Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2025 May;32(5):3614-3622.
doi: 10.1245/s10434-025-16990-x. Epub 2025 Feb 12.

Minimal Invasive Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Metanalysis of Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials

Claudio Ricci  1 , Vincenzo D'Ambra  2 , Laura Alberici  2 , Carlo Ingaldi  3 , Margherita Minghetti  3   2 , Giulia Bonini  3   2 , Riccardo Casadei  3   2
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Minimal Invasive Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Metanalysis of Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials

Claudio Ricci et al. Ann Surg Oncol. 2025 May.

Abstract

Background: The role of a minimally invasive approach (MI) in patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) remained unclear.

Methods: A systematic search of randomized controlled trials was conducted. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted, reporting risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD). The primary endpoints were the morbidity, mortality, and R1 rate. The secondary endpoints were clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), biliary fistula, reoperation, length of stay (LOS), time to functional recovery (TFR), and readmission.

Results: The meta-analysis includes seven studies and 1428 patients: 618 (46.5%) in the OPD arm and 711 (53.5%) in minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD). The mortality rate was 2.9% for MIPD and 2.6% for OPD (RR 1.11 [range 0.53-2.29]). The major morbidity rate was 29.4% for MIPD and 25.6% for OPD (RR 1.11 [range 0.53-2.29]). The R1 rate was 6.2% for MIPD and 7% for OPD (RR 0.80 [0.54-1.20]). The operative time, comprehensive complication index score, POPF, PPH, DGE, biliary fistula, reoperation, readmission, LOS, TFR, and harvested lymph nodes were similar. Greater than 25% of heterogeneity was observed for major morbidity, operative time, POPF, LOS, TFR, and harvested lymph nodes. No publication bias was registered.

Conclusions: Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy was not superior to OPD and provided marginal advantages in short-term results. Further efforts should be addressed to clarify the impact of learning curve in MIPD results and the economic sustainability of MIPD, particularly robotic approach.

Keywords: Minimally invasive surgery; Morbidity; Mortality; Pancreatoduodenectomy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure: All authors disclosed any actual or potential conflict of interest, including any financial, personal, or other relationships with other people or organizations within that could inappropriately influence (bias) this work.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Forest plot for mortality. OPD open pancreaticoduodenectomy; MIPD minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy; RR risk ratio; CI confidence interval
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Forest plot for major morbidity. OPD open pancreaticoduodenectomy; MIPD minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy; RR risk ratio; CI confidence interval
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Metaregression for major morbidity and soft pancreas. The x-axis represents the ratio between the proportion of patients with soft pancreas in the MIPD arm and OPD arm; the y-axis was RR for major morbidity
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Fingerhut A, Vassiliu P, Dervenis C, Alexakis N, Leandros E. What is in a word: pancreatoduodenectomy or pancreaticoduodenectomy? Surgery. 2007;142:428–9. - PubMed
    1. Asbun HJ, Moekotte AL, Vissers FL, et al. The Miami international evidence-based guidelines on minimally invasive pancreas resection. Ann Surg. 2020;271:1–14. - PubMed
    1. Pang L, Kong J, Wang Y, Zhang Y. Laparoscopic versus open pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy. The first meta-analyse of retrospective matched cases. Acta Cir Bras. 2018;33:40–8. - PubMed
    1. Palanivelu C, Senthilnathan P, Sabnis SC, et al. Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for periampullary tumours. Br J Surg. 2017;104(11):1443–50. - PubMed
    1. Poves I, Burdío F, Morató O, et al. Comparison of perioperative outcomes between laparoscopic and open approach for pancreatoduodenectomy: The PADULAP randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2018;268:731–9. - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources