{"title":"比较腹腔镜与开放式胰十二指肠切除术治疗胰管腺癌的安全性和有效性:一项随机对照试验的荟萃分析。","authors":"Hussain Sohail Rangwala, Hareer Fatima, Mirha Ali, Burhanuddin Sohail Rangwala","doi":"10.1007/s13193-024-02132-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has an estimated 5-year survival rate of 11% and remains a formidable challenge. Despite evolving pancreaticoduodenectomy techniques, the pinnacle status of laparoscopic surgery persists. Technological advancements since Gagner and Pomp's 1994 breakthrough have expanded its reach, yet it remains complex. Although safety reports exist, large-scale studies establishing the viability of laparoscopic surgery for PDAC are scarce. This study aimed to provide an up-to-date meta-analysis, scrutinizing all relevant trials, especially recently published ones, to discern differences between laparoscopic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy procedures. This meta-analysis, following the PRISMA guidelines, systematically searched the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases for randomized controlled trials on pancreaticoduodenectomy up to November 25, 2023. Data extraction, quality assessment, and statistical analysis, including primary and secondary outcomes, were conducted using rigorous methodology. The study employed Review Manager 5.4 for analysis, with significance set at <i>P</i> < 0.05. This meta-analysis, comprising five randomized controlled trials (laparoscopic, 605; open, 601; total, 1206), utilized the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, revealing minimal bias. Primary outcome analysis indicated a shorter hospital stay with laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (S.M.D. = - 0.18, 95% CI - 0.63 - 0.28, <i>P</i> = 0.45) and reduced blood loss (S.M.D. = - 1.96, 95% CI - 3.05, 0.88, <i>P</i> = 0.0004), but increased operative time (S.M.D. = 1.74, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.53, <i>P</i> < 0.0001). The secondary outcomes showed no significant differences in morbidity, mortality, resection, fistula, gastric emptying, hemorrhage, bile leak, reoperation, readmission, and surgical site infection between the two procedures. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) offers marginal benefits over open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD), including reduced blood loss and shorter hospital stays. However, LPD requires a significantly longer operative time, and no substantial differences have been observed in terms of mortality or other complications. Additional studies with lower heterogeneity are needed to thoroughly evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of LPD and OPD.</p>","PeriodicalId":46707,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology","volume":"16 2","pages":"432-442"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12052625/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing Safety and Efficacy: Laparoscopic vs. Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Control Trials.\",\"authors\":\"Hussain Sohail Rangwala, Hareer Fatima, Mirha Ali, Burhanuddin Sohail Rangwala\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s13193-024-02132-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has an estimated 5-year survival rate of 11% and remains a formidable challenge. Despite evolving pancreaticoduodenectomy techniques, the pinnacle status of laparoscopic surgery persists. Technological advancements since Gagner and Pomp's 1994 breakthrough have expanded its reach, yet it remains complex. Although safety reports exist, large-scale studies establishing the viability of laparoscopic surgery for PDAC are scarce. This study aimed to provide an up-to-date meta-analysis, scrutinizing all relevant trials, especially recently published ones, to discern differences between laparoscopic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy procedures. This meta-analysis, following the PRISMA guidelines, systematically searched the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases for randomized controlled trials on pancreaticoduodenectomy up to November 25, 2023. Data extraction, quality assessment, and statistical analysis, including primary and secondary outcomes, were conducted using rigorous methodology. The study employed Review Manager 5.4 for analysis, with significance set at <i>P</i> < 0.05. This meta-analysis, comprising five randomized controlled trials (laparoscopic, 605; open, 601; total, 1206), utilized the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, revealing minimal bias. Primary outcome analysis indicated a shorter hospital stay with laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (S.M.D. = - 0.18, 95% CI - 0.63 - 0.28, <i>P</i> = 0.45) and reduced blood loss (S.M.D. = - 1.96, 95% CI - 3.05, 0.88, <i>P</i> = 0.0004), but increased operative time (S.M.D. = 1.74, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.53, <i>P</i> < 0.0001). The secondary outcomes showed no significant differences in morbidity, mortality, resection, fistula, gastric emptying, hemorrhage, bile leak, reoperation, readmission, and surgical site infection between the two procedures. