Predictors and outcomes of converted minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy: a propensity score matched analysis.
Aged
Conversion to Open Surgery
/ methods
Cytoreduction Surgical Procedures
/ methods
Female
Humans
Laparoscopy
/ methods
Male
Matched-Pair Analysis
Middle Aged
Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures
/ methods
Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care
Pancreaticoduodenectomy
/ methods
Postoperative Complications
/ etiology
Propensity Score
Retrospective Studies
Risk Factors
Robotic Surgical Procedures
/ methods
Converted
Minimally invasive
Outcomes
Pancreaticoduodenectomy
Predictors
Journal
Surgical endoscopy
ISSN: 1432-2218
Titre abrégé: Surg Endosc
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8806653
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2020
02 2020
Historique:
received:
21
11
2018
accepted:
09
04
2019
pubmed:
25
4
2019
medline:
18
11
2020
entrez:
25
4
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Data-driven patient selection guidelines are not available to optimize outcomes in minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD). We aimed to define risk factors associated with conversion from MIPD to open PD and to determine the impact of conversion on post-operative outcomes. We conducted a retrospective review of MIPD using NSQIP from 2014 to 2015. Propensity score was used to match patients who underwent completed MIPD to converted MIPD. 467 patients were included: 375 (80.3%) MIPD and 92 (19.7%) converted. Converted patients were more often male (64% vs. 52%, p = 0.030), had higher rates of dyspnea (10% vs. 3%, p = 0.009), underwent more vascular (44% vs. 14%, p < 0.001) or multivisceral resection (19% vs. 6%, p = 0.0005), and were more likely attempted laparoscopically compared to robotically (76% vs. 51%, p < 0.001). Robotic approach was independently associated with reduced risk of conversion (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.23-0.69), while male gender (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.02-2.84), history of dyspnea (OR 3.85, 95% CI 1.49-9.96), vascular resection (OR 4.32, 95% CI 2.53-7.37), and multivisceral resection (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.05-4.52) were associated with increased risk. Major complications were more common in converted patients (68% vs. 37%, p < 0.001). Converted patients had increased odds of non-home discharge (OR 3.25, 95% CI 1.06-9.97) and an associated increased length of stay of 3 days (95% CI 0.1-6.7). Patients with a history of dyspnea or tumors requiring vascular or multivisceral resection were at increased risk of conversion, and the robotic platform was associated with a lower rate of conversion. Conversion was independently associated with increased overall complications, increased length of stay, and non-home discharge.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Data-driven patient selection guidelines are not available to optimize outcomes in minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD). We aimed to define risk factors associated with conversion from MIPD to open PD and to determine the impact of conversion on post-operative outcomes.
METHODS
We conducted a retrospective review of MIPD using NSQIP from 2014 to 2015. Propensity score was used to match patients who underwent completed MIPD to converted MIPD.
RESULTS
467 patients were included: 375 (80.3%) MIPD and 92 (19.7%) converted. Converted patients were more often male (64% vs. 52%, p = 0.030), had higher rates of dyspnea (10% vs. 3%, p = 0.009), underwent more vascular (44% vs. 14%, p < 0.001) or multivisceral resection (19% vs. 6%, p = 0.0005), and were more likely attempted laparoscopically compared to robotically (76% vs. 51%, p < 0.001). Robotic approach was independently associated with reduced risk of conversion (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.23-0.69), while male gender (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.02-2.84), history of dyspnea (OR 3.85, 95% CI 1.49-9.96), vascular resection (OR 4.32, 95% CI 2.53-7.37), and multivisceral resection (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.05-4.52) were associated with increased risk. Major complications were more common in converted patients (68% vs. 37%, p < 0.001). Converted patients had increased odds of non-home discharge (OR 3.25, 95% CI 1.06-9.97) and an associated increased length of stay of 3 days (95% CI 0.1-6.7).
