Minimal Invasive Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Metanalysis of Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials

BackgroundThe role of a minimally invasive approach (MI) in patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) remained unclear.MethodsA systematic search of randomized controlled trials was conducted. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted, reporting risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD). The primary endpoints were the morbidity, mortality, and R1 rate. The secondary endpoints were clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), biliary fistula, reoperation, length of stay (LOS), time to functional recovery (TFR), and readmission.ResultsThe meta-analysis includes seven studies and 1428 patients: 618 (46.5%) in the OPD arm and 711 (53.5%) in minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD). The mortality rate was 2.9% for MIPD and 2.6% for OPD (RR 1.11 [range 0.53-2.29]). The major morbidity rate was 29.4% for MIPD and 25.6% for OPD (RR 1.11 [range 0.53-2.29]). The R1 rate was 6.2% for MIPD and 7% for OPD (RR 0.80 [0.54-1.20]). The operative time, comprehensive complication index score, POPF, PPH, DGE, biliary fistula, reoperation, readmission, LOS, TFR, and harvested lymph nodes were similar. Greater than 25% of heterogeneity was observed for major morbidity, operative time, POPF, LOS, TFR, and harvested lymph nodes. No publication bias was registered.ConclusionsMinimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy was not superior to OPD and provided marginal advantages in short-term results. Further efforts should be addressed to clarify the impact of learning curve in MIPD results and the economic sustainability of MIPD, particularly robotic approach.