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) offers marginal benefits over open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD), including reduced blood loss and shorter hospital stays. However, LPD requires a significantly longer operative time, and no substantial differences have been observed in terms of mortality or other complications. Additional studies with lower heterogeneity are needed to thoroughly evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of LPD and OPD.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46707,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology\",\"volume\":\"16 2\",\"pages\":\"432-442\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12052625/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13193-024-02132-4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13193-024-02132-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
胰腺导管腺癌(PDAC)的5年生存率估计为11%,仍然是一个艰巨的挑战。尽管胰十二指肠切除术技术不断发展,腹腔镜手术的顶峰地位仍然存在。自1994年加格纳和庞普的突破以来,技术进步扩大了它的影响范围,但它仍然很复杂。虽然存在安全性报告,但建立腹腔镜手术治疗PDAC可行性的大规模研究很少。本研究旨在提供一项最新的荟萃分析,仔细审查所有相关试验,特别是最近发表的试验,以辨别腹腔镜和开放式胰十二指肠切除术的差异。本荟萃分析遵循PRISMA指南,系统检索PubMed和Cochrane图书馆数据库,检索截至2023年11月25日的胰十二指肠切除术随机对照试验。采用严格的方法进行数据提取、质量评估和统计分析,包括主要和次要结果。本研究采用Review Manager 5.4进行分析,显著性P = 0.45),出血量减少(smmd = - 1.96, 95% CI - 3.05, 0.88, P = 0.0004),但手术时间增加(smmd = 1.74, 95% CI 0.95 ~ 2.53, P = 0.0004)
Comparing Safety and Efficacy: Laparoscopic vs. Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Control Trials.
Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has an estimated 5-year survival rate of 11% and remains a formidable challenge. Despite evolving pancreaticoduodenectomy techniques, the pinnacle status of laparoscopic surgery persists. Technological advancements since Gagner and Pomp's 1994 breakthrough have expanded its reach, yet it remains complex. Although safety reports exist, large-scale studies establishing the viability of laparoscopic surgery for PDAC are scarce. This study aimed to provide an up-to-date meta-analysis, scrutinizing all relevant trials, especially recently published ones, to discern differences between laparoscopic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy procedures. This meta-analysis, following the PRISMA guidelines, systematically searched the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases for randomized controlled trials on pancreaticoduodenectomy up to November 25, 2023. Data extraction, quality assessment, and statistical analysis, including primary and secondary outcomes, were conducted using rigorous methodology. The study employed Review Manager 5.4 for analysis, with significance set at P < 0.05. This meta-analysis, comprising five randomized controlled trials (laparoscopic, 605; open, 601; total, 1206), utilized the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, revealing minimal bias. Primary outcome analysis indicated a shorter hospital stay with laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (S.M.D. = - 0.18, 95% CI - 0.63 - 0.28, P = 0.45) and reduced blood loss (S.M.D. = - 1.96, 95% CI - 3.05, 0.88, P = 0.0004), but increased operative time (S.M.D. = 1.74, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.53, P < 0.0001). The secondary outcomes showed no significant differences in morbidity, mortality, resection, fistula, gastric emptying, hemorrhage, bile leak, reoperation, readmission, and surgical site infection between the two procedures. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) offers marginal benefits over open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD), including reduced blood loss and shorter hospital stays. However, LPD requires a significantly longer operative time, and no substantial differences have been observed in terms of mortality or other complications. Additional studies with lower heterogeneity are needed to thoroughly evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of LPD and OPD.
期刊介绍:
The Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology aims to encourage and promote clinical and research activities pertaining to Surgical Oncology. It also aims to bring in the concept of multidisciplinary team approach in management of various cancers.
The Journal would publish original article, point of technique, review article, case report, letter to editor, profiles of eminent teachers, surgeons and instititions - a short (up to 500 words) of the Cancer Institutions, departments, and oncologist, who founded new departments.