ObjectiveThis meta-analysis aimed to systematically evaluate the feasibility and the safety of total laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (TLPD) by comparing it with open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD).MethodsWe searched the relative domestic and international data bases systematically, such as the Cochrane Library, Medline Database, SCI, CBM, VIP-data, CNKI-data, and WanFang Data. We selected case control studies or cohort studies, and used the Review Manager 5.3 to perform statistical analysis.ResultsIn total, thirteen single-center retrospective case-control studies were included, totally 808 patients involved, and there were 401 cases in the TLPD group and 407 cases in the OPD group. There were no significant difference in terms of the cumulative morbidity, incidence of the Clavien Ⅲ-Ⅴ complication, pancreatic fistula, B/C pancreatic fistula, biliary fistula, postoperative hemorrhage, pulmonary infection, and gastric emptying delay, as well as the ratio of secondary operation, mortality of perioperative period, the ration of R0 resection, and the number of lymph nodes dissected between the 2 groups (P>0.05). Although the operative time was significant longer, TLPD had significant superiority in terms of the amount of bleeding and blood transfusion during operation, the hospital stays after operation, the bowel function recovery time, the time to restart eating, and the time to reactivate (P<0.05).ConclusionIn terms of the relative complications and the parameters of oncology such as the ration of R0 resection, the number of lymph nodes dissected, both of the procedures are safe and feasible, while TLPD is more favorable to control operative bleeding and accelerate rehabilitation.
ObjectiveTo investigate safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) in municipal hospitals.MethodsThe clinic data of patients underwent pancreatoduodenectomy in the Leshan People’s Hospital from November 2017 to January 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into LPD group and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) group according to the operation methods, and the indicators of perioperative safety and effectiveness of the two groups were compared.ResultsA total of 72 patients were enrolled in this study, including 30 patients in the LPD group and 42 patients in the OPD group. There were no significant differences in the age, gender, and other baseline indicators between the two groups (P>0.05). Although the operative time of the LPD group was longer than that of the OPD group (P<0.05), the intraoperative blood loss in the LPD group was significantly less than that in the OPD group (P<0.05), the postoperative hospital stay, postoperative exhaust time, and postoperative ambulation time in the LPD group were shorter than those in the OPD group (P<0.05). And there were no significant differences in the terms of intraoperative red blood cell transfusion, intraoperative blood transfusion rate, postoperative ICU hospitalization time, hospitalization expenses, overall complications and specific complications (except incision infection rate of LPD group was significantly lower than OPD group, P=0.031) between the two groups (P>0.05). There were no significant differences in the positive rate of resection margin, number of lymph node dissection, and positive rate of lymph node between the two groups (P>0.05).ConclusionLPD has the same safety and effectiveness as OPD in the perioperative period in municipal hospitals, and is more conducive to postoperative recovery of patients.