| 11. |
- Korrel, Maarten, et al.
(författare)
-
Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy: an individual patient data meta-analysis of two randomized controlled trials
- 2021
-
Ingår i: HPB. - : ELSEVIER SCI LTD. - 1365-182X .- 1477-2574. ; 23:3, s. 323-330
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) has been suggested to reduce postoperative outcomes as compared to open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). Recently, the first randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing MIDP to ODP were published. This individual patient data meta analysis compared outcomes after MIDP versus ODP combining data from both RCTs. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed to identify RCTs on MIDP vs. ODP, and individual patient data were harmonized. Primary endpoint was the rate of major (Clavien-Dindo > III) complications. Sensitivity analyses were performed in high-risk subgroups. Results: A total of 166 patients from the LEOPARD and LAPOP RCTs were included. The rate of major complications was 21% after MIDP vs. 35% after ODP (adjusted odds ratio 0.54; p = 0.148). MIDP significantly reduced length of hospital stay (6 vs. 8 days, p = 0.036), and delayed gastric emptying (4% vs. 16%, p = 0.049), as compared to ODP. A trend towards higher rates of postoperative pancreatic fistula was observed after MIDP (36% vs. 28%, p = 0.067). Outcomes were comparable in high-risk subgroups. Conclusion: This individual patient data meta-analysis showed that MIDP, when performed by trained surgeons, may be regarded as the preferred approach for distal pancreatectomy. Outcomes are improved after MIDP as compared to ODP, without obvious downsides in high-risk subgroups.
|
|
| 12. |
- Korrel, Maarten, et al.
(författare)
-
Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy for resectable pancreatic cancer (DIPLOMA): an international randomised non-inferiority trial
- 2023
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Regional Health. - : ELSEVIER. - 2666-7762. ; 31
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background The oncological safety of minimally invasive surgery has been questioned for several abdominal cancers. Concerns also exist regarding the use of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer as randomised trials are lacking. Methods In this international randomised non-inferiority trial, we recruited adults with resectable pancreatic cancer from 35 centres in 12 countries. Patients were randomly assigned to either MIDP (laparoscopic or robotic) or open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). Both patients and pathologists were blinded to the assigned approach. Primary endpoint was radical resection (R0, & GE;1 mm free margin) in patients who had ultimately undergone resection. Analyses for the primary endpoint were by modified intention-to-treat, excluding patients with missing data on primary endpoint. The pre-defined non-inferiority margin of -7% was compared with the lower limit of the two-sided 90% confidence interval (CI) of absolute difference in the primary endpoint. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN44897265). Findings Between May 8, 2018 and May 7, 2021, 258 patients were randomly assigned to MIDP (131 patients) or ODP (127 patients). Modified intention-to-treat analysis included 114 patients in the MIDP group and 110 patients in the ODP group. An R0 resection occurred in 83 (73%) patients in the MIDP group and in 76 (69%) patients in the ODP group (difference 3.7%, 90% CI -6.2 to 13.6%; pnon-inferiority = 0.039). Median lymph node yield was comparable (22.0 [16.0-30.0] vs 23.0 [14.0-32.0] nodes, p = 0.86), as was the rate of intraperitoneal recurrence (41% vs 38%, p = 0.45). Median follow-up was 23.5 (interquartile range 17.0-30.0) months. Other postoperative outcomes were comparable, including median time to functional recovery (5 [95% CI 4.5-5.5] vs 5 [95% CI 4.7-5.3] days; p = 0.22) and overall survival (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.67-1.46, p = 0.94). Serious adverse events were reported in 23 (18%) of 131 patients in the MIDP group vs 28 (22%) of 127 patients in the ODP group. Interpretation This trial provides evidence on the non-inferiority of MIDP compared to ODP regarding radical resection rates in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. The present findings support the applicability of minimally invasive surgery in patients with resectable left-sided pancreatic cancer. Funding Medtronic Covidien AG, Johnson & Johnson Medical Limited, Dutch Gastroenterology Society. Copyright & COPY; 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
|
|
| 13. |
- Latenstein, Anouk E.J., et al.
