Assessment of laparoscopic versus open distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background The surgical benefits of open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) as a treatment for pancreatic disease in the body or tail were compared. Material and methods We searched PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science from 1 August 1990 to 1 July 2019. Studies comparing total LDP and ODP were included. Results In total, we reviewed 30 studies covering 4040 subjects. The analysis displayed a similar incidence of CR-POPF and POPF between ODP and LDP groups. The findings indicate that LDP correlates with fewer total complications, lower estimated blood loss, shorter length of stay and shorter postoperative hospital stay. There was no significant difference in the operation time, R0 resection, postoperative hemorrhage, number of lymph nodes collected, reoperation, major complications, or mortality. Conclusions Application of the International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula (2017) criteria in this meta-analysis showed that LDP had surgical outcomes comparable with those of ODP. However, LDP has the benefits of causing a relatively lower estimated blood loss, a small number of total complications, and a shorter hospital stay. We, however, note that further high-quality and controlled trials are required to comprehensively compare these treatments.

Automated summary

This study compared the surgical benefits of open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) as treatments for pancreatic disease in the body or tail. The findings showed that LDP had advantages over ODP in terms of lower estimated blood loss, fewer total complications, and shorter hospital stay.