Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and pancreatoduodenectomy: is it worthwhile? A meta-analysis of laparoscopic pancreatectomy

Abstract

Background/purpose: This study was performed to evaluate the outcomes of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) compared with the open method using meta-analysis.

Methods: A literature search was performed to identify comparative studies of laparoscopic versus open pancreatectomy. Perioperative outcomes were evaluated by meta-analysis using a fixed effect model and random effects model.

Results: Twenty-four studies of LDP and three studies of LPD matched the selection criteria, including 2,904 patients of DP and 109 patients of PD. Compared with ODP, LDP showed statistically significant differences with respect to less blood loss, lower transfusion rates, lower wound infection rates, lower morbidity rates, and shorter hospital stays. LPD showed significantly longer operative times compared with OPD. There was no significant difference in oncological outcomes between laparoscopic pancreatectomy and the open technique.

Conclusions: This meta-analysis included the largest number of patients and number of articles comparing LDP and ODP, and LDP showed significantly better perioperative outcomes. This meta-analysis suggests that LDP is a reasonable operative method for benign tumors and some ductal carcinomas in the pancreas.