Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33301071›Full record

SynthesisLangenbeck's archives of surgery2021

Risk factors and outcomes of conversion in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review.

A Balduzzi, N van der Heijde, A Alseidi, S Dokmak, M L Kendrick, P M Polanco, D E Sandford, S V Shrikhande, C M Vollmer, S E Wang and 5 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

15 authors.

A BalduzziDepartment of Surgery, University Hospital, Verona, Italy.
N van der HeijdeDepartment of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital, Southampton, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0961-4108
A AlseidiDepartment of Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
S DokmakDepartment of Surgery, Beaujon Hospital, Paris, France.
M L KendrickDepartment of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
P M PolancoDepartment of Surgery, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
D E SandfordDepartment of Surgery, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA.
S V ShrikhandeDepartment of Surgery, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India.
C M VollmerDepartment of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
S E WangDepartment of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China.
H J ZehDepartment of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
M Abu HilalDepartment of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital, Southampton, UK.
H J AsbunHepatobiliary and Pancreas, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, FL, USA.
M G BesselinkDepartment of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. m.g.besselink@amsterdamumc.nl.
International Evidence-based Guidelines of Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe reported conversion rates for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) range widely from 2 to 38%. The identification of risk factors for conversion may help surgeons during preoperative planning and patient counseling. Moreover, the impact of conversion on outcomes of MIDP is unknown.

methodsA systematic review was conducted as part of the 2019 Miami International Evidence-Based Guidelines on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection (IG-MIPR). The PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched for studies concerning conversion to open surgery in MIDP.

resultsOf the 828 studies screened, eight met the eligibility criteria, resulting in a combined dataset including 2592 patients after MIDP. The overall conversion rate was 17.1% (range 13.0-32.7%) with heterogeneity between studies associated with the definition of conversion adopted. Only one study divided conversion into elective and emergency conversion. The main indications for conversion were vascular involvement (23.7%), concern for oncological radicality (21.9%), and bleeding (18.9%). The reported risk factors for conversion included a malignancy as an indication for surgery, the proximity of the tumor to vascular structures in preoperative imaging, higher BMI or visceral fat, and multi-organ resection or extended resection. Contrasting results were seen in terms of blood loss and length of stay in comparing converted MIDP and completed MIDP patients.

conclusionThe identified risk factors for conversion from this study can be used for patient selection and counseling. Surgeon experience should be considered when contemplating MIDP for a complex patient. Future studies should divide conversion into elective and emergency conversion.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyPancreatic NeoplasmsRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansPancreatectomyRisk FactorsTreatment OutcomeConversionConversion to open surgeryLaparoscopic distal pancreatectomyMinimally invasive distal pancreatectomyRobotic distal pancreatectomy

Identifiers

PMID33301071
PMCPMC8106568

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.