Ricci Claudio, D'Ambra Vincenzo, Alberici Laura, Ingaldi Carlo, Minghetti Margherita, Bonini Giulia, Casadei Riccardo
Department of Internal Medicine and Surgery (DIMEC), Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Division of Pancreatic Surgery, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Ann Surg Oncol. 2025 May;32(5):3614-3622. doi: 10.1245/s10434-025-16990-x. Epub 2025 Feb 12.
The role of a minimally invasive approach (MI) in patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) remained unclear.
A systematic search of randomized controlled trials was conducted. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted, reporting risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD). The primary endpoints were the morbidity, mortality, and R1 rate. The secondary endpoints were clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), biliary fistula, reoperation, length of stay (LOS), time to functional recovery (TFR), and readmission.
The meta-analysis includes seven studies and 1428 patients: 618 (46.5%) in the OPD arm and 711 (53.5%) in minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD). The mortality rate was 2.9% for MIPD and 2.6% for OPD (RR 1.11 [range 0.53-2.29]). The major morbidity rate was 29.4% for MIPD and 25.6% for OPD (RR 1.11 [range 0.53-2.29]). The R1 rate was 6.2% for MIPD and 7% for OPD (RR 0.80 [0.54-1.20]). The operative time, comprehensive complication index score, POPF, PPH, DGE, biliary fistula, reoperation, readmission, LOS, TFR, and harvested lymph nodes were similar. Greater than 25% of heterogeneity was observed for major morbidity, operative time, POPF, LOS, TFR, and harvested lymph nodes. No publication bias was registered.
Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy was not superior to OPD and provided marginal advantages in short-term results. Further efforts should be addressed to clarify the impact of learning curve in MIPD results and the economic sustainability of MIPD, particularly robotic approach.
微创入路(MI)在接受胰十二指肠切除术(PD)患者中的作用仍不明确。
进行了随机对照试验的系统检索。进行随机效应荟萃分析,报告风险比(RR)或平均差(MD)。主要终点为发病率、死亡率和R1切除率。次要终点为临床相关的术后胰瘘(POPF)、胰十二指肠切除术后出血(PPH)、胃排空延迟(DGE)、胆瘘、再次手术、住院时间(LOS)、功能恢复时间(TFR)和再次入院。
荟萃分析纳入7项研究共1428例患者:开放胰十二指肠切除术(OPD)组618例(46.5%),微创胰十二指肠切除术(MIPD)组711例(53.5%)。MIPD组死亡率为2.9%,OPD组为2.6%(RR 1.11[范围0.53 - 2.29])。MIPD组主要发病率为29.4%,OPD组为25.6%(RR 1.11[范围0.53 - 2.29])。MIPD组R1切除率为6.2%,OPD组为7%(RR 0.80[0.54 - 1.20])。手术时间、综合并发症指数评分、POPF、PPH、DGE、胆瘘、再次手术、再次入院、LOS、TFR及获取的淋巴结数量相似。在主要发病率、手术时间、POPF、LOS、TFR及获取的淋巴结数量方面观察到超过25%的异质性。未发现发表偏倚。
微创胰十二指肠切除术并不优于OPD,在短期结果方面具有一定优势。应进一步努力阐明学习曲线对MIPD结果的影响以及MIPD的经济可持续性,尤其是机器人手术入路。