Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Effect of total laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy on short-term and oncological outcomes: a single-institution comparative study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Recently, the efficacy and outcomes of total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (TLPD) have been well established; however, specific data regarding the clinical outcomes of total laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) are still limited. The present study aims to directly compare the clinical and oncological outcomes following TLPD versus OPD at a single institution.

Methods

The clinical data of 127 consecutive patients who underwent TLPD (n = 69) and OPD (n = 58) and were admitted to our department between January 2017 and June 2019 were analysed retrospectively. The short-term and oncological outcomes in the two groups were compared.

Results

Compared to the OPD group, the TLPD group experienced a longer operative time [(399.1 ± 77.9) min vs. (247.9 ± 61.8) min] and significantly earlier oral intake [5.0 (IQR, 4.0–6.0) days vs. 8.0 (IQR, 6.0–8.0) days], earlier postoperative exhaust [3.0 (IQR, 3.0–4.0) days vs. 4.0 (IQR, 4.0–4.5) days], earlier out-of-bed activity [2.0 (IQR, 1.0–2.3) days vs. 3.0 (IQR, 2.0–3.0) days], earlier nasogastric tube removal [5.5 (IQR, 4.0–7.8) days vs. 8.0 (IQR, 6.0–11.0) days] and shorter postoperative length of hospital stay [14.0 (IQR, 11.0–21.0) days vs. 16.0 (IQR, 12.0–25.0) days] (P < 0.05). The estimated blood loss [(334.4 ± 157.8) mL vs. (344.6 ± 259.1) mL], presence of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (grade B/C, 5.8% vs. 5.2%) and the overall complication rate (23.2% vs. 25.9%) did not significantly differ between the two groups (P > 0.05). Regarding the oncological outcomes, there were no significant differences in pathological types, tumour size, lymph nodes harvested, tumour stages or resection margins, or in overall survival (OS) (56.9% vs. 53.2%, P = 0.704) or progression-free survival (PFS) (48.3% vs. 46.8%, P = 0.881) with a median 26-month follow-up.

Conclusion

TLPD is a safe and feasible procedure in select patients after a certain learning curve. Compared with OPD, TLPD has equivalent short-term and oncological outcomes and offers the advantages of faster postoperative recovery and shorter length of hospital stay.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gagner M, Pomp A (1994) Laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreatoduo- denectomy. Surg Endosc 8:408–410

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Gagner M, Pomp A (1997) Laparoscopic pancreatic resection: is it worthwhile? J Gastrointest Surg 1:20–25

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kendrick ML, Cusati D (2010) Total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: feasibility and outcome in an early experience. Arch Surg 145:19–23

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kim SC, Song KB, Jung YS, Kim YH, Park DH, Lee SS, Seo DW, Lee SK, Kim MH, Park KM, Lee YJ (2013) Short-term clinical outcomes for 100 consecutive cases of laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy: improvement with surgical experience. Surg Endosc 27:95–103

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Croome KP, Farnell MB, Que FG, Reid-Lombardo KM, Truty MJ, Nagorney DM, Kendrick ML (2014) Total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: oncologic advantages over open approaches? Ann Surg 260:633–638

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Adam MA, Choudhury K, Dinan MA, Reed SD, Scheri RP, Blazer DG 3rd, Roman SA, Sosa JA (2015) Minimally invasive versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for cancer: practice patterns and short-term outcomes among 7061 patients. Ann Surg 262:372–377

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Delitto D, Luckhurst CM, Black BS, Beck JL, George TJ Jr, Sarosi GA, Thomas RM, Trevino JG, Behrns KE, Hughes SJ (2016) Oncologic and perioperative outcomes following selective application of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary malignancies. J Gastrointest Surg 20:1343–1349

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Song KB, Kim SC, Hwang DW, Lee JH, Lee DJ, Lee JW, Park KM, Lee YJ (2015) Matched case-control analysis comparing laparoscopic and open pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with periampullary tumors. Ann Surg 262:146–155

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Chapman BC, Gajdos C, Hosokawa P, Henderson W, Paniccia A, Overbey DM, Gleisner A, Schulick RD, McCarter MD, Edil BH (2018) Comparison of laparoscopic to open pancreaticoduodenectomy in elderly patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Surg Endosc 32:2239–2248

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Pang L, Kong J, Wang Y, Zhang Y (2018) Laparoscopic versus open pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy. The first meta-analyse of retrospective matched cases. Acta Cir Bras 33:40–48

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fong ZV, Chang DC, Ferrone CR, Lillemoe KD, Castillo CFD (2016) Early national experience with laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma: is this really a short learning curve? J Am Coll Surg 222:209

