SynthesisAnnals of surgical oncology2025
Minimal Invasive Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Metanalysis of Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials.
Synthesis in Annals of surgical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Robotic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy after completion of the learning curve: a propensity score-matched and CUSUM analyses of perioperative outcomes.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Minimally Invasive Versus Open Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2026Article
- Impact of Combined Resection of the Pancreas on Long-Term Survival in Gastric Cancer.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Article
- Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy: caution is warranted.Gland surgery · 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
backgroundThe role of a minimally invasive approach (MI) in patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) remained unclear.
methodsA systematic search of randomized controlled trials was conducted. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted, reporting risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD). The primary endpoints were the morbidity, mortality, and R1 rate. The secondary endpoints were clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), biliary fistula, reoperation, length of stay (LOS), time to functional recovery (TFR), and readmission.
resultsThe meta-analysis includes seven studies and 1428 patients: 618 (46.5%) in the OPD arm and 711 (53.5%) in minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD). The mortality rate was 2.9% for MIPD and 2.6% for OPD (RR 1.11 [range 0.53-2.29]). The major morbidity rate was 29.4% for MIPD and 25.6% for OPD (RR 1.11 [range 0.53-2.29]). The R1 rate was 6.2% for MIPD and 7% for OPD (RR 0.80 [0.54-1.20]). The operative time, comprehensive complication index score, POPF, PPH, DGE, biliary fistula, reoperation, readmission, LOS, TFR, and harvested lymph nodes were similar. Greater than 25% of heterogeneity was observed for major morbidity, operative time, POPF, LOS, TFR, and harvested lymph nodes. No publication bias was registered.
conclusionsMinimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy was not superior to OPD and provided marginal advantages in short-term results. Further efforts should be addressed to clarify the impact of learning curve in MIPD results and the economic sustainability of MIPD, particularly robotic approach.
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.