Short-term Outcomes After Minimally Invasive Versus Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy in Elderly Patients: a Propensity Score-matched Analysis

Overview

Journal BMC Surg

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty General Surgery

Date 2021 Jan 26

PMID 33494734

Citations 5

Authors

Shih-Min Yin

Yueh-Wei Liu

Yu-Yin Liu

Chee-Chien Yong

Chih-Chi Wang

Wei-Feng Li

Cheng-Hsi Yeh

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: To date, the evidence on the safety and benefits of minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) in elderly patients is still controversy. This study aim to compare the risk and benefit between MIPD and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) in elderly patients.

Methods: From 2016 to 2020, we retrospective enrolled 26 patients underwent MIPD and other 119 patients underwent OPD. We firstly compared the baseline characteristics, 90-day mortality and short-term surgical outcomes of MIPD and OPD. Propensity score matching was applied for old age patient (≥ 65-year-old vs. < 65-year-old) for detail safety and feasibility analysis.

Results: Patients received MIPD is significantly older, had poor performance status, less lymph node harvest, longer operation time, less postoperative hospital stay (POHS) and earlier drain removal. After 1:2 propensity score matching analysis, elderly patients in MIPD group had significantly poor performance status (P = 0.042) compared to OPD group. Patients receiving MIPD had significantly shorter POHS (18 vs. 25 days, P = 0.028), earlier drain removal (16 vs. 21 days, P = 0.012) and smaller delay gastric empty rate (5.9 vs. 32.4% P = 0.036). There was no 90-day mortality (0% vs. 11.8%, P = 0.186) and pulmonary complications (0% vs. 17.6%, P = 0.075) in MIPD group, and the major complication rate is comparable to OPD group (17.6% vs. 29.4%, P = 0.290).

Conclusion: For elderly patients, MIPD is a feasible and safe option even in patients with inferior preoperative performance status. MIPD might also provide potential advantage for elderly patients in minimizing pulmonary complication and overall mortality over OPD.

Citing Articles

High Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index Risk as a Predictor of Postoperative Complications and Early Mortality in Older Adult Patients Undergoing Pancreatoduodenectomy for Periampullary Malignancies.

Wang M, Chen C, Lin Y, Liu Y, Liu Y, Li W J Clin Med. 2025; 14(2.

PMID: 39860660 PMC: 11766299. DOI: 10.3390/jcm14020655.

Outcomes of minimally invasive vs. open pancreatoduodenectomies in pancreatic adenocarcinoma: analysis of ACS-NSQIP data.

Khalid A, Ahmed H, Amini N, Pasha S, Newman E, King D Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2024; 409(1):258.

PMID: 39168872 DOI: 10.1007/s00423-024-03454-1.

EAES/SAGES evidence-based recommendations and expert consensus on optimization of perioperative care in older adults.

Keller D, Curtis N, Burt H, Ammirati C, Collings A, Polk Jr H Surg Endosc. 2024; 38(8):4104-4126.

PMID: 38942944 PMC: 11289045. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-024-10977-7.

The impact of preoperative nutritional status on postoperative outcomes: an insight from Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index in elderly pancreaticoduodenectomy patients.

Hou T, Lin Y, Liu Y, Liu Y, Li W, Kuo M BMC Surg. 2024; 24(1):100.

PMID: 38580988 PMC: 10996270. DOI: 10.1186/s12893-024-02397-0.

Effect of insurance status on perioperative outcomes after robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy: a propensity-score matched analysis.

Butano V, Ross S, Sucandy I, Christodoulou M, Pattilachan T, Neumeier R J Robot Surg. 2024; 18(1):90.

PMID: 38386222 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-024-01841-w.

References

Futagawa Y, Kanehira M, Furukawa K, Kitamura H, Yoshida S, Usuba T . Study on the Validity of Pancreaticoduodenectomy in the Elderly. Anticancer Res. 2017; 37(9):5309-5316. DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.11957. View

Ramai D, Ofosu A, Singh J, John F, Reddy M, Adler D . Demographics, tumor characteristics, treatment, and clinical outcomes of patients with ampullary cancer: a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cohort study. Minerva Gastroenterol Dietol. 2018; 65(2):85-90. DOI: 10.23736/S1121-421X.18.02543-6. View

Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C, Sarr M, Abu Hilal M, Adham M . The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 Years After. Surgery. 2017; 161(3):584-591. DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2016.11.014. View

