SynthesisJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2024
Laparoscopic Versus Open Pancreatoduodenectomy for Periampullary Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Synthesis in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effect of unplanned conversion to open surgery on resection margins and complications in laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis with meta-regression.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic and periampullary tumors: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic or periampullary tumors: a multicenter propensity score-matched comparative study.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Laparoscopic management of intraductal oncocytic papillary neoplasm of the pancreas: Two case reports and review of literature.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of open versus laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a retrospective Markov model analysis from China.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeLaparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) has emerged as an alternative to open technique in treating periampullary tumors. However, the safety and efficacy of LPD compared to open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) remain unclear. Thus, we conducted an updated meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LPD versus OPD in patients with periampullary tumors, with a particular focus on the pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patient subgroup.
methodsAccording to PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library in December 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that directly compare LPD versus OPD in patients with periampullary tumors. Endpoints and sensitive analysis were conducted for short-term endpoints. All statistical analysis was performed using R software version 4.3.1 with a random-effects model.
resultsFive RCTs yielding 1018 patients with periampullary tumors were included, of whom 511 (50.2%) were randomized to the LPD group. Total follow-up time was 90 days. LPD was associated with a longer operation time (MD 66.75; 95% CI 26.59 to 106.92; p = 0.001; I
conclusionOur meta-analysis of RCTs suggests that LPD is an effective and safe alternative for patients with periampullary tumors, with lower intraoperative blood loss and shorter length of stay.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39028397What 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.