The comparation of short-term outcome between laparoscopic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a propensity score matching analysis

Updates in Surgery (2021)Cite this article

Abstract

Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is one of the most complex and delicate operations in abdominal surgery. With the development of laparoscopic techniques, more and more pancreatic experts have become skilled in laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD). However, the short-term efficacy of LPD compared to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) remains unclear. Here, we performed a propensity score matching study aiming to compare the short outcomes of patients who underwent LPD or OPD after the learning curve and established a risk model of pancreatic fistula. The data of 346 patients who had OPD or LPD from July 2015 to January 2020 were retrieved. After a 1:1 matching, 224 patients remained. The operation time was significantly longer (P = 0.001) but the amount of bleeding was significantly lower (P = 0.001) in the LPD group than in the OPD group. Patients in LPD group had fewer blood transfusions (P = 0.002) than those in OPD group. More lymph nodes (P < 0.001) were dissected in LPD group. The rate of grade B/C pancreatic fistula was significantly higher in the LPD group than in the OPD group (16.1% vs. 6.3%, P = 0.002). By multi variate Logistic regression analysis, we identified pancreatic tumor, malignancy and low body mass index were risk factors of Grade B/C pancreatic fistula after PD operation. Then, we developed a Grade B/C pancreatic fistula nomogram with the risk factors. The C-index of the nomogram was 0.836 (95% CI 0.762–0.910). In conclusion, LPD could be technically feasible, get less trauma and achieve similar short-term outcome as compared with OPD.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Data availability

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this manuscript will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation, to any qualified researcher.

References

  1. 1.

    Subar D, Gobardhan PD, Gayet B (2014) Laparoscopic pancreatic surgery: an overview of the literature and experiences of a single center. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 28(1):123–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpg.2013.11.011

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Song KB, Kim SC, Lee W, Hwang DW, Lee JH, Kwon J, Park Y, Lee SJ, Park G (2020) Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary tumors: lessons learned from 500 consecutive patients in a single center. Surg Endosc 34(3):1343–1352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06913-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Wang X, Cai Y, Jiang J, Peng B (2020) Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: outcomes and experience of 550 patients in a single institution. Ann Surg Oncol 27(11):4562–4573. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-08533-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Mazzola M, Giani A, Crippa J, Morini L, Zironda A, Bertoglio CL, De Martini P, Magistro C, Ferrari G (2020) Totally laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a propensity score matching analysis of short-term outcomes. Eur J Surg Oncol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2020.10.036

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Adam MA, Choudhury K, Dinan MA, Reed SD, Scheri RP, Blazer DG 3rd, Roman SA, Sosa JA (2015) Minimally invasive versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for cancer: practice patterns and short-term outcomes among 7061 patients. Ann Surg 262(2):372–377. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001055

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Sharpe S, Talamonti M, Wang C, Prinz R, Roggin K, Bentrem D, Winchester D, Marsh R, Stocker S, Baker MJJotACoS, (2015) Early national experience with laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma: a comparison of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy and open pancreaticoduodenectomy from the national cancer data base. J Am Coll Surg 221(1):175–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2015.04.021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Han SH, Kang CM, Hwang HK, Yoon DS, Lee WJ (2020) The Yonsei experience of 104 laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomies: a propensity score-matched analysis with open pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surg Endosc 34(4):1658–1664. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06942-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Lee B, Yoon YS, Kang CM, Choi M, Lee JS, Hwang HK, Cho JY, Lee WJ, Han HS (2020) Fistula risk score-adjusted comparison of postoperative pancreatic fistula following laparoscopic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. https://doi.org/10.1002/jhbp.866

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Huang L, Tian Y, Wu J, Yan M, Qiu F, Zhou S, Bai Y, Lai Z, Wang Y, Chen SJGS (2020) The effectiveness, risks and improvement of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy during the learning curve: a propensity score-matched analysis. Gland Surg 9(4):985–999. https://doi.org/10.21037/gs-20-98

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    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, International Study Group on Pancreatic S (2017) The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 years after. Surgery 161(3):584–591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2016.11.014

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR (1999) Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Centers for disease control and prevention (CDC) hospital infection control practices advisory committee. Am J Infect Control 27(2):97–132

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Zhang H, Guo X, Xia J, Zhu F, Shen M, Wang X, Wang M, Qin R (2018) Comparison of totally 3-dimensional laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy and open pancreaticoduodenectomy. Pancreas 47(5):592–600. https://doi.org/10.1097/MPA.0000000000001036

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Dokmak S, Ftériche FS, Aussilhou B, Bensafta Y, Lévy P, Ruszniewski P, Belghiti J, Sauvanet A (2015) Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy should not be routine for resection of periampullary tumors. J Am Coll Surg 220(5):831–838. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.12.052

