Comparing Short-term and Oncologic Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy Across Low and High Volume Centers.


Journal

Annals of surgery
ISSN: 1528-1140
Titre abrégé: Ann Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0372354

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
12 2019
Historique:
pubmed: 18 5 2018
medline: 21 3 2020
entrez: 18 5 2018
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To compare short-term and oncologic outcomes of patients with cancer who underwent open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) versus minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) using the National Cancer Database. MIPD, including laparoscopic and robotic approaches, has continued to gain acceptance despite prior reports of increased short-term mortality when compared with OPD. Patients with pancreatic cancer diagnosed from 2010 to 2015 undergoing curative intent resection were selected from the National Cancer Database. Patients submitted to OPD were compared with those submitted to MIPD. Laparoscopic and robotic approaches were included in the MIPD cohort. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality; secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality, hospital length of stay, unplanned 30-day readmission, surgical margins, number of lymph nodes harvested, and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy. Propensity score-weighted random effects logistic regression models were used to examine the adjusted association between surgical approach and the specified outcomes. Between 2010 and 2015, 22,013 patients underwent OPD or MIPD for pancreatic cancer and 3754 (17.1%) were performed minimally invasively. On multivariable analysis, there was no difference in 90-day mortality between MIPD and OPD (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.75-1.14). Patients undergoing MIPD were less likely to stay in the hospital for a prolonged time (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.68-0.82). 30-day mortality, unplanned readmissions, margins, lymph nodes harvested, and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy were equivalent between groups. Regardless of surgical approach, patients operated on at high volume centers had reduced 90-day mortality. Patients selected to receive MIPD for cancer have equivalent short-term and oncologic outcomes, when compared with patients who undergo OPD.

Sections du résumé

OBJECTIVE
To compare short-term and oncologic outcomes of patients with cancer who underwent open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) versus minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) using the National Cancer Database.
SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA
MIPD, including laparoscopic and robotic approaches, has continued to gain acceptance despite prior reports of increased short-term mortality when compared with OPD.
METHODS
Patients with pancreatic cancer diagnosed from 2010 to 2015 undergoing curative intent resection were selected from the National Cancer Database. Patients submitted to OPD were compared with those submitted to MIPD. Laparoscopic and robotic approaches were included in the MIPD cohort. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality; secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality, hospital length of stay, unplanned 30-day readmission, surgical margins, number of lymph nodes harvested, and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy. Propensity score-weighted random effects logistic regression models were used to examine the adjusted association between surgical approach and the specified outcomes.
RESULTS
Between 2010 and 2015, 22,013 patients underwent OPD or MIPD for pancreatic cancer and 3754 (17.1%) were performed minimally invasively. On multivariable analysis, there was no difference in 90-day mortality between MIPD and OPD (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.75-1.14). Patients undergoing MIPD were less likely to stay in the hospital for a prolonged time (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.68-0.82). 30-day mortality, unplanned readmissions, margins, lymph nodes harvested, and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy were equivalent between groups. Regardless of surgical approach, patients operated on at high volume centers had reduced 90-day mortality.
CONCLUSION
Patients selected to receive MIPD for cancer have equivalent short-term and oncologic outcomes, when compared with patients who undergo OPD.

Identifiants

pubmed: 29771723
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002810
doi:

Types de publication

Comparative Study Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1147-1155

Auteurs

Robert J Torphy (RJ)

Department of Surgery, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO.

Chloe Friedman (C)

Department of Surgery, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO.

Alison Halpern (A)

Department of Surgery, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO.

Brandon C Chapman (BC)

Department of Surgery, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO.

Steven S Ahrendt (SS)

Department of Surgery, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO.

Martin M McCarter (MM)

Department of Surgery, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO.

Barish H Edil (BH)

Department of Surgery, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK.

Richard D Schulick (RD)

Department of Surgery, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO.

Ana Gleisner (A)

Department of Surgery, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH