ArticleSurgical endoscopy2017
Laparoscopic surgery for pancreatic neoplasms: the European association for endoscopic surgery clinical consensus conference.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 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
34 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 79 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Pancreatoduodenectomy: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Recommendations 2019.World journal of surgery · 2020Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: a prospective clinical trial and comparative analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Trial
- Enucleation vs Pancreatoduodenectomy for Benign and Low-Grade Pancreatic Head Tumors.JAMA surgery · 2026Article
- Outcomes of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy in patients with a history of major upper abdominal surgery.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Application of the IDEAL framework in hepatopancreatobiliary surgery: a review of the literature.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Review
- Distal pancreatectomy with or without radical approach, vascular resections and splenectomy: Easier does not always mean easy.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2023Review
- Laparoscopic fluorescence imaging technique for visualizing biliary structures using sodium fluorescein: the result of a preclinical study in a porcine model.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2023Article
- Feasibility of robotic-assisted pancreatic resection in patients with previous minor abdominal surgeries: a single-center experience of the first three years.BMC surgery · 2022Article
- A Propensity-Matched Analysis of the Postoperative Venous Thromboembolism Rate After Pancreatoduodenectomy Based on Operative Approach.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2022Article
- Evaluation of factors predicting loss of benefit provided by laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy compared to open approach.Updates in surgery · 2022Article
- Implementation and training with laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: 23-year experience from a high-volume center.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Laparoscopic pancreatectomy for benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic tumors: outcomes in a single high-volume institution.BMC surgery · 2021Article
- Totally Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Comparison Between Early and Late Phase of an Initial Single-Center Learning Curve.Indian journal of surgical oncology · 2021Article
- Registrar performance in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy and effects on postoperative outcomes.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2021Article
- Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy Following Prior Upper Abdominal Surgery (Pancreatectomy and Prior Surgery).Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2021Article
- Evaluation of a single surgeon's learning curve of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: risk-adjusted cumulative summation analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Article
- Insight into the methodology and uptake of EAES guidelines: a qualitative analysis and survey by the EAES Consensus & Guideline Subcommittee.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Outcomes after distal pancreatectomy for neuroendocrine neoplasms: a retrospective comparison between minimally invasive and open approach using propensity score weighting.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 7 institutions in 8 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntroduced more than 20 years ago, laparoscopic pancreatic surgery (LAPS) has not reached a uniform acceptance among HPB surgeons. As a result, there is no consensus regarding its use in patients with pancreatic neoplasms. This study, organized by the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES), aimed to develop consensus statements and clinical recommendations on the application of LAPS in these patients.
methodsAn international panel of experts was selected based on their clinical and scientific expertise in laparoscopic and open pancreatic surgery. Each panelist performed a critical appraisal of the literature and prepared evidence-based statements assessed by other panelists during Delphi process. The statements were further discussed during a one-day face-to-face meeting followed by the second round of Delphi. Modified statements were presented at the plenary session of the 24th International Congress of the EAES in Amsterdam and in a web-based survey.
resultsLAPS included laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP), pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD), enucleation, central pancreatectomy, and ultrasound. In general, LAPS was found to be safe, especially in experienced hands, and also advantageous over an open approach in terms of intraoperative blood loss, postoperative recovery, and quality of life. Eighty-five percent or higher proportion of responders agreed with the majority (69.5%) of statements. However, the evidence is predominantly based on retrospective case-control studies and systematic reviews of these studies, clearly affected by selection bias. Furthermore, no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been published to date, although four RCTs are currently underway in Europe.
conclusionsLAPS is currently in its development and exploration stages, as defined by the international IDEAL framework for surgical innovation. LDP is feasible and safe, performed in many centers, while LPD is limited to few centers. RCTs and registry studies are essential to proceed with the assessment of LAPS.
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.