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    de Rooij T, Klompmaker S, Abu Hilal M, Kendrick ML, Busch OR, Besselink MG (2016) Laparoscopic pancreatic surgery for benign and malignant disease. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 13(4):227–238. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrgastro.2016.17

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Nassour I, Wang SC, Christie A, Augustine MM, Porembka MR, Yopp AC, Choti MA, Mansour JC, Xie X-J, Polanco PM, Minter RM (2018) Minimally invasive versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a propensity-matched study from a national cohort of patients. Ann Surg 268(1):151–157. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002259

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Cai Y, Luo H, Li Y, Gao P, Peng B (2019) A novel technique of pancreaticojejunostomy for laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surg Endosc 33(5):1572–1577. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6446-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Poves I, Burdío F, Morató O, Iglesias M, Radosevic A, Ilzarbe L, Visa L, Grande L (2018) Comparison of perioperative outcomes between laparoscopic and open approach for pancreatoduodenectomy: the PADULAP randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 268(5):731–739. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002893

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Jiang Y-L, Zhang R-C, Zhou Y-C (2019) Comparison of overall survival and perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy and open pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Cancer 19(1):781. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-019-6001-x

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Kang CM, Lee WJ (2020) Is laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy feasible for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma? Cancers (Basel). https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers12113430

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Langan RC, Graham JA, Chin AB, Rubinstein AJ, Oza K, Nusbaum JA, Smirniotopoulos J, Kayser R, Jha R, Haddad N, Al-Kawas F, Carroll J, Hanna J, Parker A, Al-Refaie WB, Johnson LB (2014) Laparoscopic-assisted versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy: early favorable physical quality-of-life measures. Surgery 156(2):379–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2014.03.018

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    van Hilst J, de Rooij T, Bosscha K, Brinkman DJ, van Dieren S, Dijkgraaf MG, Gerhards MF, de Hingh IH, Karsten TM, Lips DJ, Luyer MD, Busch OR, Festen S, Besselink MG, Van Hilst J, De Rooij T, Bosscha K, Brinkman DJ, Van Dieren S, Dijkgraaf MG, Gerhards MF, De Hingh IH, Karsten TM, Lips DJ, Luyer MD, Busch OR, Festen S, Besselink MG, Marsman HA, Van Gulik TM, Wicherts DA, Eshuis WJ, Stibbe LA, Nieveen van Dijkum EJM, Van Hooft JE, Fockens P, Van Laarhoven HW, Wilmink JW, Van de Vijver MJ, Bijlsma MF, Verheij J, Nio CY, Van Lienden KP, Van Tienhoven G, Schoorlemmer A, Creemers G-J, Van Eijck CHJ, Groot Koerkamp B, Bruno MJ, Eskens F, Nuyttens JJ, Pek C, Van der Schelling GP, Seerden TC, Patijn GA, Nieuwenhuijs VB, De Groot JW, Bonsing BA, Vahrmeijer A, Swijnenburg RJ, Mieog JSD, Van der Harst E, Den Dulk M, Olde Damink S, Dejong CHC, Van Dam R, De Vos JM, Liem MSL, Van Laarhoven CJHM, Van Goor H, Van den Boezem PB, Van der Kolk BM, Stommel MWJ, Hermans JJ, Van Geenen EJM, Radema SA, Brosens LA, Scheepers JJG, Roos D, Boerma D, Te Riele W, Van Santvoort HC, Bollen TL, Wit F, Molenaar IQ, Haj Mohammad N, Van Leeuwen MS, Roele A, De Jong KP, De Meijer VE, Klaase JM, Kazemier G, Zonderhuis B, Daams F, Meijerink MR, Latenstein A, Van Rijssen LB, Nota C, Van Halsema E, Van Veldhuisen E, Vogel J, Janssen K, Scholten L, Daamen L, Walma M, Strijker M, Prins M, Zwart M, Suker M, Rombouts S, Mungroop T, Vissers F, Korrel M (2019) Laparoscopic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic or periampullary tumours (LEOPARD-2): a multicentre, patient-blinded, randomised controlled phase 2/3 trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 4(3):199–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2468-1253(19)30004-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Bressan AK, Aubin J-M, Martel G, Dixon E, Bathe OF, Sutherland FR, Balaa F, Mimeault R, Edwards JP, Grondin SC, Isherwood S, Lillemoe KD, Saeed S, Ball CG (2018) Efficacy of a dual-ring wound protector for prevention of surgical site infections after pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with intrabiliary stents: a randomized clinical trial. Ann Surg 268(1):35–40. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002614

