RESUMO
In patients with neuroendocrine tumors with liver metastases (NETLMs), complete resection of both the primary and liver metastases is a potentially curative option. When complete resection is not possible, debulking of the tumour burden has been proposed to prolong survival. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the effect of curative surgery (R0-R1) and debulking surgery (R2) on overall survival (OS) in NETLMs. For the subgroup of R2 resections, outcomes were compared by the degree of hepatic debulking (≥ 90% or ≥ 70%). A systematic review of the literature was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines using PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Embase databases. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated for each study and pooled using a random-effects inverse-variance meta-analysis model. Of 538 articles retrieved, 11 studies (1,729 patients) reported comparisons between curative and debulking surgeries. After pooling these studies, OS was found to be significantly shorter in debulking resections, with an HR of 3.49 (95% confidence interval, 2.70-4.51; p < 0.001). Five studies (654 patients) compared outcomes between ≥ 90% and ≥ 70% hepatic debulking approaches. Whilst these studies reported a tendency for OS and progression-free survival to be shorter in those with a lower degree of debulking, they did not report sufficient data for this to be assessed in a formal meta-analysis. In patients with NETLM, OS following surgical resection is the best to achieve R0-R1 resection. There is also evidence for a progressive reduction in survival benefit with lesser debulking of tumour load.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare oncological outcomes after minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). BACKGROUND: Cohort studies have suggested superior short-term outcomes of MIDP vs. ODP. Recent international surveys, however, revealed that surgeons have concerns about the oncological outcomes of MIDP for PDAC. METHODS: This is a pan-European propensity score matched study including patients who underwent MIDP (laparoscopic or robot-assisted) or ODP for PDAC between January 1, 2007 and July 1, 2015. MIDP patients were matched to ODP patients in a 1:1 ratio. Main outcomes were radical (R0) resection, lymph node retrieval, and survival. RESULTS: In total, 1212 patients were included from 34 centers in 11 countries. Of 356 (29%) MIDP patients, 340 could be matched. After matching, the MIDP conversion rate was 19% (n = 62). Median blood loss [200âmL (60-400) vs 300âmL (150-500), P = 0.001] and hospital stay [8 (6-12) vs 9 (7-14) days, P < 0.001] were lower after MIDP. Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications (18% vs 21%, P = 0.431) and 90-day mortality (2% vs 3%, P > 0.99) were comparable for MIDP and ODP, respectively. R0 resection rate was higher (67% vs 58%, P = 0.019), whereas Gerota's fascia resection (31% vs 60%, P < 0.001) and lymph node retrieval [14 (8-22) vs 22 (14-31), P < 0.001] were lower after MIDP. Median overall survival was 28 [95% confidence interval (CI), 22-34] versus 31 (95% CI, 26-36) months (P = 0.929). CONCLUSIONS: Comparable survival was seen after MIDP and ODP for PDAC, but the opposing differences in R0 resection rate, resection of Gerota's fascia, and lymph node retrieval strengthen the need for a randomized trial to confirm the oncological safety of MIDP.
