Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29067580›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2018

Comparison of laparoscopic to open pancreaticoduodenectomy in elderly patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Brandon C Chapman, Csaba Gajdos, Patrick Hosokawa, William Henderson, Alessandro Paniccia, Douglas M Overbey, Ana Gleisner, Richard D Schulick, Martin D McCarter, Barish H Edil

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 16 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 16 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 16 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Laparoscopic PancreaticoduodenectomyFrontiers in oncology · 2021
    Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Review
  18. [Emphasizing Principles of Surgical Oncology in Minimally Invasive Surgery for Pancreatic Cancer].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2025
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Brandon C ChapmanDepartment of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Csaba GajdosDepartment of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Patrick HosokawaAdult and Child Center for Health Outcomes Research and Delivery Science (ACCORDS), Aurora, CO, USA.
William HendersonAdult and Child Center for Health Outcomes Research and Delivery Science (ACCORDS), Aurora, CO, USA.
Alessandro PanicciaDepartment of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Douglas M OverbeyDepartment of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Ana GleisnerDepartment of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Richard D SchulickDepartment of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Martin D McCarterDepartment of Surgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Barish H EdilDivision of Surgical Oncology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, 1665 Aurora Court Room 3337, MS-F-703, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA. barish.edil@ucdenver.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe purpose of the study is to compare perioperative and survival outcomes in elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) to those undergoing open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD).

methodsPatients aged ≥ 75 years with pancreatic adenocarcinoma undergoing LPD or OPD were identified from the NCDB (2010-2013). Baseline characteristics and perioperative outcomes were compared using a χ

resultsWe identified 1768 patients aged ≥ 75 years who underwent LPD (n = 248, 14.0%) or OPD (n = 1520, 86.0%). The majority of patients in the LPD group had their surgery at facilities performing less than 5 LPDs per year (n = 165, 66.5%). 90-day mortality was significantly lower in the LPD compared to the OPD (7.2 vs. 12.2%, p = 0.049). The laparoscopic conversion rate was 30% (n = 74) and was associated with higher readmission rates (13.5 vs. 8.1%), 30-day mortality (8.0 vs. 3.8%), and 90-day mortality (10.4 vs. 6.0%), but these did not reach statistical significance. Median OS was significantly longer in the LPD group (19.8 vs. 15.6 months, p = 0.022). After adjusting for patient and tumor-related characteristics, there was a trend towards improved survival in the LPD group (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.69-1.03).

conclusionThe vast majority of the NCDB participating facilities perform less than 5 LPD cases per year, which was associated with an increased risk of perioperative mortality. Overall 90-day mortality was significantly lower in the LPD group and there was a trend towards improved OS in the LPD group compared to the OPD group after adjusting for patient and tumor-related characteristics. Studies with increased sample size and longer follow-up are needed before definitive conclusions can be made.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaAgedFemaleHumansLaparoscopyLength of StayMalePancreatic NeoplasmsPancreaticoduodenectomyRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAgedLaparoscopyMinimally invasive surgical proceduresPancreatic cancer, adultPancreaticoduodenectomy

Identifiers

PMID29067580

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.