SynthesisWorld journal of surgery2016
Systemic Review of the Feasibility and Advantage of Minimally Invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy.
Synthesis in World journal of surgery, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
31 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy in Elderly Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Robotic pancreatoduodenectomy with vascular resection.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2016Pooled it
- Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy with major venous resection and reconstruction: anterior superior mesenteric artery first approach.Surgical endoscopy · 2018Trial
- Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and venous resection are safe in selected patients: a monocentric comparative study in 30 patients.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- A duct-to-mucosa pancreaticojejunostomy for small main pancreatic duct and soft pancreas in minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- First assistant experience in total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: accelerating the learning curve for an operator.BMC surgery · 2023Article
- Determining Hospital Volume Threshold for Safety of Minimally Invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Contemporary Cutpoint Analysis.Annals of surgical oncology · 2022Article
- Review of minimally invasive pancreas surgery and opinion on its incorporation into low volume and resource poor centres.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2021Review
- Adverse Impact of Intraoperative Conversion on the Postoperative Course Following Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy.Yonsei medical journal · 2021Article
- A cable-driven distal end-effector mechanism for single-port robotic surgery.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2021Article
- Effect of modified Blumgart pancreaticojejunostomy on nutritional status in elderly patients after pancreaticoduodenectomy.American journal of translational research · 2021Article
- Safety of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with liver cirrhosis using propensity score matching.PloS one · 2021Article
- A Comparative Study of Laparoscopic versus Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Ampulla of Vater Carcinoma.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Robotic-assisted versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: the results of a case-matched comparison.Journal of robotic surgery · 2020Article
- The Main Bottleneck for Non-Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma in Past Decades: A Population-Based Analysis.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2020Article
- First experience of pancreaticoduodenectomy using Revo-i in a patient with insulinoma.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2020Article
- Predictors and outcomes of converted minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy: a propensity score matched analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Article
- Predicting Selection Preference of Robotic Pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) in a Chinese Single Center Population: Development and Assessment of a New Predictive Nomogram.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2019Article
- The learning curve for a surgeon in robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a retrospective study in a high-volume pancreatic center.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Article
- Pitfalls for laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: Need for a stepwise approach.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMinimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD), which includes laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) and robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD), is a complex procedure that needs to be performed by experienced surgeons. However, the safety and oncologic performance have not yet been conclusively determined.
methodsA systematic literature search was performed using the Embase, Medline, and PubMed databases to identify all studies published up to March 2015. Articles written in English containing the keywords: "pancreaticoduodenectomy" or "Whipple operation" combined with "laparoscopy," "laparoscopic," "robotic," "da vinci," or "minimally invasive surgery" were selected. Furthermore, to increase the power of evidence, articles describing more than ten MIPDs were selected for this review.
resultsTwenty-six articles matched the review criteria. A total of 780 LPDs and 248 RPDs were included in the current review. The overall conversion rate to open surgery was 9.1 %. The weighted average operative time was 422.6 min, and the weighted average blood loss was 321.1 mL. The weighted average number of harvested lymph nodes was 17.1, and the rate of microscopically positive tumor margins was 8.4 %. The cumulative morbidity was 35.9 %, and a pancreatic fistula was reported in 17.0 % of cases. The average length of hospital stay was 12.4 days, and the mortality rate was 2.2 %.
conclusionsIn conclusion, after reviewing one-thousand cases in the current literature, we conclude that MIPD offers a good perioperative, postoperative, and oncologic outcome. MIPD is feasible and safe in well-selected patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.