Meta-analysis of laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy: An insight into confounding by indication.
Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy
Spleen-preserving
Splenectomy
Journal
The surgeon : journal of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons of Edinburgh and Ireland
ISSN: 1479-666X
Titre abrégé: Surgeon
Pays: Scotland
ID NLM: 101168329
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 Sep 2023
04 Sep 2023
Historique:
received:
16
06
2023
revised:
27
07
2023
accepted:
23
08
2023
medline:
7
9
2023
pubmed:
7
9
2023
entrez:
6
9
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
To evaluate comparative outcomes of laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy (LSPDP) and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy (LDPS). A systematic search of multiple electronic data sources and bibliographic reference lists were conducted. Comparative studies reporting outcomes of LSPDP and LDPS were considered followed by evaluation of the associated risk of bias according to ROBINS-I tool. Perioperative complications, clinically important postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), infectious complications, blood loss, conversion to open, operative time and duration of hospital stay were the investigated outcome parameters. Nineteen studies were identified enrolling 3739 patients of whom 1860 patients underwent LSPDP and the remaining 1879 patients had LDPS. The patients in the LSPDP and LDPS groups were of comparable age (p = 0.73), gender (p = 0.59), and BMI (p = 0.07). However, the patient in the LDPS group had larger tumour size (p = 0.0004) and more malignant lesions (p = 0.02). LSPDP was associated with significantly lower POPF (OR:0.65, p = 0.02), blood loss (MD:-28.30, p = 0.001), and conversion to open (OR:0.48, p < 0.0001) compared to LDPS. Moreover, it was associated with significantly shorter procedure time (MD: -22.06, p = 0.0009) and length of hospital stay (MD: -0.75, p = 0.005). However, no significant differences were identified in overall perioperative (OR:0.89, p = 0.25) or infectious (OR:0.67, p = 0.05) complications between two groups. LSPDP seems to be associated with lower POPF, bleeding and conversion to open compared to LDPS in patients with small-sized benign tumours. Moreover, it may be quicker and reduce hospital stay. Nevertheless, such advantages are of doubtful merit about large-sized or malignant tumours. The available evidence is subject to confounding by indication.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37673704
pii: S1479-666X(23)00092-6
doi: 10.1016/j.surge.2023.08.006
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh (Scottish charity number SC005317) and Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of competing interest All authors have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.