Lee Ser Yee, Allen Peter J, Sadot Eran, D'Angelica Michael I, DeMatteo Ronald P, Fong Yuman, Jarnagin William R, Kingham T Peter
Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
J Am Coll Surg. 2015 Jan;220(1):18-27. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.10.004. Epub 2014 Oct 15.
The indications for minimally invasive (MIS) pancreatectomy have slowly increased as experience, techniques, and technology have improved and evolved to manage malignant lesions in selected patients without compromising safety and oncologic principles. There are sparse data comparing laparoscopic, robotic, and open distal pancreatectomy (DP).
All patients undergoing DP at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between 2000 and 2013 were analyzed from a prospective database. Clinicopathologic and survival data were analyzed to compare perioperative and oncologic outcomes in patients who underwent DP via open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches.
Eight hundred five DP were performed during the study period, comprising 37 robotic distal pancreatectomies (RDP), 131 laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies (LDP), and 637 open distal pancreatectomies (ODP). The 3 groups were similar with respect to American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, sex ratio, body mass index, pancreatic fistula rate, and 90-day morbidity and mortality. Patients in the ODP group were generally older (p = 0.001), had significantly higher intraoperative blood loss (p < 0.001), and had a trend toward a longer hospital stay (p = 0.05). Of the significant preoperative variables, visceral fat was predictive of conversion on multivariate analysis (p = 0.003). Oncologic outcomes in the adenocarcinoma cases were similar for the 3 groups, with high rates of R0 resection (88% to 100%). The ODP group had a higher lymph node yield than the LDP and RDP groups (15.4, [SD 8.7] vs 10.4 [SD 8.0] vs 12[SD 7.2], p = 0.04).
The RDP and LDP were comparable with respect to most perioperative outcomes, with no clear advantage of one approach over the other. Both of these MIS techniques may have advantages over ODP in well-selected patients. All approaches achieved a similarly high rate of R0 resection for patients with adenocarcinoma.
随着经验、技术和科技的进步与发展,为在不影响安全性和肿瘤学原则的前提下处理特定患者的恶性病变,微创胰腺切除术的适应证逐渐增多。比较腹腔镜、机器人辅助和开放远端胰腺切除术(DP)的数据较少。
对2000年至2013年间在纪念斯隆凯特琳癌症中心接受DP的所有患者进行前瞻性数据库分析。分析临床病理和生存数据,以比较通过开放、腹腔镜和机器人辅助途径接受DP的患者的围手术期和肿瘤学结局。
研究期间共进行了805例DP,包括37例机器人辅助远端胰腺切除术(RDP)、131例腹腔镜远端胰腺切除术(LDP)和637例开放远端胰腺切除术(ODP)。三组在麻醉医师协会(ASA)评分、性别比例、体重指数、胰瘘发生率以及90天发病率和死亡率方面相似。ODP组患者通常年龄较大(p = 0.001),术中失血量显著更高(p < 0.001),且住院时间有延长趋势(p = 0.05)。在显著的术前变量中,内脏脂肪在多变量分析中可预测中转手术(p = 0.003)。三组腺癌病例的肿瘤学结局相似,R0切除率较高(88%至100%)。ODP组的淋巴结获取数高于LDP组和RDP组(分别为15.4个[标准差8.7]、10.4个[标准差8.0]和12个[标准差7.2],p = 0.04)。
RDP和LDP在大多数围手术期结局方面具有可比性,一种方法相对于另一种方法没有明显优势。在精心挑选的患者中,这两种微创技术可能均优于ODP。对于腺癌患者,所有手术方法均实现了相似的高R0切除率。