Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy
Autor: | Bård I. Røsok, Thijs de Rooij, Jony van Hilst, Markus K. Diener, Peter J. Allen, Charles M. Vollmer, David A. Kooby, Shailesh V. Shrikhande, Horacio J. Asbun, Jeffrey Barkun, Marc G. Besselink, Ugo Boggi, Kevin Conlon, Ho Seong Han, Paul Hansen, Michael L. Kendrick, David Kooby, Andre L. Montagnini, Chinnasamy Palanivelu, Go Wakabayashi, Herbert J. Zeh |
---|---|
Přispěvatelé: | CCA - Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, Other departments, Surgery, APH - Methodology, Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism |
Rok vydání: | 2017 |
Předmět: |
medicine.medical_specialty
medicine.medical_treatment MEDLINE 030230 surgery law.invention 03 medical and health sciences Pancreatectomy Postoperative Complications 0302 clinical medicine Robotic Surgical Procedures Randomized controlled trial Risk Factors law medicine Humans Laparoscopy Evidence-Based Medicine Hepatology medicine.diagnostic_test business.industry Patient Selection General surgery Gastroenterology Evidence-based medicine Perioperative Congresses as Topic Surgery Treatment Outcome Systematic review 030220 oncology & carcinogenesis Observational study business |
Zdroj: | HPB: The official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association, 19(3), 205-214. John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
ISSN: | 1365-182X |
Popis: | Background The first International conference on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection was arranged in conjunction with the annual meeting of the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (IHPBA), in Sao Paulo, Brazil on April 19th 2016. The presented evidence and outcomes resulting from the session for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is summarized and addressed perioperative outcome, the outcome for cancer and patient selection for the procedure. Methods A literature search was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to compare MIDP and open distal pancreatectomy. Patient selection was discussed based on plenary talks, panel discussions and a worldwide survey on MIDP. Results Of 582 studies, 52 (40 observational and 12 case-matched) were included in the assessment for outcome for LDP (n = 5023) vs. ODP (n = 16,306) whereas 16 observational comparative studies were identified for cancer outcome. No randomized trials were identified. MIDP resulted in similar outcome to ODP with a tendency for lower blood loss and shorter hospital stay in the MIDP group. Discussion Available evidence for comparison of MIDP to ODP is weak, although the number of studies is high. Observed outcomes of MIDP are promising. In the absence of randomized control trials, an international registry should be established. |
Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
Externí odkaz: |