ArticleJournal of minimal access surgery
Evolution of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomies at a single institution.
Article in Journal of minimal access surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Early (≤ 1 year) anastomotic complications after laparoscopic and robotic hepaticojejunostomy: initial experience from a single center.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Case report: Initial presentation of pancreatic schwannoma as cystic pancreatic mass treated with classic Whipple's procedure.Frontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Propensity-Score Matched Analyses Comparing Clinical Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Distal Pancreatectomies: A Single-Center Experience.World journal of surgery · 2022Article
- First experience with robotic pancreatoduodenectomy in Singapore.Singapore medical journal · 2020Article
- Minimally Invasive Versus Open Pancreatectomies for Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: A Propensity-Score-Matched Study.World journal of surgery · 2020Article
- A single institution experience with robotic and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2020Article
- Critical Appraisal of the Impact of the Systematic Adoption of Advanced Minimally Invasive Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery on the Surgical Management of Mirizzi Syndrome.World journal of surgery · 2019Article
- Laparoscopic distal pancreatosplenectomy for isolated blunt traumatic pancreatic laceration: A case report and review of current literature.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2019Article
- Outcome of minimally-invasive versus open pancreatectomies for solid pseudopapillary neoplasms of the pancreas: A 2:1 matched case-control study.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2019Article
- Minimally-invasive versus open enucleation for pancreatic tumours: A propensity-score adjusted analysis.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2019Article
- Robotic assisted laparoscopic completion pancreatectomy for recurrent intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm after previous open pancreatoduodenectomy: A case report and literature review.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2019Article
- Short- and long-term outcomes after minimally invasive versus open spleen-saving distal pancreatectomies.Journal of minimal access surgeryArticle
- Changing trends and outcomes associated with the adoption of minimally-invasive pancreato-biliary surgery: Contemporary experience of a 'self-taught' early adopter in Southeast Asia.Journal of minimal access surgeryArticle
- Changing trends and outcomes associated with the adoption of minimally invasive pancreatic surgeries: A single institution experience with 150 consecutive procedures in Southeast Asia.Journal of minimal access surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study aims to study the changing trends and outcomes associated with the adoption of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) at a single centre. MATERIALS AND
methodsRetrospective review of sixty consecutive patients who underwent MIDP from September 2006 to November 2016 at a single institution. To study the evolution of MIDP, the study population was divided into three groups consisting of twenty patients (Group I, Group II and Group III).
resultsSixty patients underwent MIDP with 11 (18.3%) requiring open conversions. The median operation time was 305 (range: 85-775) min and the median post-operative stay was 6 (range: 3-73) days. Fifteen procedures were spleen-saving pancreatectomies. Major post-operative morbidity (>Grade 2) occurred in 12 (20.0%) patients and there was no mortality or reoperations. There were 33 (55.0%) pancreatic fistulas, of which 15 (25.0%) were Grade B fistulas of which 12 (20.0%) required percutaneous drainage. Comparison between the three groups demonstrated a statistically significant increase in the frequency of procedures performed, increase in robotic-assisted procedures and proportion of asymptomatic tumours resected. There also tended to be non-significant decrease in open conversion rates from 25% to 5% between the three groups and increase in tumour size resected from 24 to 40 mm.
conclusionComparison between the three groups demonstrated that MIDP was performed with increased frequency. There was a statistically significant increase in the frequency of resections performed for asymptomatic tumours and resections performed through robotic assistance. There was also a non-significant trend towards a decrease in open conversions and increase in the size of tumours resected.
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.