CONCLUSION
Patients with a history of dyspnea or tumors requiring vascular or multivisceral resection were at increased risk of conversion, and the robotic platform was associated with a lower rate of conversion. Conversion was independently associated with increased overall complications, increased length of stay, and non-home discharge.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31016458
doi: 10.1007/s00464-019-06792-0
pii: 10.1007/s00464-019-06792-0
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
544-550Références
J Gastrointest Surg. 2008 Apr;12(4):707-12
pubmed: 17909923
Ann Surg Oncol. 2012 Mar;19(3):864-70
pubmed: 21947670
Arch Surg. 2010 Jul;145(7):634-40
pubmed: 20644125
J Am Coll Surg. 2014 Jan;218(1):129-39
pubmed: 24275074
HPB (Oxford). 2017 Jul;19(7):595-602
pubmed: 28400087
Surg Endosc. 1994 May;8(5):408-10
pubmed: 7915434
Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2008 Feb;18(1):13-8
pubmed: 18287976
J Am Coll Surg. 2012 Dec;215(6):810-9
pubmed: 22999327
Arch Surg. 2003 Jul;138(7):777-84
pubmed: 12860761
Ann Surg Oncol. 2017 Nov;24(12):3725-3731
pubmed: 28849407
Int J Med Robot. 2011 Jun;7(2):131-7
pubmed: 21412963
Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2016 Feb;26(1):6-16
pubmed: 26836625
World J Surg. 2011 Dec;35(12):2739-46
pubmed: 21947494
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2003 Feb;13(1):33-6
pubmed: 12676019
Int J Surg. 2012;10(9):475-9
pubmed: 22732431
J Gastrointest Surg. 2015 Jan;19(1):189-94; discussion 194
pubmed: 25274069
Am Surg. 2013 Oct;79(10):1064-7
pubmed: 24160800
Anaesthesia. 1993 Apr;48(4):309-11
pubmed: 8494131
Ann Surg. 2018 Jul;268(1):151-157
pubmed: 28486387
World J Surg. 2016 May;40(5):1218-25
pubmed: 26830906
J Gastrointest Surg. 2011 Jul;15(7):1151-7
pubmed: 21538192
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2016 Sep 5;113(35-36):597-603
pubmed: 27658473
HPB (Oxford). 2018 Apr;20(4):356-363
pubmed: 29191691
J Surg Oncol. 2018 Sep;118(4):651-656
pubmed: 30114321
Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2014 Aug;24(4):296-305
pubmed: 24743678
Hepatogastroenterology. 2012 Mar-Apr;59(114):570-3
pubmed: 21940382
Surg Endosc. 2012 Sep;26(9):2397-402
pubmed: 22437947
Surg Endosc. 2017 Apr;31(4):1947-1951
pubmed: 27553804
Ann Surg Oncol. 2013 Jun;20(6):1774-80
pubmed: 23504140
J Gastrointest Surg. 2017 Nov;21(11):1784-1792
pubmed: 28819886
Surgery. 2014 Aug;156(2):379-84
pubmed: 24680859
Ann Surg. 2016 Nov;264(5):754-762
pubmed: 27741008
J Gastrointest Surg. 2014 Apr;18(4):682-9
pubmed: 24234245
Am J Surg. 2009 Sep;198(3):445-9
pubmed: 19342003
Br J Surg. 2017 Oct;104(11):1443-1450
pubmed: 28895142
Surg Endosc. 2015 Dec;29(12):3698-711
pubmed: 25761559
JAMA Surg. 2013 Dec;148(12):1154-7
pubmed: 24154790
Surg Endosc. 2013 Dec;27(12):4518-23
pubmed: 23943116
Surg Innov. 2016 Aug;23(4):407-14
pubmed: 27130645
Ann Surg Oncol. 2014 Nov;21(12):4014-9
pubmed: 24923222
J Surg Res. 2018 Jul;227:168-177
pubmed: 29804849