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Marjanovic G, Kuvendziska J, Holzner PA, Glatz T, Sick O, Seifert G, Kulemann B, Küsters S, Fink J, Timme S, Hopt UT, Wellner U, Keck T, Karcz WK (2014) A prospective clinical study evaluating the development of bowel wall edema during laparoscopic and open visceral surgery. J Gastrointest Surg 18(12):2149–2154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-014-2681-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Klompmaker S, van Hilst J, Wellner UF, Busch OR, Coratti A, D’Hondt M, Dokmak S, Festen S, Kerem M, Khatkov I, Lips DJ, Lombardo C, Luyer M, Manzoni A, Molenaar IQ, Rosso E, Saint-Marc O, Vansteenkiste F, Wittel UA, Bonsing B, Groot Koerkamp B, Abu Hilal M, Fuks D, Poves I, Keck T, Boggi U, Besselink MG (2020) Outcomes after minimally-invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy: a pan-european propensity score matched study. Ann Surg 271(2):356–363. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002850

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Zhou W, Jin W, Wang D, Lu C, Xu X, Zhang R, Kuang T, Zhou Y, Wu W, Jin D, Mou Y, Lou W (2019) Laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a propensity score matching analysis. Cancer Commun (Lond, Engl) 39(1):66. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40880-019-0410-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Krautz C, Denz A, Weber GF, Grützmann R (2017) Influence of hospital volume effects and minimum caseload requirements on quality of care in pancreatic surgery in Germany. Visc Med 33(2):131–134. https://doi.org/10.1159/000456042

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Casadei R, Ricci C, Taffurelli G, Pacilio CA, Di Marco M, Pagano N, Serra C, Calculli L, Santini D, Minni F (2017) Prospective validation of a preoperative risk score model based on pancreatic texture to predict postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Int J Surg (Lond, Engl) 48:189–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.09.070

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Ellis RJ, Brock Hewitt D, Liu JB, Cohen ME, Merkow RP, Bentrem DJ, Bilimoria KY, Yang AD (2019) Preoperative risk evaluation for pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Surg Oncol 119(8):1128–1134. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.25464

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Akgul O, Merath K, Mehta R, Hyer JM, Chakedis J, Wiemann B, Johnson M, Paredes A, Dillhoff M, Cloyd J, Pawlik TM (2019) Postoperative pancreatic fistula following pancreaticoduodenectomy-stratification of patient risk. J Gastrointest Surg 23(9):1817–1824. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-018-4045-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Guo C-X, Shen Y-N, Zhang Q, Zhang X-Z, Wang J-L, Gao S-L, Lou J-Y, Que R-S, Ma T, Liang T-B, Bai X-L (2020) Prediction of postoperative pancreatic fistula using a nomogram based on the updated definition. Ann Surg Treat Res 98(2):72–81. https://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2020.98.2.72

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    You Y, Han IW, Choi DW, Heo JS, Ryu Y, Park DJ, Choi SH, Han S (2019) Nomogram for predicting postoperative pancreatic fistula. HPB Off J Int Hepato Pancreato Biliary Assoc 21(11):1436–1445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpb.2019.03.351

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by Young Talent Development Plan of Changzhou Health Commission (CZQM2020118), the Development Foundation of Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University (XYFY2020016), the Clinical Technology Development Foundation of Jiangsu University (JLY20180079), Post-Doctoral Special Foundation of China (2020M670065ZX), Post-Doctoral Foundation of Jiangsu Province (2020Z021), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81971504).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Wei Ding and Wenze Wu contributed equally to this work.

Affiliations

  1. Department of Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, #185 Juqian Road, Changzhou, 213003, China

    Wei Ding, Wenze Wu, Xuemin Chen, Yunfei Duan, Donglin Sun & Yunjie Lu

  2. Department of General Surgery, Wujin Hospital Affiliated With Jiangsu University, Changzhou, 213017, China

    Wei Ding, Yulin Tan & Xuezhong Xu

  3. Department of General Surgery, The Wujin Clinical College of Xuzhou Medical University, Changzhou, 213017, China

    Wei Ding, Yulin Tan & Xuezhong Xu

  4. Department of General Surgery, The Affiliated Changzhou No. 2 People’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Changzhou, 213003, Jiangsu, China

    Wenze Wu

Authors
  1. Wei Ding
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wenze Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yulin Tan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Xuemin Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yunfei Duan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Donglin Sun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Yunjie Lu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Xuezhong Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Donglin Sun or Yunjie Lu or Xuezhong Xu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Human and animal rights

This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors. As this study is designed as a retrospective study, formal consent is not required.

Informed consent

The study was approved by the local ethics committee.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ding, W., Wu, W., Tan, Y. et al. The comparation of short-term outcome between laparoscopic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a propensity score matching analysis. Updates Surg (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-021-00997-6

Download citation

Keywords

  • Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD)
  • Open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD)
  • Pancreatic fistula
  • Outcome
  • Propensity score matching analysis