A review of the current evidence for the role of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery following neo-adjuvant chemotherapy

Francis P. Robertson , Rowan W. Parks
{"title":"A review of the current evidence for the role of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery following neo-adjuvant chemotherapy","authors":"Francis P. Robertson ,&nbsp;Rowan W. Parks","doi":"10.1016/j.lers.2022.03.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Surgical resection of pancreatic cancer remains the only potentially curative treatment for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. The robotic platform has been introduced to surgical practice and recent large studies from national registries have demonstrated similar or improved peri-operative outcomes compared to the standard open approach. Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy is increasingly being offered to patients with borderline resectable/locally advanced disease but this has led to more challenging resections. Numbers of patients undergoing minimally invasive resection following neo-adjuvant chemotherapy remain low. The aim of this review is to assess the current evidence for the peri-operative safety and long-term oncological outcomes associated with minimally invasive pancreatic resection following neo-adjuvant chemotherapy.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central Register for Clinical Trials were searched up until 31st October 2021. The search terms include “minimally invasive”, “robotic”, “laparoscopic”, “pancreatectomy”, “pancreatic resection”, “whipple's pancreaticoduodenectomy”, “distal pancreatectomy”, “chemotherapy”, “neo-adjuvant chemotherapy”, “radiotherapy”, “neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy”, “induction therapy”, and “conversion surgery”. All studies including patients undergoing pancreatic resections were included. Studies which did not clearly state the approach to resection (minimally invasive or open) were excluded.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Seventy-eight studies were identified of which 8 compared open and minimally invasive resection following neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. There was insufficient data to perform a meta-analysis. Robotic surgery was associated with lower blood loss and shorter length of hospital stay. Three-year overall survival rates were similar between patients who underwent robotic or open resection however the robotic approach was associated with higher lymph node yield and a lower R1 resection rate.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Currently the evidence for minimally invasive surgery following neo-adjuvant chemotherapy is limited. Long-term oncological outcomes are similar to patients undergoing open resection and there is some evidence to suggest superior peri-operative outcomes. As numbers are limited, future studies analysing national and international databases on minimally invasive pancreatic resection are required to provide sufficient evidence to support the use of minimally invasive pancreatic resection following neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk groups.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":32893,"journal":{"name":"Laparoscopic Endoscopic and Robotic Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S246890092200024X/pdfft?md5=1fb49fdeb3979ec3e422aa069758973f&pid=1-s2.0-S246890092200024X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laparoscopic Endoscopic and Robotic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S246890092200024X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

Surgical resection of pancreatic cancer remains the only potentially curative treatment for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. The robotic platform has been introduced to surgical practice and recent large studies from national registries have demonstrated similar or improved peri-operative outcomes compared to the standard open approach. Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy is increasingly being offered to patients with borderline resectable/locally advanced disease but this has led to more challenging resections. Numbers of patients undergoing minimally invasive resection following neo-adjuvant chemotherapy remain low. The aim of this review is to assess the current evidence for the peri-operative safety and long-term oncological outcomes associated with minimally invasive pancreatic resection following neo-adjuvant chemotherapy.

Methods

Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central Register for Clinical Trials were searched up until 31st October 2021. The search terms include “minimally invasive”, “robotic”, “laparoscopic”, “pancreatectomy”, “pancreatic resection”, “whipple's pancreaticoduodenectomy”, “distal pancreatectomy”, “chemotherapy”, “neo-adjuvant chemotherapy”, “radiotherapy”, “neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy”, “induction therapy”, and “conversion surgery”. All studies including patients undergoing pancreatic resections were included. Studies which did not clearly state the approach to resection (minimally invasive or open) were excluded.

Results

Seventy-eight studies were identified of which 8 compared open and minimally invasive resection following neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. There was insufficient data to perform a meta-analysis. Robotic surgery was associated with lower blood loss and shorter length of hospital stay. Three-year overall survival rates were similar between patients who underwent robotic or open resection however the robotic approach was associated with higher lymph node yield and a lower R1 resection rate.

Conclusion

Currently the evidence for minimally invasive surgery following neo-adjuvant chemotherapy is limited. Long-term oncological outcomes are similar to patients undergoing open resection and there is some evidence to suggest superior peri-operative outcomes. As numbers are limited, future studies analysing national and international databases on minimally invasive pancreatic resection are required to provide sufficient evidence to support the use of minimally invasive pancreatic resection following neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk groups.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
微创胰腺手术在新辅助化疗后的作用的最新证据综述
目的手术切除胰腺导管腺癌仍是治疗胰腺导管腺癌的唯一可行方法。机器人平台已被引入外科实践,最近来自国家登记处的大型研究表明,与标准开放入路相比,机器人平台的围手术期结果相似或改善。新辅助化疗越来越多地提供给边缘可切除/局部晚期疾病的患者,但这导致了更具有挑战性的切除。在新辅助化疗后进行微创切除的患者数量仍然很低。本综述的目的是评估新辅助化疗后微创胰腺切除术的围手术期安全性和长期肿瘤预后的现有证据。方法检索截至2021年10月31日的medline、Embase和Cochrane临床试验中央注册库。搜索词包括“微创”、“机器人”、“腹腔镜”、“胰腺切除术”、“胰切除术”、“惠普尔胰十二指肠切除术”、“远端胰腺切除术”、“化疗”、“新辅助化疗”、“放疗”、“新辅助放化疗”、“诱导治疗”和“转化手术”。所有包括胰腺切除术患者的研究都被纳入。没有明确说明切除入路(微创或开放)的研究被排除在外。结果共纳入78项研究,其中8项比较了新辅助化疗后的开放性和微创性切除。没有足够的数据进行meta分析。机器人手术与更少的出血量和更短的住院时间有关。接受机器人或开放式切除术的患者的三年总生存率相似,但机器人方法与更高的淋巴结清除率和更低的R1切除率相关。结论目前新辅助化疗后微创手术治疗的证据有限。长期肿瘤预后与开放切除患者相似,有证据表明围手术期预后更好。由于数量有限,未来的研究需要分析国内和国际的微创胰腺切除术数据库,以提供足够的证据来支持高危人群在新辅助化疗后使用微创胰腺切除术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Laparoscopic Endoscopic and Robotic Surgery
Laparoscopic Endoscopic and Robotic Surgery minimally invasive surgery-
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: Laparoscopic, Endoscopic and Robotic Surgery aims to provide an academic exchange platform for minimally invasive surgery at an international level. We seek out and publish the excellent original articles, reviews and editorials as well as exciting new techniques to promote the academic development. Topics of interests include, but are not limited to: ▪ Minimally invasive clinical research mainly in General Surgery, Thoracic Surgery, Urology, Neurosurgery, Gynecology & Obstetrics, Gastroenterology, Orthopedics, Colorectal Surgery, Otolaryngology, etc.; ▪ Basic research in minimally invasive surgery; ▪ Research of techniques and equipments in minimally invasive surgery, and application of laparoscopy, endoscopy, robot and medical imaging; ▪ Development of medical education in minimally invasive surgery.
期刊最新文献
Gastric leiomyoma presenting as an endophytic growth of cardia of the stomach: A case report A live birth resulting from a fourth cesarean scar pregnancy after combined hysteroscopic and laparoscopic uterine repair: A case report and literature review A new abdominal drainage tube fixation method for 3-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy improves patients’ postoperative quality of life Managerial perspectives of scaling up robotic-assisted surgery in healthcare systems: A systematic literature review Minimally invasive management of parapharyngeal space tumors: Introducing a decision-making algorithm and radiologic tool
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1