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Dokmak S, Fteriche FS, Aussilhou B, Bensafta Y, Lévy P, Ruszniewski P, Belghiti J, Sauvanet A (2015) Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy should not be routine for resection of periampullary tumors. J Am Coll Surg 220:831–838

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Warshaw AL, Thayer SP (2004) Pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Gastrointest Surg 8:733–741

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lassen K, Coolsen MM, Slim K, Carli F, Aguilar-Nascimento JE, Schäfer M, Parks RW, Fearon KCH, Lobo DN, Demartines N, Braga M, Ljungqvist O, Dejong CHC (2013) Guidelines for perioperative care for pancreaticoduodenectomy: enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) society recommendations. World J Surg 37:240–258

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C, Sar M, Hilal MA, Adham M, Allen P, Andersson R, Asbun HJ, Besselink MG, Conlon K, Chiaro MD, Falconi M, Fernandez-Cruz L, Castillo CFD, Fingerhut A, Friess H, Gouma DJ, Hackert T, Izbicki J, Lillemoe KD, Neoptolemos JP, Olah A, Schulick R, Shrikhande SV, Takada T, Takaori K, Traverso W, Vollmer CR, Wolfgang CL, Yeo CJ, Salvia R, Buchler M (2017) The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPF) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 years after. Surgery 161:584–591

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Wente MN, Bassi C, Dervenis C, Fingerhut A, Gouma DJ, Izbicki JR, Neoptolemos JP, Padbury RT, Sarr MG, Traverso LW, Yeo CJ, Büchler MW (2007) Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after pancreatic surgery: a suggested definition by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS). Surgery 142:761–768

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Wente MN, Veit JA, Bassi C, Dervenis C, Fingerhut A, Gouma DJ, Izbicki JR, Neoptolemos JP, Padbury RT, Sarr MG, Yeo CJ, Büchler MW (2007) Postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH)—an International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definition. Surgery 142:20–25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Koch M, Garden OJ, Padbury R, Rahbari NN, Adam R, Capussotti L, Fan ST, Yokoyama Y, Crawford M, Makuuchi M, Christophi C, Banting S, Brooke-Smith M, Usatoff V, Nagino M, Maddern G, Hugh TJ, Vauthey JN, Greig P, Rees M, Nimura Y, Figueras J, DeMatteo RP, Büchler MW, Weitz J (2011) Bile leakage after hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: a definition and grading of severity by the International Study Group of Liver Surgery. Surgery 149:680–688

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Paniccia A, Schulick RD, Edil BH (2015) Total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a single-institutional experience. Ann Surg Oncol 22:4380–4381

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Shin SH, Kim YJ, Song KB, Kim SR, Hwang DW, Lee JH, Park KM, Lee YJ, Jun E, Kim SC (2017) Totally laparoscopic or robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy versus open surgery for periampullary neoplasms: separate systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Surg Endosc 31:3459–3474

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. de Rooij T, Lu MZ, Steen MW, Gerhards MF, Dijkgraaf MG, Busch OR, Lips DJ, Festen S, Besselink MG (2016) Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative cohort and registry studies. Ann Surg 264:257–267

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Khatkov I, Izrailov R, Tyutyunnik P, Khisamov A, Andrianov A, Fingerhut A (2017) One hundred and forty five total laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomies: A single centre experience. Pancreatology 17:936–942

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Zhang H, Guo X, Xia J, Zhu F, Shen M, Wang X, Wang M, Qin Y (2018) Comparison of totally 3-Dimensional laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy and open pancreaticoduodenectomy. Pancreas 47:592–600

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Torphy RJ, Friedman C, Halpern A, Chapman BC, Ahrendt SS, McCarter MM, Edil BH, Schulick RD, Gleisner A (2019) Comparing short-term and oncologic outcomes of minimally invasive versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy across low and high volume centers. Ann Surg 270:1147–1155

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Wang M, Peng B, Liu J, Yin X, Tan Z, Liu R, Hong D, Zhao W, Wu H, Chen R, Li D, Huang H, Miao Y, Liu Y, Liang T, Wang W, Cai Y, Xing Z, Cheng W, Zhong X, Zhao Z, Zhang J, Yang Z, Li G, Shao Y, Lin G, Jiang K, Wu P, Jia B, Ma T, Jiang C, Peng S, Qin R (2021) Practice patterns and perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy in China: a retrospective multicenter analysis of 1029 patients. Ann Surg 273:145–153

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Meng LW, Cai YQ, Li YB, Cai H, Peng B (2018) Comparison of laparoscopic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy for the treatment of nonpancreatic periampullary adenocarcinomas. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 28:56–61

