• J. Gastrointest. Surg. · Apr 2014

    Comparative Study

    Retrospective comparison of robot-assisted minimally invasive versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary neoplasms.

    • Philip Q Bao, Pavel O Mazirka, and Kevin T Watkins.
    • J. Gastrointest. Surg. 2014 Apr 1;18(4):682-9.

    BackgroundAs with other open procedures now routinely performed using laparoscopy, minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) may result in decreased pain, fewer wound complications, and accelerated recovery. However, when used for periampullary cancers, it is also important to assess if MIPD offers comparable oncologic outcomes.MethodsTechnical and perioperative outcomes were compared between patients with a preoperative diagnosis of periampullary neoplasm offered MIPD or open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) from November 2009 to July 2011.ResultsFifty-six consecutive MIPD and OPD (28 each) procedures were analyzed. Comparing MIPD to OPD, significant differences included longer median procedure time (431 vs 410 min, p = .04) and fewer median lymph nodes harvested (15 vs. 20, p = .04). R0 resection rate tended to be lower (63 vs. 88%, p = .07) as well as surgical site infections (18 vs. 43 %, p = .08). Clinically significant pancreatic fistula rate was the same between groups (21%). Other outcomes such as narcotic pain medication use, length of stay, and 30-day readmission rates were also similar.ConclusionsMIPD is feasible with comparable technical success and outcomes to OPD. However, there is a learning curve to the procedure and further experience and prospective study will be required to better establish the oncologic efficacy of MIPD to open resection.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?

    User can't be blank.

    Content can't be blank.

    Content is too short (minimum is 15 characters).

    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…