(författare)
-
The use and clinical outcome of total pancreatectomy in the United States, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Surgery (United States). - : Elsevier BV. - 0039-6060. ; 170:2, s. 563-570
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Total pancreatectomy has high morbidity and mortality and differences among countries are currently unknown. This study compared the use and postoperative outcomes of total pancreatectomy among 4 Western countries. Methods: Patients who underwent one-stage total pancreatectomy were included from registries in the United States, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden (2014–2018). Use of total pancreatectomy was assessed by calculating the ratio total pancreatectomy to pancreatoduodenectomy. Primary outcomes were major morbidity (Clavien Dindo ≥3) and in-hospital mortality. Predictors for the primary outcomes were assessed in multivariable logistic regression analyses. Sensitivity analysis assessed the impact of volume (low-volume <40 or high-volume ≥40 pancreatoduodenectomies annually; data available for the Netherlands and Germany). Results: In total, 1,579 patients underwent one-stage total pancreatectomy. The relative use of total pancreatectomy to pancreatoduodenectomy varied up to fivefold (United States 0.03, Germany 0.15, the Netherlands 0.03, and Sweden 0.15; P <.001). Both the indication and several baseline characteristics differed significantly among countries. Major morbidity occurred in 423 patients (26.8%) and differed (22.3%, 34.9%, 38.3%, and 15.9%, respectively; P <.001). In-hospital mortality occurred in 85 patients (5.4%) and also differed (1.8%, 10.2%, 10.8%, 1.9%, respectively; P <.001). Country, age ≥75, and vascular resection were predictors for in-hospital mortality. In-hospital mortality was lower in high-volume centers in the Netherlands (4.9% vs 23.1%; P =.002), but not in Germany (9.8% vs 10.6%; P =.733). Conclusion: Considerable differences in the use of total pancreatectomy, patient characteristics, and postoperative outcome were noted among 4 Western countries with better outcomes in the United States and Sweden. These large, yet unexplained, differences require further research to ultimately improve patient outcome.
|
|
| 14. |
- Mackay, Tara M., et al.
(författare)
-
Transatlantic registries of pancreatic surgery in the United States of America, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden : Comparing design, variables, patients, treatment strategies, and outcomes
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Surgery (United States). - : Elsevier BV. - 0039-6060.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Registries of pancreatic surgery have become increasingly popular as they facilitate both quality improvement and clinical research. We aimed to compare registries for design, variables collected, patient characteristics, treatment strategies, clinical outcomes, and pathology. Methods: Registered variables and outcomes of pancreatoduodenectomy (2014–2017) in 4 nationwide or multicenter pancreatic surgery registries from the United States of America (American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program), Germany (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Allgemein- und Viszeralchirurgie - Studien-, Dokumentations- und Qualitätszentrum), the Netherlands (Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit), and Sweden (Swedish National Pancreatic and Periampullary Cancer Registry) were compared. A core registry set of 55 parameters was identified and evaluated using relative and absolute largest differences between extremes (smallest versus largest). Results: Overall, 22,983 pancreatoduodenectomies were included (15,224, 3,558, 2,795, and 1,406 in the United States of America, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden). Design of the registries varied because 20 out of 55 (36.4%) core parameters were not available in 1 or more registries. Preoperative chemotherapy in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma was administered in 27.6%, 4.9%, 7.0%, and 3.4% (relative largest difference 8.1, absolute largest difference 24.2%, P < .001). Minimally invasive surgery was performed in 7.8%, 4.5%, 13.5%, and unknown (relative largest difference 3.0, absolute largest difference 9.0%, P < .001). Median length of stay was 8.0, 16.0, 12.0, and 11.0 days (relative largest difference 2.0, absolute largest difference 8.0, P < .001). Reoperation was performed in 5.7%, 17.1%, 8.7%, and 11.2% (relative largest difference 3.0, absolute largest difference 11.4%, P < .001). In-hospital mortality was 1.3%, 4.7%, 3.6%, and 2.7% (relative largest difference 3.6, absolute largest difference 3.4%, P < .001). Conclusion: Considerable differences exist in the design, variables, patients, treatment strategies, and outcomes in 4 Western registries of pancreatic surgery. The absolute largest differences of 24.3% for the use of preoperative chemotherapy, 9.0% for minimally invasive surgery, 11.4% for reoperation rate, and 3.4% for in-hospital mortality require further study and improvement. This analysis provides 55 core parameters for pancreatic surgery registries.
