ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2022
Effect of total laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy on short-term and oncological outcomes: a single-institution comparative study.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecently, the efficacy and outcomes of total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (TLPD) have been well established; however, specific data regarding the clinical outcomes of total laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) are still limited. The present study aims to directly compare the clinical and oncological outcomes following TLPD versus OPD at a single institution.
methodsThe clinical data of 127 consecutive patients who underwent TLPD (n = 69) and OPD (n = 58) and were admitted to our department between January 2017 and June 2019 were analysed retrospectively. The short-term and oncological outcomes in the two groups were compared.
resultsCompared to the OPD group, the TLPD group experienced a longer operative time [(399.1 ± 77.9) min vs. (247.9 ± 61.8) min] and significantly earlier oral intake [5.0 (IQR, 4.0-6.0) days vs. 8.0 (IQR, 6.0-8.0) days], earlier postoperative exhaust [3.0 (IQR, 3.0-4.0) days vs. 4.0 (IQR, 4.0-4.5) days], earlier out-of-bed activity [2.0 (IQR, 1.0-2.3) days vs. 3.0 (IQR, 2.0-3.0) days], earlier nasogastric tube removal [5.5 (IQR, 4.0-7.8) days vs. 8.0 (IQR, 6.0-11.0) days] and shorter postoperative length of hospital stay [14.0 (IQR, 11.0-21.0) days vs. 16.0 (IQR, 12.0-25.0) days] (P < 0.05). The estimated blood loss [(334.4 ± 157.8) mL vs. (344.6 ± 259.1) mL], presence of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (grade B/C, 5.8% vs. 5.2%) and the overall complication rate (23.2% vs. 25.9%) did not significantly differ between the two groups (P > 0.05). Regarding the oncological outcomes, there were no significant differences in pathological types, tumour size, lymph nodes harvested, tumour stages or resection margins, or in overall survival (OS) (56.9% vs. 53.2%, P = 0.704) or progression-free survival (PFS) (48.3% vs. 46.8%, P = 0.881) with a median 26-month follow-up.
conclusionTLPD is a safe and feasible procedure in select patients after a certain learning curve. Compared with OPD, TLPD has equivalent short-term and oncological outcomes and offers the advantages of faster postoperative recovery and shorter length of hospital stay.
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.