RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: There is considerable debate about the safety and clinical equivalence of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDCA). STUDY DESIGN: We queried the National Cancer Data Base to identify patients undergoing LPD and OPD for PDCA between 2010 and 2011. Chi-square and Student's t-tests were used to evaluate differences between the 2 approaches. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was performed to identify patient, tumor, or facility factors associated with perioperative mortality. RESULTS: Four thousand and thirty-seven (91%) patients underwent OPD. Three hundred and eighty-four (9%) patients underwent LPD. There were no statistical differences between the 2 surgical cohorts with regard to age, race, Charlson score, tumor size, grade, stage, or treatment with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy demonstrated a shorter length of stay (10 ± 8 days vs 12 ± 9.7 days; p < 0.0001) and lower rates of unplanned readmission (5% vs 9%; p = 0.027) than OPD. In an unadjusted comparison, there was no difference in 30-day mortality between the LPD and OPD cohorts (5.2% vs 3.7%; p = 0.163). Multivariable logistic regression modeling predicting perioperative mortality controlling for age, Charlson score, tumor size, nodal positivity, stage, facility type, and pancreaticoduodenectomy volume identified age (odds ratio [OR] = 1.05; p < 0.0001), positive margins (OR = 1.45; p = 0.030), and LPD (OR = 1.89; p = 0.009) as associated with an increased probability of 30-day mortality; higher hospital volume was associated with a lower risk of 30-day mortality (OR = 0.98; p < 0.0001). In institutions that performed ≥10 LPDs, the 30-day mortality rate of the laparoscopic approach was equal to that for the open approach (0.0% vs 0.7%; p = 1.00). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy is equivalent to OPD in length of stay, margin-positive resection, lymph node count, and readmission rate. There is a higher 30-day mortality rate with LPD, but this appears driven by a surmountable learning curve for the procedure.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/cirugía , Laparoscopía , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía , Pancreaticoduodenectomía/métodos , Adulto , Anciano , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/mortalidad , Bases de Datos Factuales , Femenino , Humanos , Laparoscopía/mortalidad , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Análisis Multivariante , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/mortalidad , Pancreaticoduodenectomía/mortalidad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Tasa de Supervivencia , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The oncologic equivalence of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) to open pancreatectomy (ODP) for ductal adenocarcinoma (DAC) is not established. METHODS: The National Cancer Data Base was used to compare perioperative outcomes following LDP and ODP for DAC between 2010 and 2011. RESULTS: One hundred forty-five patients underwent LDP; 625 underwent ODP. Compared with ODP, patients undergoing LDP were older (68 ± 10.1 vs 66 ± 10.5 years, P = .027), more likely treated in academic centers (70% vs 59%, P = .01), and had shorter hospital stays (6.8 ± 4.6 vs 8.9 ± 7.5 days, P < .001). Demographic data, lymph node count, 30-day unplanned readmission, and 30-day mortality were identical between groups. Multivariable regression identified a lower probability of prolonged length of stay with LDP (odds ratio .51, 95% confidence interval .327 to .785, P = .0023). There was no association between surgical approach and node count, readmission, or mortality. CONCLUSION: LDP for DAC provides shorter postoperative lengths of stay and rates of readmission and 30-day mortality similar to OPD without compromising perioperative oncologic outcomes.