Laparoscopic vs open pancreaticoduodenectomy: Overall outcomes and severity of complications using the accordion severity grading system

Horacio J. Asbun, John A. Stauffer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

230 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Minimal access surgery techniques have evolved to include complex surgical procedures. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) is a complex operation that pancreas surgeons have been slow to adopt. This article reviews our experience with patients undergoing LPD and compares their outcomes with those of patients undergoing open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). Study Design: All patients undergoing OPD or LPD during a 6-year period (2005-2011) were included. Results from the 2 groups were compared for mortality and morbidity according to the Accordion Severity Grading System. Oncologic markers, including margins of resection, transfusions received, number of lymph nodes, and lymph node ratio, were also compared. Results: During the study time period, 215 and 53 patients underwent OPD and LPD, respectively. No differences were seen in patient demographics, comorbidities, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, or pathology. Significant differences favoring LPD were seen in intraoperative blood loss (p < 0.001), transfusions (p < 0.001), length of hospital stay (p < 0.001), and length of ICU stay (p < 0.001). Operative time was significantly longer for LPD (p < 0.001). There were no differences in overall complications, pancreas fistula, or delayed gastric emptying. Oncologic outcomes demonstrated no significant differences in resection margins, size of tumor, or T/N stages. There were significant differences in number of lymph nodes retrieved (p = 0.007) and lymph node ratio (p < 0.001) in favor of LPD. Conclusions: This series demonstrates that LPD appears to be safe and feasible, with benefits over the open counterpart. However, the increased complexity and effort demanded by the technique pose the need for multi-institutional series and standardization in reporting. The goal should be to assess if LPD can result in a better procedure with better outcomes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)810-819
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of the American College of Surgeons
Volume215
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2012

Fingerprint

Pancreaticoduodenectomy
Lymph Nodes
Length of Stay
Pancreas
Gastric Emptying
Operative Time
Fistula
Comorbidity
Demography

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Laparoscopic vs open pancreaticoduodenectomy : Overall outcomes and severity of complications using the accordion severity grading system. / Asbun, Horacio J.; Stauffer, John A.

In: Journal of the American College of Surgeons, Vol. 215, No. 6, 12.2012, p. 810-819.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{b120249baf2b4db1ad1147e0cef807be,
title = "Laparoscopic vs open pancreaticoduodenectomy: Overall outcomes and severity of complications using the accordion severity grading system",
abstract = "Background: Minimal access surgery techniques have evolved to include complex surgical procedures. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) is a complex operation that pancreas surgeons have been slow to adopt. This article reviews our experience with patients undergoing LPD and compares their outcomes with those of patients undergoing open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). Study Design: All patients undergoing OPD or LPD during a 6-year period (2005-2011) were included. Results from the 2 groups were compared for mortality and morbidity according to the Accordion Severity Grading System. Oncologic markers, including margins of resection, transfusions received, number of lymph nodes, and lymph node ratio, were also compared. Results: During the study time period, 215 and 53 patients underwent OPD and LPD, respectively. No differences were seen in patient demographics, comorbidities, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, or pathology. Significant differences favoring LPD were seen in intraoperative blood loss (p < 0.001), transfusions (p < 0.001), length of hospital stay (p < 0.001), and length of ICU stay (p < 0.001). Operative time was significantly longer for LPD (p < 0.001). There were no differences in overall complications, pancreas fistula, or delayed gastric emptying. Oncologic outcomes demonstrated no significant differences in resection margins, size of tumor, or T/N stages. There were significant differences in number of lymph nodes retrieved (p = 0.007) and lymph node ratio (p < 0.001) in favor of LPD. Conclusions: This series demonstrates that LPD appears to be safe and feasible, with benefits over the open counterpart. However, the increased complexity and effort demanded by the technique pose the need for multi-institutional series and standardization in reporting. The goal should be to assess if LPD can result in a better procedure with better outcomes.",
author = "Asbun, {Horacio J.} and Stauffer, {John A.}",
year = "2012",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2012.08.006",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "215",
pages = "810--819",
journal = "Journal of the American College of Surgeons",
issn = "1072-7515",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Laparoscopic vs open pancreaticoduodenectomy

T2 - Overall outcomes and severity of complications using the accordion severity grading system

AU - Asbun, Horacio J.

AU - Stauffer, John A.

PY - 2012/12

Y1 - 2012/12

N2 - Background: Minimal access surgery techniques have evolved to include complex surgical procedures. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) is a complex operation that pancreas surgeons have been slow to adopt. This article reviews our experience with patients undergoing LPD and compares their outcomes with those of patients undergoing open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). Study Design: All patients undergoing OPD or LPD during a 6-year period (2005-2011) were included. Results from the 2 groups were compared for mortality and morbidity according to the Accordion Severity Grading System. Oncologic markers, including margins of resection, transfusions received, number of lymph nodes, and lymph node ratio, were also compared. Results: During the study time period, 215 and 53 patients underwent OPD and LPD, respectively. No differences were seen in patient demographics, comorbidities, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, or pathology. Significant differences favoring LPD were seen in intraoperative blood loss (p < 0.001), transfusions (p < 0.001), length of hospital stay (p < 0.001), and length of ICU stay (p < 0.001). Operative time was significantly longer for LPD (p < 0.001). There were no differences in overall complications, pancreas fistula, or delayed gastric emptying. Oncologic outcomes demonstrated no significant differences in resection margins, size of tumor, or T/N stages. There were significant differences in number of lymph nodes retrieved (p = 0.007) and lymph node ratio (p < 0.001) in favor of LPD. Conclusions: This series demonstrates that LPD appears to be safe and feasible, with benefits over the open counterpart. However, the increased complexity and effort demanded by the technique pose the need for multi-institutional series and standardization in reporting. The goal should be to assess if LPD can result in a better procedure with better outcomes.

AB - Background: Minimal access surgery techniques have evolved to include complex surgical procedures. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) is a complex operation that pancreas surgeons have been slow to adopt. This article reviews our experience with patients undergoing LPD and compares their outcomes with those of patients undergoing open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). Study Design: All patients undergoing OPD or LPD during a 6-year period (2005-2011) were included. Results from the 2 groups were compared for mortality and morbidity according to the Accordion Severity Grading System. Oncologic markers, including margins of resection, transfusions received, number of lymph nodes, and lymph node ratio, were also compared. Results: During the study time period, 215 and 53 patients underwent OPD and LPD, respectively. No differences were seen in patient demographics, comorbidities, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, or pathology. Significant differences favoring LPD were seen in intraoperative blood loss (p < 0.001), transfusions (p < 0.001), length of hospital stay (p < 0.001), and length of ICU stay (p < 0.001). Operative time was significantly longer for LPD (p < 0.001). There were no differences in overall complications, pancreas fistula, or delayed gastric emptying. Oncologic outcomes demonstrated no significant differences in resection margins, size of tumor, or T/N stages. There were significant differences in number of lymph nodes retrieved (p = 0.007) and lymph node ratio (p < 0.001) in favor of LPD. Conclusions: This series demonstrates that LPD appears to be safe and feasible, with benefits over the open counterpart. However, the increased complexity and effort demanded by the technique pose the need for multi-institutional series and standardization in reporting. The goal should be to assess if LPD can result in a better procedure with better outcomes.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84869501544&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84869501544&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2012.08.006

DO - 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2012.08.006

M3 - Article

C2 - 22999327

AN - SCOPUS:84869501544

VL - 215

SP - 810

EP - 819

JO - Journal of the American College of Surgeons

JF - Journal of the American College of Surgeons

SN - 1072-7515

IS - 6

ER -