reduced overall morbidity, blood loss, transfusion, and DGE, but longer operative time. Further RCTs should address the potential advantages of LPD over OPD.
PROSPERO, identifier CRD42022338832.
本荟萃分析比较了腹腔镜胰十二指肠切除术(LPD)与开放胰十二指肠切除术(OPD)治疗胰腺和壶腹周围肿瘤的围手术期结局。
LPD已越来越多地应用于胰腺和壶腹周围肿瘤的治疗。然而,LPD与OPD的围手术期结局仍存在争议。
检索PubMed、科学网、EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆,以识别比较LPD与OPD治疗胰腺和壶腹周围肿瘤的随机对照试验(RCT)和非随机对照试验(NRCT)。主要结局为死亡率、发病率、严重并发症和住院时间。次要结局为手术时间、失血量、输血、术后胰瘘(POPF)、胰十二指肠切除术后出血(PPH)、胆漏(BL)、胃排空延迟(DGE)、获取的淋巴结、R0切除、再次手术和再次入院。RCT采用Cochrane偏倚风险工具进行评估。NRCT使用来自非随机研究方法学指数的改良工具进行评估。数据合并为比值比(OR)或平均差(MD)。本研究已在PROSPERO注册(注册号CRD42022338832)。
纳入了4项RCT和35项NRCT,共40230例患者(4262例行LPD,35968例行OPD)。荟萃分析显示,LPD与OPD在死亡率(OR 0.91,P = 0.35)、严重并发症(OR 0.97,P = 0.74)、POPF(OR 0.93,P = 0.29)、PPH(OR 1.10,P = 0.42)、BL(OR 1.28,P = 0.22)、获取的淋巴结(MD 0.66,P = 0.09)、再次手术(OR 1.10,P = 0.41)和再次入院(OR 0.95,P = 0.46)方面无显著差异。LPD的手术时间显著更长(MD 85.59分钟,P < 0.00001),而LPD的总体发病率(OR 0.80,P < 0.00001)、住院时间(MD -2.32天,P < 0.00001)、失血量(MD -173.84毫升,P < 0.00001)、输血(OR 0.62,P = 0.0002)和DGE(OR 0.78,P = 0.002)降低。LPD的R0切除率更高(OR 1.25,P = 0.001)。
在大型中心由经验丰富的外科医生进行时,与OPD相比,LPD的短期手术结局和肿瘤学充分性不劣。LPD可能导致总体发病率、失血量、输血和DGE降低,但手术时间更长。进一步的RCT应探讨LPD相对于OPD的潜在优势。
PROSPERO,标识符CRD42022338832。