Shore S, Vimalachandran D, Raraty M, Ghaneh P . Cancer in the elderly: pancreatic cancer. Surg Oncol. 2004; 13(4):201-10. DOI: 10.1016/j.suronc.2004.11.001. View

Pratt W, Gangavati A, Agarwal K, Schreiber R, Lipsitz L, Callery M . Establishing standards of quality for elderly patients undergoing pancreatic resection. Arch Surg. 2009; 144(10):950-6. DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.2009.107. View

Wente M, Bassi C, Dervenis C, Fingerhut A, Gouma D, Izbicki J . Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after pancreatic surgery: a suggested definition by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS). Surgery. 2007; 142(5):761-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2007.05.005. View

Wang S, Shyr B, Chen S, Shyr Y . Comparison between robotic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy with modified Blumgart pancreaticojejunostomy: A propensity score-matched study. Surgery. 2018; 164(6):1162-1167. DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2018.06.031. View

Wang M, Meng L, Cai Y, Li Y, Wang X, Zhang Z . Learning Curve for Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy: a CUSUM Analysis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2016; 20(5):924-35. DOI: 10.1007/s11605-016-3105-3. View

Zong L, Wu A, Wang W, Deng J, Aikou S, Yamashita H . Feasibility of laparoscopic gastrectomy for elderly gastric cancer patients: meta-analysis of non-randomized controlled studies. Oncotarget. 2017; 8(31):51878-51887. PMC: 5584298. DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.16691. View

10.

Shi Y, Wang W, Qiu W, Zhao S, Wang J, Weng Y . Learning Curve From 450 Cases of Robot-Assisted Pancreaticoduocectomy in a High-Volume Pancreatic Center: Optimization of Operative Procedure and a Retrospective Study. Ann Surg. 2019; 274(6):e1277-e1283. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003664. View

11.

Chapman B, Gajdos C, Hosokawa P, Henderson W, Paniccia A, Overbey D . Comparison of laparoscopic to open pancreaticoduodenectomy in elderly patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Surg Endosc. 2017; 32(5):2239-2248. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-017-5915-0. View

12.

Han S, Kang C, Hwang H, Yoon D, Lee W . The Yonsei experience of 104 laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomies: a propensity score-matched analysis with open pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surg Endosc. 2019; 34(4):1658-1664. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-019-06942-4. View

13.

Rawla P, Sunkara T, Gaduputi V . Epidemiology of Pancreatic Cancer: Global Trends, Etiology and Risk Factors. World J Oncol. 2019; 10(1):10-27. PMC: 6396775. DOI: 10.14740/wjon1166. View

14.

Bablekos G, Roussou T, Rasmussen T, Vassiliou M, Behrakis P . Postoperative changes on pulmonary function after laparoscopic and open cholecystectomy. Hepatogastroenterology. 2003; 50(53):1193-200. View

15.

Chen Y, Ma F, Wang C, Zhao D, Zhang Y, Tian Y . Elderly patients had more severe postoperative complications after pancreatic resection: A retrospective analysis of 727 patients. World J Gastroenterol. 2018; 24(7):844-851. PMC: 5807942. DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v24.i7.844. View

16.

Zhao Z, Yin Z, Hang Z, Ji G, Feng Q, Zhao Q . A systemic review and an updated meta-analysis: minimally invasive vs open pancreaticoduodenectomy. Sci Rep. 2017; 7(1):2220. PMC: 5440387. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-02488-4. View

17.

Nagakawa Y, Nakamura Y, Honda G, Gotoh Y, Ohtsuka T, Ban D . Learning curve and surgical factors influencing the surgical outcomes during the initial experience with laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2018; 25(11):498-507. DOI: 10.1002/jhbp.586. View

18.

Charlson M, Charlson R, Peterson J, Marinopoulos S, Briggs W, Hollenberg J . The Charlson comorbidity index is adapted to predict costs of chronic disease in primary care patients. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008; 61(12):1234-1240. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.01.006. View

19.

Winter J, Cameron J, Campbell K, Arnold M, Chang D, Coleman J . 1423 pancreaticoduodenectomies for pancreatic cancer: A single-institution experience. J Gastrointest Surg. 2006; 10(9):1199-210. DOI: 10.1016/j.gassur.2006.08.018. View

20.

Adam M, Thomas S, Youngwirth L, Pappas T, Roman S, Sosa J . Defining a Hospital Volume Threshold for Minimally Invasive Pancreaticoduodenectomy in the United States. JAMA Surg. 2016; 152(4):336-342. PMC: 5470427. DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2016.4753. View