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Asbun HJ, Stauffer JA (2012) Laparoscopic vs open pancreaticoduodenectomy: overall outcomes and severity of complications using the accordion severity grading system. J Am Coll Surg 215:810–819

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Stauffer JA, Coppola A, Villacreses D, Mody K, Johnson E, Li Z, Asbun HJ (2017) Laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: long-term results at a single institution. Surg Endosc 31:2233–2241

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Palanivelu C, Senthilnathan P, Sabnis SC, Babu NS, Gurumurthy SS, Vijai NA, Nalankilli VP, Raj PP, Parthasarathy R, Rajapandian S (2017) Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for periampullary tumours. Br J Surg 104:1443–1450

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Poves I, Burdío F, Morató O, Iglesias M, Radosevic A, Ilzarbe L, Visa L, Grande L (2018) Comparison of perioperative outcomes between laparoscopic and open approach for pancreatoduodenectomy: the PADULAP randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 268:731–739

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Lee CS, Kim EY, You YK, Hong TH (2018) Perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for benign and borderline malignant periampullary disease compared to open pancreaticoduodenectomy. Langenbecks Arch Surg 403:591–597

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Nickel F, Haney CM, Kowalewski KF, Probst P, Limen EF, Kalkum E, Diener MK, Strobel O, Müller-Stich BP, Hackert T (2020) Laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ann Surg 271:54–66

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. van Hilst J, de Rooij T, Bosscha K, Brinkman DJ, van Dieren S, Dijkgraaf MG, Gerhards MF, de Hingh IH, Karsten TM, Lips DJ, Luyer MD, Busch OR, Festen S, Besselink MG (2019) Laparoscopic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic or periampullary tumours (LEOPARD-2): a multicentre, patient-blinded, randomized controlled phase 2/3 trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 4:199–207

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Nickel F, Haney CM, Kowalewski KF, Probst P, Limen EF, Kalkum E, Diener MK, Strobel O, Müller-Stich BP, Hackert T (2020) Laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic review and meta­analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ann Surg 271:54–66

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Strobel O, Büchler MW (2019) Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy: safety concerns and no benefits. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 4:186–187

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Dokmak S (2019) Comment on “Comparison of perioperative outcomes between the laparoscopic and open approach for pancreaticoduodenectomy: can we compare the results of the laparoscopic approach with bad results of the open approach?” Ann Surg 270:e91-92

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Wang M, Li D, Chen R, Huang X, Li J, Liu Y, Liu J, Cheng W, Chen X, Zhao W, Li J, Tan Z, Huang H, Li D, Zhu F, Qin T, Ma J, Yu G, Zhou B, Zheng S, Tang Y, Han W, Meng L, Ke J, Feng F, Chen B, Yin X, Chen W, Ma H, Xu J, Liu Y, Lin R, Dong Y, Yu Y, Liu J, Zhang H, Qin R (2021) Laparoscopic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic or periampullary tumours: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 6(6):438–447

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Conrad C, Basso V, Passot G, Zorzi D, Li L, Chen HC, Fuks D, Gayet B (2017) Comparable long-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for adenocarcinoma: a propensity score weighting analysis. Surg Endosc 31:3970–3978

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Kantor O, Talamonti MS, Sharpe S, Lutfi W, Winchester DJ, Roggin KK, Bentrem DJ, Prinz RA, Baker MS (2017) Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for adenocarcinoma provides short-term oncologic outcomes and long-term overall survival rates similar to those for open pancreaticoduodenectomy. Am J Surg 213:512–515

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Pengbo Zhang and Shuai Gong contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of General Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, #99 Huaihai Xi Road, Jiangsu, 221002, Xuzhou, China

    Pengbo Zhang, Shuai Gong, Nai Wu, Chong Zhang, Yi Zhang, Xiuzhong Zhang & Zeqiang Ren

Authors
  1. Pengbo Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shuai Gong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nai Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Chong Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yi Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Xiuzhong Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Zeqiang Ren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

PZ, XZ and ZR participated in the study conception and design. PZ, SG and NW participated in the acquisition of data. PZ and SG participated in the analysis and interpretation of data. PZ participated in the drafting of the manuscript. ZR, XZ, SG, CZ, NW and YZ participated in the critical revision of the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Xiuzhong Zhang or Zeqiang Ren.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

The retrospective study was approved by the hospital Ethics Committee.

Consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, P., Gong, S., Wu, N. et al. Effect of total laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy on short-term and oncological outcomes: a single-institution comparative study. Langenbecks Arch Surg 407, 2789–2799 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-022-02478-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-022-02478-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation