A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic vs open pancreaticoduodenectomy

Abstract

Background: Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported conflicting results regarding the safety of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD). The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of the available RCTs concerning the short-term outcomes of LPD versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD).

Methods: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, Scopus databases and ClinicalTrials.gov register were searched. Only RCTs published up to February 2019 were eligible for inclusion. Random-effect models were used to summarize the relative risks (RR) and mean differences.

Results: 3 RCTs were identified, including a total number of 114 and 110 patients who underwent LPD and OPD, respectively. The rate of major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥3) was 29% in LPD vs 31% in OPD group (RR 0.80 (95% CI: 0.36-1.79); p = 0.592). Complication-related mortality occurred in 5% (LPD) vs 4% (OPD) patients (RR 1.22 (95% CI: 0.19-8.02); p = 0.841). LPD was significantly associated with longer operative time [95 min (95% CI: 24-167; p = 0.009)] and lower perioperative blood loss [-151 ml (95% CI: 169-133; p < 0.001)].

Conclusions: There are no statistically significant differences between LPD and OPD in terms of postoperative complications and mortality. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution due to high clinical and statistical heterogeneity of pooled data. Further studies with different outcome measures are needed to clarify the future of LPD.