Laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a single-center experience
The efficacy and outcomes of laparoscopic resection for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) are well established; however, specific data regarding the outcomes of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (L-PD) are limited. The purpose of the present study was to compare the clinical and oncological outcomes following L-PD versus open PD (O-PD) in patients with PNETs.
This retrospective study included 149 patients with PNETs who underwent PD at the Asan Medical Center between January 2006 and December 2017. In 58 patients, a laparoscopic approach was used (L-PD group), and in 91, an open technique was used (O-PD group).
The mean operative time was longer in the L-PD group than in the O-PD group (417.4 min vs. 362.2 min; p = 0.002), and the mean duration of postoperative stay was shorter in the L-PD group (12.6 days vs. 17.8 days; p < 0.001). The estimated blood loss (433.2 ml vs. 415.0 ml; p = 0.824) and the overall complication rate (34.5% vs. 38.5%; p = 0.624) did not significantly differ between the two groups. Regarding the oncological outcomes, there were no significant differences in the resection margins, tumor size, tumor grading, or T/N stage. The number of harvested lymph nodes in the L-PD group was lower than that in the O-PD group (7.1 vs. 10.8; p = 0.002). The 3-year overall survival rate was 91.9% in the L-PD group and 93.6% in the O-PD group (p = 0.974). The 3-year disease-free survival rate was 94.8% in the L-PD group and 86.7% in the O-PD group (p = 0.225).
L-PD is feasible for the treatment of PNETs in selected patients and has the advantages of short recovery time and reduced hospital stay. The survival rate was similar in both groups; however, due to the difference in the harvested lymph nodes, a randomized trial should confirm the oncological safety of L-PD for PNETs.
KeywordsPancreatic NET Laparoscopy Pancreaticoduodenectomy
This study was supported by a Grant of the Korean Health Technology R&D Project, Ministry of Health & Welfare, South Korea (Grant Number: HI14C2640).
Compliance with ethical standards
Hanbaro Kim, Ki Byung Song, Dae Wook Hwang, Jae Hoon Lee, Shadi Alshammary, and Song Cheol Kim have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.
- 2.Yao JC, Hassan M, Phan A, Dagohoy C, Leary C, Mares JE, Abdalla EK, Fleming JB, Vauthey JN, Rashid A, Evans DB (2008) One hundred years after “carcinoid”: epidemiology of and prognostic factors for neuroendocrine tumors in 35,825 cases in the United States. J Clin Oncol 26:3063–3072CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.Sadot E, Reidy-Lagunes DL, Tang LH, Do RK, Gonen M, D’Angelica MI, DeMatteo RP, Kingham TP, Groot Koerkamp B, Untch BR, Brennan MF, Jarnagin WR, Allen PJ (2016) Observation versus resection for small asymptomatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a matched case-control study. Ann Surg Oncol 23:1361–1370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Spolverato G, Bagante F, Aldrighetti L, Poultsides G, Bauer TW, Field RC, Marques HP, Weiss M, Maithel SK, Pawlik TM (2017) Neuroendocrine liver metastasis: prognostic implications of primary tumor site on patients undergoing curative intent liver surgery. J Gastrointest Surg 21:2039–2047CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Cho CS, Kooby DA, Schmidt CM, Nakeeb A, Bentrem DJ, Merchant NB, Parikh AA, Martin RC 2nd, Scoggins CR, Ahmad SA, Kim HJ, Hamilton N, Hawkins WG, Weber SM (2011) Laparoscopic versus open left pancreatectomy: can preoperative factors indicate the safer technique? Ann Surg 253:975–980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Song KB, Kim SC, Park JB, Kim YH, Jung YS, Kim MH, Lee SK, Seo DW, Lee SS, Park DH, Han DJ (2011) Single-center experience of laparoscopic left pancreatic resection in 359 consecutive patients: changing the surgical paradigm of left pancreatic resection. Surg Endosc 25:3364–3372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Tamburrino D, Partelli S, Renzi C, Crippa S, Muffatti F, Perali C, Parisi A, Randolph J, Fusai GK, Cirocchi R, Falconi M (2017) Systematic review and meta-analysis on laparoscopic pancreatic resections for neuroendocrine neoplasms (PNENs). Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 11:65–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C, Sarr M, Abu Hilal M, Adham M, Allen P, Andersson R, Asbun HJ, Besselink MG, Conlon K, Del Chiaro M, Falconi M, Fernandez-Cruz L, Fernandez-Del Castillo C, Fingerhut A, Friess H, Gouma DJ, Hackert T, Izbicki J, Lillemoe KD, Neoptolemos JP, Olah A, Schulick R, Shrikhande SV, Takada T, Takaori K, Traverso W, Vollmer CR, Wolfgang CL, Yeo CJ, Salvia R, Buchler M (2017) The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 years after. Surgery 161:584–591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Tol JA, Gouma DJ, Bassi C, Dervenis C, Montorsi M, Adham M, Andren-Sandberg A, Asbun HJ, Bockhorn M, Buchler MW, Conlon KC, Fernandez-Cruz L, Fingerhut A, Friess H, Hartwig W, Izbicki JR, Lillemoe KD, Milicevic MN, Neoptolemos JP, Shrikhande SV, Vollmer CM, Yeo CJ, Charnley RM (2014) Definition of a standard lymphadenectomy in surgery for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a consensus statement by the International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS). Surgery 156:591–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Bettini R, Boninsegna L, Mantovani W, Capelli P, Bassi C, Pederzoli P, Delle Fave GF, Panzuto F, Scarpa A, Falconi M (2008) Prognostic factors at diagnosis and value of WHO classification in a mono-institutional series of 180 non-functioning pancreatic endocrine tumours. Ann Oncol 19:903–908CrossRefGoogle Scholar