|
|
| 15. |
- Siriwardena, Ajith K., et al.
(författare)
-
Standards for reporting on surgery for chronic pancreatitis : a report from the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS)
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Surgery (United States). - : Elsevier BV. - 0039-6060. ; 168:1, s. 101-105
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: The International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery provides globally accepted definitions for reporting of complications after pancreatic surgery. This International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery project aims to provide a standardized framework for reporting of the results of operative treatment for chronic pancreatitis. Methods: An International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery project circulation list was created with pre-existing and new members and including gastroenterologists in addition to surgeons. A computerized search of the literature was undertaken for articles reporting the operative treatment of chronic pancreatitis. The results of the literature search were presented at the first face-to-face meeting of this International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery project group. A document outlining proposed reporting standards was produced by discussion during an initial meeting of the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery. An electronic questionnaire was then sent to all current members of the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery. Responses were collated and further discussed at international meetings in North America, Europe, and at the International Association of Pancreatology World Congress in 2019. A final consensus document was produced by integration of multiple iterations. Results: The International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery consensus standards for reporting of surgery in chronic pancreatitis recommends 4 core domains and the necessary variables needed for reporting of results: clinical baseline before operation; the morphology of the diseased gland; a new, standardized, operative terminology; and a minimum outcome dataset. The 4 domains combine to give a comprehensive framework for reports. Conclusion: Adoption of the 4 domains of the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery reporting standards for surgery for chronic pancreatitis will facilitate comparison of results between centers and help to improve the care for patients with this debilitating disease.
|
|
| 16. |
- ter Veer, Emil, et al.
(författare)
-
Consensus statement on mandatory measurements in pancreatic cancer trials (COMM-PACT) for systemic treatment of unresectable disease
- 2018
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Oncology. - 1470-2045 .- 1474-5488. ; 19:3, s. E151-E160
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Variations in the reporting of potentially confounding variables in studies investigating systemic treatments for unresectable pancreatic cancer pose challenges in drawing accurate comparisons between findings. In this Review, we establish the first international consensus on mandatory baseline and prognostic characteristics in future trials for the treatment of unresectable pancreatic cancer. We did a systematic literature search to find phase 3 trials investigating first-line systemic treatment for locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer to identify baseline characteristics and prognostic variables. We created a structured overview showing the reporting frequencies of baseline characteristics and the prognostic relevance of identified variables. We used a modified Delphi panel of two rounds involving an international panel of 23 leading medical oncologists in the field of pancreatic cancer to develop a consensus on the various variables identified. In total, 39 randomised controlled trials that had data on 15 863 patients were included, of which 32 baseline characteristics and 26 prognostic characteristics were identified. After two consensus rounds, 23 baseline characteristics and 12 prognostic characteristics were designated as mandatory for future pancreatic cancer trials. The COnsensus statement on Mandatory Measurements in unresectable PAncreatic Cancer Trials (COMM-PACT) identifies a mandatory set of baseline and prognostic characteristics to allow adequate comparison of outcomes between pancreatic cancer studies.
|
|
| 17. |
- Glasbey, JC, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 18. |
|
|
| 19. |
- Bravo, L, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 20. |
|
|
