In recent years, an increasing of the level of evidence occurred with a significant number of meta-analyses. A question remains open: can LDP be considered the “new gold standard” for benign and malignant body–tail pancreatic disease? A systematic literature search was conducted to identify all meta-analyses published up to 2016. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the clinical safety of LDP. The secondary endpoints were to evaluate: the length of hospital stay (LOS), readmission rate, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), overall postoperative morbidity and oncologic safety. Nine studies were found to be suitable for the analysis. Data regarding clinical safety were extractable in all meta-analyses but a “between study” homogeneity was available only in 7. The safety of LDP was sustained by six meta-analyses in benign/low grade of malignancy body–tail pancreatic lesions, by one in ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). LDP has a shorter LOS compared to open distal pancreatectomy (ODP), demonstrated by three meta-analyses. Readmission rate in LDP procedures was lower than in ODP; these data are sustained by one meta-analysis. LDP is not inferior to ODP regarding the occurrence of POPF (seven meta-analyses); overall morbidity rate was lower in LDP than ODP for benign or low-grade malignant tumor. The use of the LDP in PDAC is sustained from one study. In conclusion, LDP can be considered a safe alternative to ODP. LDP could have some advantages but the data do not permit to define this procedure as the first choice or as the new gold standard.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: many meta-analyses, few certainties / Ricci, Claudio; Casadei, Riccardo; Taffurelli, Giovanni; Pacilio, CARLO ALBERTO; Minni, Francesco. - In: UPDATES IN SURGERY. - ISSN 2038-131X. - STAMPA. - 68:3(2016), pp. 225-234. [10.1007/s13304-016-0389-5]

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: many meta-analyses, few certainties

RICCI, CLAUDIO;CASADEI, RICCARDO;TAFFURELLI, GIOVANNI;PACILIO, CARLO ALBERTO;MINNI, FRANCESCO
2016

Abstract

In recent years, an increasing of the level of evidence occurred with a significant number of meta-analyses. A question remains open: can LDP be considered the “new gold standard” for benign and malignant body–tail pancreatic disease? A systematic literature search was conducted to identify all meta-analyses published up to 2016. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the clinical safety of LDP. The secondary endpoints were to evaluate: the length of hospital stay (LOS), readmission rate, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), overall postoperative morbidity and oncologic safety. Nine studies were found to be suitable for the analysis. Data regarding clinical safety were extractable in all meta-analyses but a “between study” homogeneity was available only in 7. The safety of LDP was sustained by six meta-analyses in benign/low grade of malignancy body–tail pancreatic lesions, by one in ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). LDP has a shorter LOS compared to open distal pancreatectomy (ODP), demonstrated by three meta-analyses. Readmission rate in LDP procedures was lower than in ODP; these data are sustained by one meta-analysis. LDP is not inferior to ODP regarding the occurrence of POPF (seven meta-analyses); overall morbidity rate was lower in LDP than ODP for benign or low-grade malignant tumor. The use of the LDP in PDAC is sustained from one study. In conclusion, LDP can be considered a safe alternative to ODP. LDP could have some advantages but the data do not permit to define this procedure as the first choice or as the new gold standard.
2016
Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: many meta-analyses, few certainties / Ricci, Claudio; Casadei, Riccardo; Taffurelli, Giovanni; Pacilio, CARLO ALBERTO; Minni, Francesco. - In: UPDATES IN SURGERY. - ISSN 2038-131X. - STAMPA. - 68:3(2016), pp. 225-234. [10.1007/s13304-016-0389-5]
Ricci, Claudio; Casadei, Riccardo; Taffurelli, Giovanni; Pacilio, CARLO ALBERTO; Minni, Francesco
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/597437
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 7
  • Scopus 14
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 14
social impact